Laura - what size of small square? You can generally work this out quite easily. If the chocolate bar is 100g, and it is comprised of largeish squares, 2 across and 5 along, then it's 10g (e.g. Lindt). If it's 3 across and 8 along, then each piece is about 4g, and if it's 4 across and 9 along, then it's about 3g per piece. And the reason why I know all this is because I have just been losing weight and I have had to measure out my chocolate properly, instead of just wolfing it down.
Anyone who thinks that you can't wolf down dark chocolate, or that it's "not really fattening" despite the high fat content - hah. Nope, sorry, that one doesn't wash. If you're one of the subtype of ME where you can eat far too much and still can't keep the weight on, then of course you don't need to worry about chocolate being fattening. But if you tend the other way and find that you keep on putting on weight, and especially if you've checked accurately and you're not actually overeating (very easy to overeat with a poor routine and memory problems - it's why I put on weight, but it's not true of everyone with ME, some have problems with metabolism or what have you), then you do need to be careful with it. I think the people who regard dark chocolate as magically non-fattening and non-moreish are used to milk chocolate. I've not had milk chocolate in fifteen years, and believe me, dark chocolate can be just as bad. You just have to get used to it.
Mark - ick, Plamil? Admittedly I partly don't like them because they were playing silly buggers a while back and really put off a lot of people with a holier-than-thou attitude that included crapping all over the Vegan Society, but I've always thought their food tastes horrible too. I'm surprised that you couldn't find more chocolate without any of those ingredients, or do you have to watch out for trace contaminants from machinery etc. too? I've always been told that those only affect people who have very severe (i.e. life-threatening) allergies, or else people who are practising dietary restrictions for religious ritual purity reasons (kashrut or halal). If you're not looking at the trace contaminant level but just at the ingredients, there is loads, and even if you are looking at the trace contaminant level (though you can't be for soya, Plamil uses that all the time - I think it's why the taste is often poor), there must be more than Plamil. Have a look at the range at
Real Foods, for instance. Much of it is horribly pricey, but once you start deliberately eating very small amounts, it matters less, and you appreciate it more. I adore the raw chocolate-covered raisins, for instance, although not the prices Real Foods sell them at. Organica is another brand I like. Divine just tastes odd to me, though it's OK in cooking, plus I see it uses soya lecithin so that's no use for you. Green and Black is another one with soya lecithin, and they were very weird about exactly how much dairy gets into their chocolate the other year, plus I hear there are fairtrade problems, so I tend to stay off them.
In terms of eating cocoa powder alone, I do make stuff with cocoa powder, but the one time I tried it in an electrolyte drink (which already has d-ribose in there as a sort of sweetener), I found that it made me far too jittery, heart racing and so on. Possibly the fats and sugars help tone that effect down? I wasn't having much cocoa powder, that was the odd thing. Anyway, I make up chocolate peanut butter balls as small snacks (pretty healthy ingredients, and they're only the size of Maltesers so about 20 calories each), which I find give me a nice protein boost and are a good pick-me-up. Also I make my own chocolate spread, as the commercial dairy-free ones are both vile and overpriced, but that won't be any good for you, Mark, as it's composed of hazelnut butter, dairy-free margarine, cocoa powder, syrup of choice (usually agave - maple tastes divine but gives me a bit of a head rush), and a bit of soya milk to stop it going too thick in the fridge (though another milk would do, I'm sure). That isn't for health purposes, though, that's for the joy of having lovely dark chocolate-hazelnut spread every now and again, and I'm mentioning it for people who feel that they need dairy-free chocolate-hazelnut spread in their life. It's very easy, you just stir it all together (trying not to let the cocoa powder puff all over the place). Hazelnut butter is the best nut butter I've tried for this, it tastes good and isn't too thick, although now that I'm adding a bit of milk in for the texture, I may try messing around with almond butter (much thicker) instead, if I can find an affordable one that isn't salted. You could de-soya it easily enough by using another plant margarine and if needed, another plant milk. Not sure about de-nutting it: would tahini taste good?
By the way, only 73% or so, folks? That's not really all that dark. I'd have thought you meant 85% or higher! I generally go for Lindt for that, though on having a look, they appear a little fuzzy around the "may contain traces of" area. Tesco sells a couple of own-brand 85% chocolate which I recall as being good, and one of them even seems to fit Mark's criteria (if he doesn't mind nuts having previously been around on the machinery) - and is mercifully cheap compared to the other brands I've been discussing. I find that I need to get to about 85% before the chocolate is dark enough that it's always easy to stop at one 3g piece. With 70% or so, sometimes I can stop there, sometimes it's harder. I was given a bar of 99% once, which took a while to get into. Generally I ate it broken into little pieces with some raisins (green raisins if I can get them, delicious), and often some almonds as well. Probably not the best snack for dieting, this is before I learnt about calories and just how dense in them nuts are, but I think it's reasonably healthy, and you'll be getting a nice dose of minerals at the very least.