Archive for the ‘Bike Culture’ Category

This post is in response to the inquires I have received from interested parties who saw one of my comments on my friend Cyclelicious‘ blog about this same topic, where I told my story in brief. Here is the longer story. Richard (Cyclelicious) is an amazing cyclist to ride with and showed me many of the awesome trails around San Jose I mention in this post, he is a long-time cyclist who knows how to respect the rules of the road and is a wealth of knowledge on everything bicycle related. Without further introduction, here is my story about being cited for running a red light on my bicycle.

No one is perfect, especially when rushing to work. I was riding my bike to work a few years ago and I came to a turn with a pack of several cars and the yellow light quickly turned on us to red light mid-turn. A couple blocks later, while traveling with the same gridlock of cars, we came to another yellow light which I rode through as it turned to red on the pack of us. At this point a motorcycle officer stopped me on my bicycle, rather than any of the cars which were doing the exact same things I was, yet posing far more of a safety hazard (by being cars, a potentially lethal weapon). I politely took my lumps, as yes I did enter a yellow light which quickly turned to a red light, because I felt it was safe to do so since the intersection was entirely gridlocked with cars, reducing their killing potential to very near zero. There is nothing to be gained by being rude to a police officer, no matter how tempting it may seem to an adrenaline rattled brain, being cordial and asserting your rights will always get you further than verbal attacks. A good tip is to write down everything that the citing officer says to you, including their name and badge number. You want to know who they are in case there are any errors on your citation, as I suspected with mine. Focusing on writing can also be a great way to calm down a potentially inflammatory situation, as police encounters often can be.

While he was citing me, I asked the officer why the government doesn’t provide information for bicyclists at the DMV and other government offices, letting cyclists know their rights and how laws apply to them. I pointed out how the DMV already does this for both cars and motorcyclists. He retorted that ‘all cyclists choose to be cyclists because they don’t like dealing with the government.’ While I did not take issue with being cited, I did take issue with his threat to add a point to my drivers license for activity taken on a bicycle, after he pointed out that cyclists do not need a drivers license to operate bicycles. It was an interesting sort of Catch 22 logic he was attempting to apply, where I was being meted out a harsher punishment just because I was a bicyclist who also possessed a drivers license. Later on, during my research and in court with the officer when we appeared before a judge, I learned just how absurd his threat was, and thankfully I was prepared to show it for the ridiculousness is was.


My Legal Reasoning


A Caveat: I am not a lawyer, nor have I ever gone to law school. At best, my political science degree counts as a pre-law degree, but it does not empower me to offer legal advice in any meaningful way like a lawyer can. If you are in the middle of a serious legal situation you should contact a lawyer rather than reading a blog.

As someone who spent years on the speech and debate team in college, I learned that a great approach is attacking an argument from multiple fronts in order to fully deconstruct it and force the other side to rebuild it from the pieces. With a limited amount of time before a judge, either in a debate or in a courtroom, this can be a very effective strategy to destabilize even well-prepared opposition teams. I always strive to have one main argument that is undeniably solid, followed up with supporting arguments that are mostly there to provide cover for that main attack. In this case I actually had two main avenues of attack, one was a bureaucratic maneuver, which had it been effective would have shut the entire process down; I highly encourage the use of bureaucracy in your favor since it hardly ever is.


Main Argument 1: Bureaucracy 

The officer cited me for a turning on a red light violation, yet he stopped me at a point where, if anything, I had ran a red light while going straight, not turning. He never clarified what I was being cited for, or how long he had been watching me. While I was presumably being stopped for one thing, I was cited for something different, a slight technicality I thought I could exploit to get the case tossed out because the officer wrote down a C instead of an A or a B. Unfortunately for me, my presumption was wrong and the only opportunity I got to ask for clarification was in court. My advice to you is to ask as many clarifying questions as you can of the citing officer when they are citing you, and write down their responses. Try to get exact quotes.


Main Argument 2: Public Safety

I don’t like to put all my eggs in one basket when using a bureaucratic maneuver and I hedged my bet on the much stronger argument, one grounded in protecting public safety. Cars are unarguably more dangerous than bicycles, so to apply the same penalties to a bicyclist as a car is a punishment disproportionate to the crime and a reflection of poor options existing to law enforcement in terms of citing cyclists. I fully owned my fault in the matter in court and offered to take a smaller fine, more true to the offense and one that would not put a point on my license.

To support this argument I read over the entirety of the California Vehicle Code which applied to my case, and parsed it for all mentions of “operators of bicycles,” “drivers of vehicles,” and “pedestrians.” There is a clear distinction between these groups under state law, with different rights granted to and regulations imposed on each group. The portion of state law I was cited for, section 21453C, is worded to apply only to cars, not bikes.  It is important to know what you are being cited for, don’t lose that piece of paper the officer gives you when you are stopped, that is your citation and it is your way to find out more information to fight that ticket. I have successfully fought multiple traffic tickets while driving a car, as well as this one one my bicycle; you’d be surprised how often police officers don’t know the specifics of how a law actually applies in practice. You will need to find out what that section of law you are being cited for actually says; I was once cited for something that was so laughably inaccurate the officer did not even show up for court, but he still wasted my time coming to court to hear that my case was thrown out (still, good news). While there is a space for notes on the citation, mine did not contain any regarding how I was on a bicycle, which I worried could become a headache for insurance rates, as there was no actual proof I was riding a bike in the initial citation, merely the court record.

To support my interpretation of state law that a safety difference exists between cars driving on roads and a bicycle being ridden, I did research to see if my hypothesis was correct, and upon reading the available information on car vs. bike safety I was confident that cars are definitely more dangerous than bicycles. According to the Centers for Disease Control, the governmental agency responsible for tracking how many Americans are killed and how they are killed, cars killed nearly 34,000 people in the US in 2013 (around 92 people every day); nearly a thousand of those yearly deaths are due specifically to cars running red lights. In 2013, 743 bicyclists lose their lives to cars in vehicle collisions, roughly 2 a day nationally; four of them were killed in San Francisco. In my research, I only came across two cases in San Francisco where cyclists fatally killed pedestrians, whereas in the same time period in the same area, dozens of cyclists lost their lives due to cars reckless driving. Compared to the deaths caused by cars, those caused by bikes are so few that the CDC doesn’t even have information on it (though they have plenty about bicycle safety). Everything was proving my theory that bicycles were safer than cars to be true, including a New York Times Op-Ed which found that “studies performed in Arizona, Minnesota and Hawaii suggest that drivers are at fault in more than half of cycling fatalities.”


Supporting Argument 1: Other Cities Have Options for a Pointless-Citation

Since my major issue was the point being placed on my license, I looked up how different cities handled a bicycle running a red light. This allowed me to see the spectrum of potential punishments I could propose as better alternatives than what the officer was proposing. At the end of the day, a citation is nothing more than a suggestion of illegal activity, which it is up to the court to determine based off the officer’s testimony, radar readings, and other evidence. Innocent until proven guilty is still alive and well (for now).

When I went to court I looked up information by the SF Bicycle Coalition, about San Francisco’s laws, which recently changed dramatically in how they are enforced. At the time, a failure to stop for a stop sign citation cost between $100 and $200 for a violation on a bicycle and $200 to $300 for a violation in a motor vehicle. A failure to stop for a red light cost bikes roughly the same amount, $175. This was a much fairer system than what was proposed to me in San Jose and San Francisco is a city which which recognizes the different risk factors that bikes and cars present in their laws.At the time, Philadelphia had a $100 fine for cyclists who ran red lights, which was the lowest fine I could find anywhere. The link I used as reference now appears to be broken of offline, I will update this if it changes. The point is, you should research other cities and see what their laws are because chances are you can find somewhere with more favorable laws to your case.


Supporting Argument 2: Legal Bias

There is a known bias against cyclists by police officers and by courts, and I worked hard to provide evidence of this to the court. The story of Amelie Le Moullac is a prime example of this, where the cyclist was assumed to be at fault for the collision which killed her, until video evidence could be obtained showing she was not at fault. Had the SF Bicycle Coalition not done extensive work on her behalf no one would know the real story. Not all crash victims have this luxury, so in most cases people go on believing the myth of the suicide swerve, where a cyclist inexplicably rides in front of a car and is killed.

In my case, when I asked the officer why the DMV, or some other government agency, doesn’t provide information to cyclists on their legal rights, like they do for cars and motorcycles, instead of giving me an actual answer, the citing officer made a remark about how ‘all cyclists choose to be cyclists because they don’t like dealing with the government.’ The way this comment was delivered reflected in him a view that cyclists were anti-government hooligans who should be punished for being outlaws not registered with the DMV. Amelie’s death led SF Supervisor Jane Kim to call for a hearing on police practices in how they investigate bicyclist fatalities. New York bicyclists point to an apparent 3-1 discrepancy in how many summonses were issues to truck operators versus bicycles, “In 2011, the NYPD issued 10,415 criminal court summonses to truck operators. During the same year, 34,813 summonses were issued to bicyclists.” Another manifestation of this bias was made clear in an investigation by the San Francisco Examiner, which found that “Motorists who strike and kill a pedestrian or bicycle rider in San Francisco have about a 30 percent chance of getting charged with a crime.”

The legal bias against bicyclists can take a myriad of other forms as well, but these were the three I opted to focus on for my case.


More Advice:

In addition to preparing your argument to deliver in court it can be helpful to send a letter to the court beforehand explaining your case and legal reasons. I did this in the hopes that the judge would see the merits in my arguments and throw it out in favor of issuing me a citation in the mail; most local governments have limited budgets and I was trying to save them resources and save myself time. I forget where I originally got the idea for this, I believe it was the advice of a lawyer friend of mine. Another piece of advice I got from a lawyer is to play dirty, and stall the trial as long as you can, rescheduling it at the last minute if possible; hopefully the officer will already have taken the day off and wont be able to change his schedule in time. Though I did try this tactic it did not help in my case, he still showed up and we had our battle of wits in court; if nothing else, I did greatly appreciate the extra time to prepare my case.


Do Your Research:

Nearly everything in this post and my sample letter only applies to cyclists in California, since it uses the California vehicle code, much of it is only relevant to Bay Area cyclists. While some of my findings may be useful for you in your case you need to do your own research to see what the law actually says in your area, even in California local laws can very radically from one city to another. The good news is that public documents, like laws, need to be publicly available online, and if you know where to look and how to look they aren’t terribly difficult to navigate. If this is a very important case (like Biking Under the Influence) now is when you want to step away from this blog and contact any lawyer you know and see if they know someone who specializes in those types of cases. A random blog on the Internet is never meant to replace the legal counsel of a barred lawyer, which I am not.


Follow Up Links:

My letter mentions Amelie Le Moullac, a cyclist who was killed in San Francisco, you can find out more about her story here. There also is Josh Alper in Santa Cruz, Bahram Saghari a former professor at Santa Clara University who is now dead from injuries sustained when an SUV cut him off, and thousands of others who die every single year.

My letter also mentioned the case of Chris Bucchere, the cyclist in San Francisco who fatally struck and killed a 71 year old man who was legally crossing the street in a crosswalk when the light abruptly changed to yellow and the cyclist was going down a large hill with too much momentum to stop. This story has two telling points, the first is that just because you can go a certain speed on a bike or a car, doesn’t always mean you should. The second is that cities need better civic planning to account for situations like this, I am a huge fan of the web of bike trails and wide bike lanes I found all over San Jose (where I was cited).


Post 24 - Amazing Grass Chcolate Peanut Butter

Brand: Amazing Grass (Still no website to link to.)

Product: Green Superfood Chocolate Peanut Butter

Weight: 2.2oz / 63g

Cost: $2.49/per, online (not from manufacturer)


Calories: 270

Total Fat: 14g, Sat. Fat 4g

Cholesterol: 15mg

Sodium: 190mg

Potassium: 250mg

Total Carb: 28g

Fiber: 3g

Sugars: 19g

Protein: 12g

Protein per ounce: 5.45g

Protein, Cost per gram: $0.21

Carb to Protein Ratio: 2.3-1

Vit A: 35% DV

Vit B12: 6% DV

Vit C: 15% DV

Vit K: 15% DV

Calcium: 10% DV

Iron: 8% DV

Organic, gluten free, and fair trade.

Not made in a gluten-free facility.


The taste of this Amazing Grass bar was the best that brand has had to offer, which isn’t saying much since flavor-wise this has been consistently one of the most disappointing brands. This one had real peanuts, peanut butter, and was covered in delicious chocolate. It wasn’t as good as any of the other chocolate peanut butter bars I’ve tried, but I have pretty high standards (one might say snobby). It was better than a Power Bar, and better than the NuGo bars I have reviewed, but that really isn’t saying much, at least not enough in my book. This is the first bar I have reviewed that has any cholesterol, which isn’t inherently a bad thing as it could be good cholesterol (the label doesn’t specify). This bar also uses whey protein, which I am not the biggest fan of since it tends to be a cheap filler protein compared to other, better sources like almonds and hemp. At the same time, I am not vegan and love dairy so whey is not a problem for me but could be if you are vegan or whey intolerant. The Amazing Grass Chocolate Peanut Butter bar is also pretty nutrient dense with a good balance of nutrients, including lots of potassium.

Post 23 - Pure Bar Ancient Grains

Brand: Pure Bar

Product: Ancient Grains Peanut Butter Chocolate Bar

Weight: 1.23oz / 35g

Cost: $2.19/per from manufacturer


Calories: 160

Total Fat: 9g, Sat. Fat 1.5g

Cholesterol: 0g

Sodium: 65mg

Potassium: 135mg

Total Carb: 17g

Fiber: 2g

Sugars: 8g

Protein: 5g

Protein per ounce: 4.06g

Protein, Cost per gram: $0.44

Carb to Protein Ratio: 3.4-1

Vit A: 0% DV

Vit C: 0% DV

Calcium: 2% DV

Iron: 4% DV

Organic, non-GMO, gluten free, soy free, and vegan.


As awesome as the Chocolate Brownie bar was, is about as disappointing as this Peanut Butter Chocolate Bar tasted. I had pretty high hopes for Pure Bar after that protein-dense brownie bar rocked my world to its very core. While the taste and mouth-feel of the last bar were spot-on perfect for being a delicious brownie with some nutrients hidden away in the mix, this bar had a mouth-feel that reminded me of a dry granola bar that they tried to jazz up with some bits of chocolate.

The one major selling point to this bar is that it is physically the lightest weight/smallest bar I have reviewed. I’m not actually sure if that even is a selling point, since it is not the most nutrient dense (not by a long shot) meaning you’d be better off eating a piece of an Organic Food Bar or a 22 Days bar rather than ever trying this disappointment. That being said, the small size of this bar manages to give it a protein-density greater than the Pure Bar Chocolate Brownie, the Kit’s Organic Bar, and all of the Simple Squares. The carb-to-protein ratio is also right in the ideal window. But, the price per gram of protein here is the worst out of every bar I have reviewed, making this the worst buy so far.  This bar did have the lowest amount of sugar out of all the bars I have reviewed, making this ideal for anyone who is diabetic.

Hey readers, I am back from the Black Rock Desert and my third trip out to Burning Man. Now I can speak from experience as to which protein bars actually held up best in the intense desert heat (which was significantly less intense than previous years). I’ll be trying to settle back into my groove of 1-2 of these a week now that life has gone back to relative normalcy.

Post 22 - 22 Days Coconut Chocolate Chip

Brand: 22 Days

Product: Coconut & Chocolate Chip Protein Bar

Weight: 2.6oz / 75g

Cost: $2.99/per from manufacturer.


Calories: 290

Total Fat: 12g, Sat. Fat 4.5g

Cholesterol: 0g

Sodium: 5mg

Total Carb: 33g

Fiber: 12g

Sugars: 15g

Protein: 20g

Protein per ounce: 7.69g

Protein, Cost per gram: $0.15

Carb to Protein Ratio: 1.8-1

Vit A: 0% DV

Vit C: 2% DV

Calcium: 8% DV

Iron: 35% DV

Organic, plant based, vegan, non-GMO, soy free, gluten free.

Not made in gluten free facility.


It was faintly coconut tasting, not as strong as I would have liked but probably for the best since coconut can be one of those flavors where either you love it (like I do) or you hate it. The chocolate was definitely more of the central flavor in this bar and the overall flavor was quite pleasant. Like the other 22 Days bar I reviewed, the texture did remind me a bit of a power bar, really chewy but with a pleasant mouth feel. It did not have a shred of the dreaded chalky taste that typifies cheap protein; one of the major reasons I love this brand is they are entirely plant based without and cheap whey, wheat, or soy protein as fillers. The importance of this point cannot be overstated as most protein bars on the market are loaded with cheap filler proteins from China. Outside of the protein, there was a ton of iron, at 35% DV this would be the most iron-rich bar I have reviewed making it good for people who are iron deficient. This coconut protein bar manages to be even more nutrient dense than 22 Days peanut butter protein bar, not by much but by enough to be notable.

As I made note of in my first review on 22 Days Daily Mocha Mantra, 22 Days has some organic protein bars that pack 20 grams of protein into each bar. While they are a bit heftier than other bars by about half an ounce they still pack in more protein per ounce than anything else I have reviewed, even more than the Squarebar. These 22 Days bars still have the cheapest protein per gram cost at 15 cents a gram and the best density of any bar reviewed; at this point I doubt I will find anything better. While I did not bring any of this flavor with me to Burning Man, I did bring three other 22 Days bars and they all held up well (save for my walnut protein bar where it seemed that the factory seal didn’t hold in the heat, the bar still tasted great but it was kind of stale).

Post 21 - Simple Squares Coffee

Brand: Simple Squares

Product: Coffee Nuts & Honey Organic Snack Bar

Weight: 1.6oz / 45g

Cost: $2.49/per from manufacturer


Calories: 230

Total Fat: 17g, Sat. Fat 5g

Cholesterol: 0g

Sodium: 95mg

Total Carb: 16g

Fiber: 3g

Sugars: 10g

Protein: 6g

Protein per ounce: 3.75g

Protein, Cost per gram: $0.41

Carb to Protein Ratio: 2.6-1

Vit A: 0% DV

Vit C: 0% DV

Calcium: 4% DV

Iron: 10% DV

Organic, gluten free, wheat free, kosher, no refined sugars, soy and dairy free.

Not made in a gluten free facility.


It would seem I spoke too soon when I said the Daily Mocha Mantra bar, from my first post, was the only one made with real organic coffee; now that I have had the coffee Simple Square I know my error. It would seem there are two made with coffee (if any of you readers know of another one let me know). The flavor was similar to the ginger Simple Square, but with hints of coffee instead of ginger. It was not nearly as tasty as the coconut Simple Square I started with, but hey, it had coffee in it so that’s pretty cool, right? The mouth feel of all of these Simple Squares is the same, as the ingredients are virtually identical in all of their products. Simple Square created one template to rule them all, and then made a bunch of flavors to apply to that template. The nutrient content is not very good and the protein ratio is also lacking, the major win for this bar is that it is made with coffee and is still kosher.

Another win for the entire Simple Square family of products is that they have nothing in them to melt in high heat situations, making them all great for Burning Man. I picked up a few Simple Squares and other bars that seem Burn-friendly to bring out with me this year to test them first-hand in the desert heat.

Post 20 - Squarebar Cocoa Almond


Brand: Squarebar

Product: Cocoa Almond Organic Protein Bar

Weight: 1.7oz / 48g

Cost: $2.49/per from manufacturer


Calories: 210

Total Fat: 10g, Sat. Fat 7g

Cholesterol: 0g

Sodium: 40mg

Potassium: 230mg

Total Carb: 21g

Fiber: 2g

Sugars: 14g

Protein: 12g

Protein per ounce: 7.06g

Protein, Cost per gram: $0.21

Carb to Protein Ratio: 1.83-1

Vit A: 0% DV

Vit C: 2% DV

Calcium: 4% DV

Iron: 15% DV

Phosphorous: 4% DV

Magnesium: 6% DV

Zinc: 2% DV

Organic, gluten free, non-GMO, soy free, vegan.

Not made in a gluten-free facility, but good manufacturing practices are used.


The last Squarebar I reviewed in post 8 is still one of the best I have had up to this point, in terms of overall nutritional value and taste; it kicked ass in both categories. I had very high hopes for this Squarebar, perhaps too high, as it was definitely not as good on the flavor-side. Despite that, it was still a big winner in terms of nutrients. Just like the other Squarebar, the protein is all plant based with no whey or soy as filler. The mouth feel of this bar was also not as good as the Cocoa Crunch, but it was still pleasant. All things considered, I would opt for the Cocoa Crunch over the Cocoa Almond Squarebar, but if I wanted some variety I would still eat the Almond one. Speaking of variety, I have two more Squarebar reviews to come (new flavors I found more recently). Like the last Squarebar, I left the Burning Man tag off this post for obvious chocolatey reasons, this is another example of the type of bar that will melt into a gooey mess in high heat.

One extra plus for Bay Area residents like me is that they are local, made in Alameda. If I wanted to I could bike to them and pick up the bars in person creating no greenhouse gas emissions in shipping; this is the processed food equivalent to going to the farmers market. I just made a run to Whole Foods to get some more protein bars for review, up until now they all came from my local Pharmaca here in Oakland. The Squarebar is the first out of the Whole Foods bars I am reviewing.

Post 19 - Evo Hemp Pineapple Almond

Brand: Evo Hemp

Product: Pineapple Almond + Raw Protein (Hemp Powder)

Weight: 1.69oz /48g

Cost: $2.25/per from manufacturer


Calories: 205

Total Fat: 10g, Sat. Fat 1g

Cholesterol: 0g

Sodium: 0mg

Potassium: 280mg

Total Carb: 22g

Fiber: 4g

Sugars: 11g

Protein: 8g

Protein per ounce: 4.73g

Protein, Cost per gram: $0.28

Vit A: 0% DV

Vit B1: 4% DV

Vit B6: 4% DV

Vit C: 2% DV

Vit E: 15% DV

Magnesium: 20% DV

Zinc: 2% DV

Calcium: 6% DV

Iron: 15% DV

Phosphorous: 10% DV

Manganese: 15% DV

Organic, raw, gluten free, vegan, and soy free.


If you couldn’t tell from my previous posts, I love hemp, so the idea of a protein bar largely made of hemp definitely has some appeal. The flavor wasn’t particularly inspiring nor unpleasant in any way. It was somewhat sweet, yet savory, the dates that make up much of the bar are a large flavor component. This Evo Hemp bar didn’t have as good of a flavor or mouth feel as the last one I reviewed for post #4, but it did have more protein, magnesium, manganese and other minerals. The protein per ounce ratio on the Evo Hemp bars isn’t as high as many of the bars I have reviewed but it also isn’t the lowest, and for the price it makes this a very well-rounded middle of the road protein bar, with a lot of auxiliary nutrients for those who need them. The extra minerals and bromelian from the pineapple would be a great asset for anyone who is mineral deprived or needs a little extra boost recovering from an MDMA hangover, which could be great at festivals like Burning Man (if you take MDMA). The lack of chocolate coupled with the bromelian makes this an ideal protein bar for Burning Man, especially if you intend to take MDMA out there.

Post 18 - Nugo Organic Dark Chocolate Pomegranate

Brand: NuGo Organic

Product: Dark Chocolate Pomegranate

Weight: 1.76oz / 50g

Cost: $1.83/per  from manufacturer


Calories: 190

Total Fat: 5g, Sat. Fat 3g

Cholesterol: 0g

Sodium: 60mg

Total Carb: 26g

Fiber: 2g

Sugars: 16g

Protein: 10g

Protein per ounce: 5.68g

Protein, Cost per gram: $0.18

Carb to Protein Ratio: 2.6-1

Calcium: 2% DV

Iron: 4% DV

Organic, low fat, non-GMO, and vegan.

Not made in a gluten-free facility.


It tasted better than the last NuGo Organic bar I reviewed, but that really isn’t saying much. It was also better tasting than the last Amazing Grass bar I reviewed that tasted like spirulina disappointment. The flavor itself wasn’t terrible, but the mouth feel was atrocious, it felt like chewing on dried, kind of stale granola bar dipped in chocolate. It didn’t have the smoothness or depth of feel and flavor that the other bars I have been reviewing have had. it was better than your average non-organic bar but that really isn’t saying much. The saving grace of this brand is that that bars are cheap; mediocre, but cheap to fit that mediocrity. Nutritionally this bar brought next to nothing to the table other than protein, but the protein per ounce was pretty decent and better than many of the bars I have reviewed. From that perspective this bar might be worth buying, if you can handle the mediocre taste and mouth feel. Every one of those bars it out-proteined tasted *far* better than this bar, but still, this wasn’t the worst tasting of the bunch so it definitely is a better buy than some options. It would be a terrible choice for Burning Man as it was covered in chocolate and would melt into a liquid mess in the wrapper.

Post 17 - Organic Food Bar Protein


Brand: Organic Food Bar

Product: Protein

Weight: 2.65z / 60g

Cost: $3.29/per, online


Calories: 330

Total Fat: 9g, Sat. Fat 1.4g

Cholesterol: 0g

Sodium: 5mg

Potassium: 364mg

Total Carb: 33g

Fiber: 8g

Sugars: 18g

Protein: 22g

Protein per ounce: 8.3g

Protein, Cost per gram: $0.15

Carb to Protein Ratio: 1.5-1

Vit A: 0% DV

Vit C: 0% DV

Calcium: 10% DV

Iron: 9% DV

Organic, 100% raw, gluten free, cold processed, alkaline forming, non-GMO, vegan, and produced with solar power.

Not made in a gluten-free facility.


I was a little skeptical when I saw the package, the package kind of reminds me of a Power Bar or some other generic protein bar full of fake garbage. Upon closer inspection I saw a really simple ingredient list and none of it was a chemical or something synthetic. This bar was 100% raw and 100% deliciously awesome. While it was the most expensive bar I have reviewed in terms of total cost, the protein per gram cost was one of the lowest and this bar had the highest amount of protein out of any bar I have reviewed so far. This was a very solid protein bar with lots of potassium, but it really didn’t have any other nutrients worth noting. I am intrigued to check out other bars by this company to see if they have something comparable on the protein but with more other nutrients as well. The flavor was pleasant but also kind of bland, it tasted strongly of the dates and nut butter that make it up. You could see the sesame seeds in it and occasionally get a small crunch from them. It had a mouth feel similar to a Power Bar, but softer. The complete lack of chocolate would make this a great bar for Burning Man


Post 16 - Amazing Grass Chocolate Cherry

Brand: Amazing Grass (Yup, they still don’t have a website)

Product: Green Superfood Chocolate Cherry Almond

Weight: 2.1oz / 60g

Cost: $2.49/per, online (not from manufacturer)


Calories: 240

Total Fat: 8g, Sat. Fat 3g

Cholesterol: 0g

Sodium: 50mg

Potassium: 190mg

Total Carb: 33g

Fiber: 4g

Sugars: 20g

Protein: 10g

Protein per ounce: 4.76g

Protein, Cost per gram: $0.25

Carb to Protein Ratio: 3.3-1

Vit A: 30% DV

Vit B12: 6% DV

Vit C: 10% DV

Vit K: 10% DV

Calcium: 4% DV

Iron: 10% DV

Organic, alkaline, gluten free, fair trade, non-GMO, and vegan.

Not made in a gluten-free facility.


I’m not sure if ‘Amazing Grass’ is meant to be a punny play-on-words for Amazing Grace, but there is absolutely nothing amazing or graceful about this bar. This thing tasted like stale spirulina covered in chocolate; at least it was covered in chocolate but that’s like putting a new paint job on the Titanic and calling it good. That is not going to cut when much better options exist for the same cost, or even lower cost per gram of protein, and when there are bars with a much better flavor. On that note, this bar had the most sugar out of any of the bars I have reviewed and still managed to taste awful; a lose-lose. If you’re going to have lots of sugar at least taste decent. Seriously, this bar is 7 grams of sugar away from a Snickers bar (Fun Fact: Snickers is the “protein bar” of candy bars, clocking in at 4 grams and 2.16g of protein per ounce). At least the last Amazing Grass bar I reviewed was merely “nothing spectacular or memorable,” if this one came even close to that I would be happy, instead I just want the bad taste out of my mouth.

This bar doesn’t even have the saving grace of being good for Burning Man; by being covered in chocolate it is the enemy in those kind of high-heat environments. By all measures, this bar is an utter failure. Save yourself $2.49 and pass on this one.