7 Controversial Candies From Around the World

Enjoying a piece of chocolate, blowing bubbles with bubblegum, or relishing a lollipop are simple childhood delights. However, stumbling upon one of these debated confections in your child's trick-or-treat stash could turn sweetness into dismay.

1. Candy Cigarettes

Candy cigarettes and their tobacco counterparts share a intertwined history in the U.S. As real cigarettes gained popularity in the early 1900s, candy cigarettes, or “candy sticks,” emerged—first as chalky sweets, then as bubblegum. Both reached their peak in the 1950s and '60s but have since declined. The candy's purpose was clear, with packaging mimicking real cigarette brands, parody names like Marboro and Lucky Spike, and even red-dyed tips to resemble lit cigarettes. Marketed to kids through endorsements from Popeye, Superman, and Mr. Spock, their target audience was undeniable.

As the health risks of smoking became widely known, concerns grew about candy cigarettes influencing children. But do these sugary imitations lead to real smoking?

Research suggests they might. A 2007 study by the University of Rochester found that 22 percent of smokers had regularly played with candy cigarettes as kids, compared to only 14 percent of non-smokers. This data supports the numerous efforts to ban candy cigarettes in the U.S. over the years.

Candy sticks were briefly banned in North Dakota from 1953 to 1967, a fact that may surprise those who believe they are currently prohibited. The 2009 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act led to confusion, with some media outlets incorrectly reporting a ban on candy cigarettes. In reality, the law only restricted flavored tobacco products, not candy imitations.

Despite their legality, these items are rarely found on store shelves. Most retailers avoid stocking them to prevent public backlash. However, if you’re determined to indulge, a simple online search reveals numerous retailers offering a wide range of brands and flavors today.

2. Chronic Candy

If candy resembling cigarettes caused outrage, imagine the uproar over sweets that mimic the taste of marijuana.

Introduced in the mid-'90s, brands like Chronic Candy and Hemp Candy use legal hemp oil to create their unique flavor without any psychoactive effects. Despite this, parents, law enforcement, religious leaders, and groups like The Coalition Against Chronic Candy have campaigned to remove these controversial treats through political action and merchant education.

Critics argue that these candies normalize marijuana use and may encourage children to experiment with the real thing later in life. Their concerns are amplified by endorsements from celebrities like Paris Hilton, Cheech Marin, and Snoop Dogg, who have promoted these products.

3. Big League Chew

Since its debut in 1980, Big League Chew has remained a staple on Little League fields while simultaneously landing on parents' lists of concerns. This shredded bubble gum, crafted to resemble the tobacco chewed by Major Leaguers, was conceived by two baseball players, Rob Nelson and Jim Bouton, who recalled stuffing their mouths with bubblegum as kids to imitate their idols. Over the years, parents have pushed for its ban, fearing it might encourage tobacco use. Harvard public health professor Gregory Connolly has supported these concerns, suggesting the gum could normalize the behavior.

“Big League Chew replicates the sensory experience of chewing tobacco,” Connolly stated in 2010. He argued that replacing sugar with nicotine could be the “logical progression.” Despite these warnings, the gum remains popular among kids. The company reports that over 800 million pouches of the shredded gum have been sold since its launch.

4. Sloche Gummy Spiders

Sloche was a Canadian candy brand famous for its bold packaging, sold in Couche-Tard convenience stores. For instance, their gummy frogs came in a bag depicting a Biology class dissection, complete with pins securing the frog's legs. Their cotton candy, labeled “Hair Balls,” featured a tub with an image of an unwell cat. However, Laurraine LeBlanc found the gummy spider packaging particularly offensive. The bag displayed a snarling Black man with a gold tooth, earrings, and a spider on his head, its legs resembling dreadlocks. LeBlanc argued the imagery reinforced harmful stereotypes about Black men, a view supported by The Quebec Human Rights Commission, which ruled against the company despite their claim that the design was meant to be humorous.

Ultimately, Couche-Tard removed the controversial candy from stores and contributed $18,000 to Youth In Motion, a Canadian organization dedicated to mentoring youth. For her role in combating racism, LeBlanc received the 2006 Anne-Greenup Prize from Quebec's Immigration and Cultural Communities Minister.

5. Road Kill Gummies

During the summer of 2004, Trolli, then under Kraft Foods, launched its new gummy candy line named Road Kill. These vibrant, fruit-flavored gelatin candies were shaped like animals such as squirrels, chickens, and snakes, all flattened with tire marks imprinted on their backs. By early 2005, the New Jersey Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals raised concerns, arguing the candy promoted animal cruelty. The group planned to initiate letter-writing campaigns, petitions, and a Kraft boycott unless the candy was removed. Kraft acted swiftly, pulling the product without hesitation.

Kraft, in the midst of negotiations with Wrigley to acquire the Trolli division, couldn't afford a scandal. The company promptly withdrew the cartoonish animal candies and issued a public apology. Wrigley finalized the purchase of Trolli and other confectionery brands from Kraft in June of that year for $1.46 billion.

6. Maoam Candy

Sometimes a cigar is simply a cigar. But a lime-colored bean licking smiling cherries? That’s harder to explain. Simon Simpkins of the UK caused quite a stir when he discovered Maoam candies at his local shop featuring strange and inappropriate imagery. The packaging depicted a character named “Maoam Man” engaged in what Simpkins described as a “seemingly intimate encounter” with fruits like lemons, cherries, strawberries, and oranges, all while wearing a “distinctly suggestive expression.” Despite his objections, Haribo, the candy manufacturer, refused to alter the packaging, citing Maoam Man’s popularity among fans of all ages. It’s safe to assume the fruits were equally fond of him.

7. Eskimos Candy

For many Inuit in Canada, the term “Eskimo” is deeply offensive. So, in 2009, Inuit Seeka Lee Veevee Parsons was shocked to find Pascall's Eskimo Candies in nearly every New Zealand store during her vacation. The marshmallow candies were shaped like people in stereotypical fur-lined hoods, which Dr. Nicole Gombay of Canterbury University, an expert on Inuit culture, likened to depicting “an African in a mud hut with a grass skirt and a bone in hand.”

When the issue initially gained media attention, the company stated it had no plans to alter the name or design of its beloved candy. However, that stance was in 2009; by 2021, it was revealed that the Eskimo candy would be rebranded and reshaped as Pascall Explorers.

This article was first published in 2010 and has been revised for 2021.