It's not a "risk" it's a "hazard assement".
It's not a food safety agency it's just the World Health Organization's cancer research arm.
This certainly doesn't stir up mistrust. 
It's not a "risk" it's a "hazard assement".
It's not a food safety agency it's just the World Health Organization's cancer research arm.
This certainly doesn't stir up mistrust.
i remember reading some story about some guy with a snacky sweet tooth buying a big pack of sugar free gummy bears to eat on a plane ride. they were sweetened with sorbitol. anyway, the guy absentmindedly eats a shitload of them and then gets outrageous bubble gut, before absolutely wrecking the airplane toilet midflight. like apparently it was loud as hell and unrelenting.
he discovered later sorbitol, while a sweetener, is also used as a laxative.
this was featured in dr house, one of the clinic patients had persistent diarrhea and house was like "how much gum are you chewing per day lmao"
30 years ago, there was a lot of hay made about "Olestra" (an indigestible fat substitute) and the FDA made products with it have a warning label about "loose stools", even though someone had to go absolutely buck wild to experience it. there was other stuff going on with olestra, but the association in consumers' minds of snackies and sloppy dookies killed the idea. i guess they learned their lesson, because it seems like sugar substitutes are far worse at causing blowouts than olestra was, but they are here to stay. i guess the solution was to make it so the FDA can't tell anyone what to do, re: labeling.