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.
oh, i'm all for replacing aspartame with sucralose, the superior sweetener that doesn't leave an aftertaste akin to licking lightbulbs. but we got two scare-mongering pieces of news regarding artificial sweeteners in a row, and the news that popped up didn't cover it with the proper nuance and could be easily interpreted as "sugar better", so I strongly suspect sugar lobbying is at play here (non-sugar sweeteners have gained incredible ground over sugar itself on processed food and especially beverages), and I'm surpised someone who is so suspicious about science communication isn't picking up this obvious a scent.