Let's look at the definition of a food put on the FDA's GRAS list.

1 There is no evidence in the available information on [substance] that demonstrates, or suggests reasonable grounds to suspect, a hazard to the public when they are used at levels that are now current or might reasonably be expected in the future.

2 There is no evidence in the available information on [substance] that demonstrates a hazard to the public when it is used at levels that are now current and in the manner now practiced. However, it is not possible to determine, without additional data, whether a significant increase in consumption would constitute a dietary hazard.

3 While no evidence in the available information on [substance] demonstrates a hazard to the public when it is used at levels that are now current and in the manner now practiced, uncertainties exist requiring that additional studies be conducted.

4 The evidence on [substance] is insufficient to determine that the adverse effects reported are not deleterious to the public health should it be used at former levels and in the manner formerly practiced.

5 In view of the almost complete lack of biological studies, the Select Committee has insufficient data upon which to evaluate the safety of [substance] as a [intended use].

Diabetes is now 1 in 11 Americans. A fourfold increase since the 1970's. I find it hard to believe all forms of sugar still do not break rule #1 to be on the FDA's GRAS list. Oh wait, they probably bribe really really well.