china titanium dioxide storage
In order to contribute with experimental evidence that could help to achieve a better understanding of the field for future regulation, in the present work, the biocompatibility of commercial P25TiO2NPs (one type of TiO2NPs used in sunscreen formulations) and two novel functionalized P25TiO2NPs were evaluated under solar simulated irradiation. White light, generated by red, blue, and yellow LEDs, together with UV ones, was chosen to simulate the solar spectra. Functionalization of TiO2NPs was made with antioxidant vitamins in order to prevent the expected photo-initiated ROS production when nanoparticles are exposed to the simulated solar spectra. Vitamin B2 (riboflavin) and vitamin C were chosen to carry out the functionalization because they are water-soluble, low-cost, and are a constitutive part of biological processes. In addition, it is known that both have the potential to prevent macromolecular oxidation by ROS [23], [24], [25], [26].
On November 23, 2022, the General Court of the European Union reversed the conclusion that titanium dioxide was carcinogenic and released a statement (1,2):
“First, the Commission made a manifest error in its assessment of the reliability and acceptability of the study on which the classification was based and, second, it infringed the criterion according to which that classification can relate only to a substance that has the intrinsic property to cause cancer.”
As part of our mission at CRIS we base our safety assessments on the currently available scientific evidence and consider many variables (e.g., study quality, journal of publication, etc.), even if it goes against previous conclusions. Evidence-informed decisions making is critical to ensure that the laws and regulations put into place are for the benefit of the population.
The EU General Court maintains that the scientific evidence presented wasn’t the complete picture for the ingredient, “in the present case, the requirement to base the classification of a carcinogenic substance on reliable and acceptable studies was not satisfied.”
“First, the Commission made a manifest error in its assessment of the reliability and acceptability of the study on which the classification was based and, second, it infringed the criterion according to which that classification can relate only to a substance that has the intrinsic property to cause cancer.”
As part of our mission at CRIS we base our safety assessments on the currently available scientific evidence and consider many variables (e.g., study quality, journal of publication, etc.), even if it goes against previous conclusions. Evidence-informed decisions making is critical to ensure that the laws and regulations put into place are for the benefit of the population.
The EU General Court maintains that the scientific evidence presented wasn’t the complete picture for the ingredient, “in the present case, the requirement to base the classification of a carcinogenic substance on reliable and acceptable studies was not satisfied.”