In an early study Jani et al. administred rutile TiO₂ (500 nm) as a 0.1 ml of 2.5 % w/v suspension (12.5 mg/kg BW) to female Sprague Dawley rats, by oral gavage daily for 10 days and detected presence of particles in all the major gut associated lymphoid tissue as well as in distant organs such as the liver, spleen, lung and peritoneal tissue, but not in heart and kidney. The distribution and toxicity of nano- (25 nm, 80 nm) and submicron-sized (155 nm) TiO₂ particles were evaluated in mice administered a large, single, oral dosing (5 g/kg BW) by gavage. In the animals that were sacrificed two weeks later, ICP-MS analysis showed that the particles were retained mainly in liver, spleen, kidney, and lung tissues, indicating that they can be transported to other tissues and organs after uptake by the gastrointestinal tract. Interestingly, although an extremely high dose was administrated, no acute toxicity was observed. In groups exposed to 80 nm and 155 nm particles, histopathological changes were observed in the liver, kidney and in the brain. The biochemical serum parameters also indicated liver, kidney and cardiovascular damage and were higher in mice treated with nano-sized (25 or 80 nm) TiO₂ compared to submicron-sized (155 nm) TiO₂. However, the main weaknesses of this study are the use of extremely high single dose and insufficient characterisation of the particles.

In addition to controlling the reaction conditions, it is also important to carefully monitor the precipitation process to ensure that the desired precipitation percentage is achieved. This can be done through various analytical techniques, such as X-ray diffraction, scanning electron microscopy, and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy, which can provide valuable insights into the particle size distribution, crystallinity, and purity of the titanium dioxide product.

It’s true that titanium dioxide does not rank as high for UVA protection as zinc oxide, it ends up being a small difference (think about it like being 10 years old versus 10 years and 3 months old). This is not easily understood in terms of other factors affecting how sunscreen actives perform (such as the base formula), so many, including some dermatologists, assume that zinc oxide is superior to titanium dioxide for UVA protection. When carefully formulated, titanium dioxide provides excellent UVA protection. Its UVA protection peak is lower than that of zinc oxide, but both continue to provide protection throughout the UVA range for the same amount of time.

Some food products will include titanium dioxide on their nutrition label. But again, it can be hard to tell for those who don't list the ingredient.