Additionally, the committee noted that the available data did not provide convincing evidence of genotoxicity for titanium dioxide as a food additive, but recognized the limitations in current methodologies with respect to the testing of poorly soluble particulate materials. Although there were uncertainties in the genotoxicity data, the experts took into account the fact that the additive was not carcinogenic in adequately conducted two-year studies in mice and rats at doses of up to 7,500 mg/kg BW per day for mice, and 2,500 mg/kg BW per day for rats, the highest doses tested. There was also no evidence of reproductive or developmental toxicity in studies in rats at doses up to 1,000 mg/kg BW per day, the highest doses tested.  

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.

One of the most widely used food pigments is titanium dioxide, an odorless powder that enhances the white color or opacity of foods and over-the-counter products, including coffee creamers, candies, sunscreen, and toothpaste (1Trusted Source, 2Trusted Source).