MORE KEY DATA CONCERNING EFSA's FLAWED OPINION ON TiO2 AND THE EU BAN ON E171
If you have an interest in the ongoing discussions related to the safety of TiO2 (E171), you will want to read the article linked to the LinkedIn post below. Lyle Burgoon, a totally independent toxicologist has done a critical review of the key studies that EFSA relied on to say that there were some uncertainties related to the genotoxicity of E171. As you will see, he has found major FLAWS in many of these studies which brings into serious question why EFSA relied on them for any type of assessment when these studies are less than credible!!
As you will see in the article below, Lyle Burgoon has questioned how these studies were even published since they are not scientifically credible and robust. Certainly, when you see the assessment done in this article of these studies, I think you will have your own questions as to why EFSA would have used these studies to claim there was enough uncertainty to say that they could no longer say that E171 was safe when, in fact, there are many very credible studies which have demonstrated the safety of E171 for many years, including a large NTP Cancer study which showed no concerns a number of years ago.
Please read the analysis of the studies EFSA relied on at the link below and then ask yourself the question: What was EFSA thinking in actually even using these studies as part of their assessment??? The fact that the flawed EFSA Opinion has led to a ban on the use of E171 for foods in Europe is extremely disappointing and scientists everywhere should be asking the EU Commission for a justification for this ban!! The EU Commission should re-assess their position on this ban and try to use better science to justify any decision like this that has sweeping effect on consumers and the industry when there is no sufficient data that appears to justify a safety concern at this time!!