Infrared analysis showed that the characteristics bands for the bare nanoparticles are still exhibited in the vitamins@P25TiO₂NPs spectra, such as a wide peak in 450–1028 cm⁻¹ related to the stretching vibration of Ti-O-Ti and other peaks in 1630 cm⁻¹ and 3400 cm⁻¹, which represent the surface OH groups stretching. The IR spectrum of vitaminB2@P25TiO₂NPs showed signs of binding between compounds. The OH bending peak (1634 cm⁻¹) corresponding to bare nanoparticles disappeared, and the NH₂ bending band characteristic of vitamin B2 appeared (1650 cm⁻¹). The IR spectrum of vitaminC@P25TiO₂NPs also showed signs of successful functionalization. Bands at 1075 cm⁻¹; 1120 cm⁻¹; 1141 cm⁻¹ were observed, which are originated by CO-C vibrations present in the vitamin C. The intense band at 1672 cm⁻¹ is attributed to the C = O stretching in the lactone ring while the peak at 1026 cm⁻¹ is ascribed to the stretching vibration Ti-O-C. Wide bands at 3880–3600 cm⁻¹ are related to stretching vibration OH groups, but those disappear in the modified nanoparticles spectrum. These observations confirm the interactions between the P25TiO₂NPs and the vitamins [35].

BaSO4+C→BaS+4CO

Australian researchers examined how titanium dioxide as a food additive affected gut microbiota in mice by orally administering it in drinking water. The study, published in the journal Frontiers in Nutrition in 2019, found the treatment could “alter the release of bacterial metabolites in vivo and affect the spatial distribution of commensal bacteria in vitro by promoting biofilm formation. We also found reduced expression of the colonic mucin 2 gene, a key component of the intestinal mucus layer, and increased expression of the beta defensin gene, indicating that titanium dioxide significantly impacts gut homeostasis.” The changes were then linked to colonic inflammation, along with a higher expression of inflammatory cytokines, which are signal proteins that help with regulation. The researchers concluded that titanium dioxide “impairs gut homeostasis which may in turn prime the host for disease development.”

As early as sixty years ago, zinc sulphide was first thought of as a pigment for coloring India rubber and a patent for the process of its manufacture was issued in England. But it was not until twenty years later that zinc sulphide and its manufacture was seriously considered as a pigment for paint, and in 1874 a patent was issued for a process of manufacturing a white pigment, composed of zinc sulphide and barium sulphate, known as Charlton white, also as Orr's white enamel. This was followed in 1876 by a patent issued to a manufacturer named Griffith and the product, which was similar in character to Charlton white, was known as Griffith's patent zinc white. In 1879 another patent for a more novel process was obtained by Griffith & Cawley, the product made under this process proving the best of the series placed upon the market up to that date. After that time many new processes were patented, all, however, tending to the same object, that of producing a white pigment, composed of zinc sulphide and barium carbonate, the results, however, in many cases ending with failure.

Nanoparticles