HBW Insight is part of Pharma Intelligence UK Limited

This site is operated by Pharma Intelligence UK Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 13787459 whose registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. The Pharma Intelligence group is owned by Caerus Topco S.à r.l. and all copyright resides with the group.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By

UsernamePublicRestriction

Airborne TiO2 Of Respirable Size? Litigation Goes On Under Prop 65

This article was originally published in The Rose Sheet

Executive Summary

In an ongoing Prop 65 case targeting sun-protection and powder-cosmetics manufacturers, the Public Interest Alliance maintains it has demonstrated likely exposure to titanium dioxide particles that are airborne, unbound and of respirable size, as characterized by the Prop 65 listing. However, defendants argue the plaintiff must conduct air-monitor testing to prove that all products named in the suit contain particles of that form, with associated exposure risks.

You may also be interested in...



TiO2 Still A California Prop 65 Target; EU Commission Returns To SCCS With New Safety Questions

Titanium dioxide use in cosmetic products is getting another look by the EU’s Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety, with a focus on genotoxicity and exposure via inhalation and oral routes. Stateside, potentially respirable TiO2 continues to be the focus of Prop 65 lawsuits in California.

TiO2 Prop 65 Dismissal Offers Lessons, Renews Hope For Industry

A win for industry in California Prop 65 litigation targeting titanium dioxide-containing cosmetics illustrates the importance of getting involved early in the listing process and challenging the factual basis for exposure claims. Morrison & Foerster attorney Michael Steel discusses the case and its takeaways.

TiO2 Prop 65 Dismissal Offers Lessons, Renews Hope For Industry

A win for industry in California Prop 65 litigation targeting titanium dioxide-containing cosmetics illustrates the importance of getting involved early in the listing process and challenging the factual basis for exposure claims. Morrison & Foerster attorney Michael Steel discusses the case and its takeaways.

Related Content

Latest Headlines
See All
UsernamePublicRestriction

Register

RS019133

Ask The Analyst

Ask the Analyst is free for subscribers.  Submit your question and one of our analysts will be in touch.

Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts

Cancel