w2 9 x w2 9 wire mesh

The inception and evolution of lithopone can be traced back through various industries and diverse applications. Revered for its robust hiding power, this white pigment, also called sulfide of zinc white, has been an invaluable asset to industries requiring a durable and reliable white pigment. Lithopone was an economical and functional solution as an alternative to lead carbonate, which is prone to change, and zinc oxide, known for its brittleness.

Furthermore, this packaging has been shown to have both antibacterial and photocatalytic activity, the latter of which reduces ultraviolet (UV) exposure (5Trusted Source, 6).

The conventional surface treatment methods of titanium alloy include glow discharge plasma deposition, oxygen ion implantation, hydrogen peroxide treatment, thermal oxidation, sol-gel method, anodic oxidation, microarc oxidation, laser alloying, and pulsed laser deposition. These methods have different characteristics and are applied in different fields. Glow discharge plasma deposition can get a clean surface, and the thickness of the oxide film obtained is 2 nm to 150 nm [2–8]. The oxide film obtained from oxygen ion implantation is thicker, about several microns [9–14]. Hydrogen peroxide treatment of titanium alloy surface is a process of chemical dissolution and oxidation [15, 16]. The dense part of the oxide film is less than 5 nm [17–21]. The oxide film generated from the thermal oxidation method has a porous structure, and its thickness is commonly about 10-20 μm [22–25]. The oxide film from the sol-gel method is rich in Ti-OH, a composition that could induce apatite nucleation and improve the combining of implants and bone. It has a thickness of less than 10 μm [26–28]. Applied with the anodic oxidation method, the surface can generate a porous oxide film of 10 μm to 20 μm thickness [29–31]. Similarly, the oxide film generated from the microarc oxidation method is also porous and has a thickness of 10 μm to 20 μm [32, 33].

Prof Matthew Wright, both a member of the FAF Panel and chair of EFSA’s working group on E 171, said: “Although the evidence for general toxic effects was not conclusive, on the basis of the new data and strengthened methods we could not rule out a concern for genotoxicity and consequently we could not establish a safe level for daily intake of the food additive.”