Prof. Matthew Wright, chair of EFSA’s working group on E171, noted: “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.”

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.

Durabo White, 24.5 per cent zinc sulphide, 51 per cent barium sulphate, 18 per cent white clay, 5.5 per cent infusorial earth.

EFSA Scientific Conclusion on E171