Let me reiterate. I never said that suboxide particles of titanium are not harmful. I don't know that either way. I said that using an analogy of something harmful that has been proven is false logic. I could 'prove' green tea to be harmful using that logic. " Don't drink green tea- they said asbestos was harmless 10 years ago". QED
Using a betting trend is also a logical fallacy. Because the majority believe something to be true does not make it true. 1000 years ago most believed the earth was flat and the sun revolved around the earth. The logical fallacy is known as argumentum ad populum.
Again those who oppose the view that nanopartilces of suboxide titanium are harmful don't have to supply evidence. They cannot in any case prove a negative. The burden of proof is on those making the claim [that the particles are harmful]. I cannot prove there are no dinosaurs living today. There may be an undiscovered one living in Likoloula swamps. However, the burden of proof lies with those making the claim.
