Im no expert but anything that puts load on the liver is usually deemed to increase risk of liver cancer. Perhaps in relation to my supposition on bioload of foreign bodies leading to increase risk of cancer through an immune system effect? Let's see what I can drum up.
So that last bit I highlighted. "TIO2 is so safe. put it on your donuts bro" That's not what the data suggests. The data suggests we have no data and just put it on donuts anyway. Second, This is not equivalent to oral exposure. With implants this seems more equivalent to a TIO2 Junkie. a chronic intravenous TIO2 user.
Since your body needs electrolyte it seems rational to compare this to a salty environment:
What about when we expose this to electrolysis? Salt water seems to be an incomplete comparison to implants in the organism. Not only is it comparable to a salt or brine water environment but there's electrolysis taking place and an immune system attempting to absorb it.
So I assume an implant dropped into the "outside environment" would take on the positive charge. An anode.
This is a passive equivalent negating the active environment of the organism attempting to rid itself of a foreign body. Negating this, it still sounds like a bad idea.
However, we're dealing with a society that needs to get woke on chrome cobalt, so understanding Titanium seems to be beyond the scope here. Also it seems the burden of proof is on us. Not the manufacturers of implantable titanium to prove a safe device. I wouldn't trust it. These guys have a tract record for unsafe devices with chrome cobalt.
Like some kind of "safe hands" "trusted hands" insurance commercial with these guys. My take is not to have the questionable device implanted in the first place, then having the burden of proof placed on you in a court of law down the road to prove why it did or did not give you liver cancer or immune reaction.