Microbial status and product labelling of 58 original tattoo inks

Trine Høgsberg · Ditte Marie Lindhardt Saunte · Jørgen Vedelskov Serup

72 citations0/0 files storedJournal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Tattoo and Body Piercing Complications Infection Control in Healthcare Healthcare Regulation

Abstract

BACKGROUND: European Council resolutions on tattoo ink introduce sterility and preservation of inks to protect customers. Inks used in Denmark are typically purchased over the internet from international suppliers and manufacturers from the US and the UK. In Denmark tattoo inks are regulated and labelled according to REACH as if they were plain chemicals. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to check the microbial product safety of unopened and opened tattoo ink stock bottles. Packaging, labelling, preservation, sterility and contamination with micro-organisms were studied. METHODS: Physical inspection and culture of bacteria and fungi. RESULTS: Six of 58 unopened stock bottles (10%) were contaminated with bacteria and one of six samples (17%) of previously used stock bottles was contaminated. The bacterial species represented bacteria considered pathogenic in humans as well as non-pathogenic environmental bacteria. Yeast or moulds were detected in none of the samples. A total of 31% of the manufacturers informed only about the brand name. No information about content, sterility, risks or expiry date was indicated on the label. A total of 42% claimed sterility of their inks. A total of 54% labelled a maximum period of durability of typically 2-3 years. The physical sealing was leaking in 28% of the products. CONCLUSIONS: The European Council resolutions regarding safety of tattoo inks are not effective. Stock bottles of tattoo ink may contain bacteria pathogenic to humans and environmental bacteria, and packaging, labelling and preservation of inks are of inadequate quality. Claim of sterility can be erroneous.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 72 citations exist upstream.

References

2006Tattoos and body piercings in the United States: A national data set 2007Tattoos: dermatological complications 2010Incidence of Health Problems Associated with Tattooed Skin: A Nation-Wide Survey in German-Speaking Countries 1994Infectious Complications of Tattoos 2010Cutaneous complications related to permanent decorative tattooing 2001Tattoos as risk factors for transfusion-transmitted diseases

Cited by

2022Tattoo inks are toxicological risks to human health: A systematic review of their ingredients, fate inside skin, toxicity due to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, primary aromatic amines, metals, and overview of regulatory frameworks 2015Black tattoos protect against UVR ‐induced skin cancer in mice 2012Tattoo-Associated Nontuberculous Mycobacterial Skin Infections - Multiple States, 2011–2012 2017How to Diagnose and Classify Tattoo Complications in the Clinic: A System of Distinctive Patterns 2015Complications of Cosmetic Tattoos 2013Tattooing and piercing: An underestimated issue for immunocompromised patients?2017Red tattoos, ultraviolet radiation and skin cancer in mice

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.