Market survey on toxic metals contained in tattoo inks
Introduction
The practice of skin tattoos has been adopted for several centuries worldwide assuming different significance passing from one country to another. Tattoos have been used to express not only a simple fashionable body ornament, but also the membership to a particular socio-cultural group.
Nowadays, epidemiological findings showed that the practice of depicting the body is even more adopted by people. Mayers et al. (2002) reported that the 25% of 302 subjects of a small Midwest private college had at least one tattoo, while Forbes (2001) highlighted that the prevalence for tattooing among 491 university students in New York State was of 23%. In 1995, on 1762 students the proportion of adolescents with a tattoo was 9% higher with respect to that in 1993, while the average age at first tattoo dropped from 16 years to 14.5 years (Armstrong and Murphy, 1997). In Italy this practice is largely adopted among 12–18 years old students; at national level, on 3800 students the 6.6% was tattooed (7.2% were males and 5.7% were females) (Eurispes, 2002), and in one Italian region the 4.8% of 496 interviewed students (3.0% males and 6.0% females) had at least one tattoo (Boncompagni et al., 2005).
In permanent tattoos and permanent make-up, the pigments are deposed in the dermis by means of a needle. This process ensures that the pigments cannot be removed and simultaneously the organism is exposed to the ingredients in the tattoo colors in a very direct way and for prolonged time. In this context, the main components of colors are metals. In fact, dichromate-, Co-, Cd- and Hg-salts were considered the base for green, blue, yellow and red colors, while iron oxide, titanium dioxide, C and Mn are prevalently in the brown, white, black and violet inks (Kaatz et al., 2008). In addition, organic pigments and metals (i.e., Al, Ca, Cd, etc.) were often combined to create different hues, brightness or lightness shade of colors (Duke et al., 1998). The intimate and continuative contact between skin and colors can create in many people metal-related skin inflammation such as allergic, eczematous, lichenoid, psudolymphomatous or granulomatous reactions due to a one or more metals contained in pigments (Blumental et al., 1982, Sowden et al., 1991, Morales-Callaghan et al., 2006, Eun and Kim, 1989, Rubianes and Sánchez, 1993, Bagnato et al., 1999).
Considering the wide diffusion of the tattooing practice and the serious problems for the human health, a strict legislation for colors used for tattooing should be mandatory. In fact, there are no coded rules that reported which raw materials are allowed and how to test the final product. In addition, in most cases is very difficult to retrieve the relevant ink ingredients because only relatively few manufacturers release the documentation. In this context, each National Health Service should collect ink samples at both suppliers and studios for tattoo to verify the metallic components with the aim of assessing the human health risks.
The aim of the present study was to ascertain which metals are present in tattoo inks available on the Italian market and at which concentration they are present. For this purpose, a method based on acid assisted microwave (MW) digestion and sector field inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (SF-ICP-MS) analysis for the simultaneous quantification of Al, Ba, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Fe, Hg, Mn, Ni, Pb, Sb, Sr and V in 56 colors for tattoos was validated.
This market survey represents a first step in the risk evaluation process regarding toxic metals in tattoos and health effects.
Section snippets
Samples, reagents and decomposition
A total of 56 colors were purchased from 4 different tattoo ink suppliers: 13 colors “Starbrite Colors”; 10 colors “Millennium Colorworks Inc.”; 13 colors “Intenze Prod.”; 20 colors “Diabolo by Deep Colours”. All colors were liquids. The samples were acid digested in a MW oven (Ethos 900-Mega II, FKV Milestone, Milan, Italy), ca. 0.25 g of pigment being weighed in a Teflon vessel to which a mixture of 4 ml of super-pure HNO3 (Romil, Cambridge, UK), 1 ml of supra-pure HF (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany)
Validation study
The method was validated for limits of detection and quantification (LoDs and LoQs), recovery and precision (within- and between-day). The LoDs and LoQs were calculated as 3.3 and 10 times, respectively, the standard deviation (SD) of 10 independent digested blanks. The recovery experiment was realized at one spiked concentration level in 5 independent digestion blanks. Within-day precision was determined by the measurements of a digested pigment 10 times on one occasion. Between-day precision
Conclusions
The practice of tattooing is largely adopted worldwide, but the inorganic components of pigments injected into the skin are known to cause chronic or systemic pathologies. The situation is troubled by the fact that no official controls on pigments used in tattooing practices are existing and this lack of controls does not make users aware about the risk for their health.
In this view, the aim of this study was to characterize the metal composition of 56 tattoo inks from market and to draw
References (29)
- et al.
Tattooing: another adolescent risk behavior warranting health education
Appl Nurs Res
(1997) - et al.
Pseudolymphomatous reaction to tattoos
J Am Acad Dermatol
(1982) - et al.
A reaction to a red lip cosmetic tattoo
J Am Acad Dermatol
(1998) - et al.
Body-modifying concepts and dermatologic problems: tattooing and piercing
Clin Dermatol
(2008) - et al.
Prevalence of body art (body piercing and tattooing) in university undergraduates and incidence of medical complications
Mayo Clin Proc
(2002) - et al.
Sarcoid granuloma on black tattoo
J Am Acad Dermatol
(2006) - et al.
Urticaria in a tattooed patient
Allergol Immunopathol
(1999) - et al.
Nickel, chromium and cobalt in consumer products: revisiting safe levels in the new millennium
Contact Dermatitis
(2003) Allergic reactions to chrome in green tattoo markings
Acta Derm Venereol
(1959)Allergic reaction to cobalt in light blue tattoo marking
Acta Derm Venereol
(1961)
Reactions to light in yellow tattoos from cadmium sulfide
Arch Dermatol
Related risks of tattoos and piercings: prevalence study in a convenience sample
J Prev Med Hyg
Lichenoid reaction from a permanent red tattoo: has nickel a possible aetiologic role?
Contact Dermatitis
Allergic granuloma from cosmetic eyebrow tattooing
Contact Dermatitis
Cited by (104)
Heavy metals in cosmetics and tattoos: a review of historical background, health impact, and regulatory limits
2024, Journal of Hazardous Materials Advances4-Aminobenzoic acid, 2-phenoxyethanol and iodine used as tracers in a short-term in vivo-kinetics study for tattoo ink ingredients: Mass spectrometry method development and validation
2023, Journal of Chromatography B: Analytical Technologies in the Biomedical and Life SciencesHeavy metals in contact dermatitis: A review
2023, Journal of Trace Elements in Medicine and BiologyQuantitative analysis of restricted metals and metalloids in tattoo inks: A systematic review and meta-analysis
2023, ChemosphereCitation Excerpt :Cobalt, in the form of Cobalt(2+); oxido(oxo)alumane [cobalt blue, CAS No. 1333-88-6], is associated with blue inks (Cristaudo et al., 2012; Bocca et al., 2017). These pigments are considered less stable and more toxic than their copper-containing counterparts (Forte et al., 2009). None of the 156 tattoo inks included in Table 4 violated ResAP (2008)1 guidelines with respect to cobalt content.
Barium
2021, Handbook on the Toxicology of Metals: Fifth EditionWhat’s in My Ink: An Analysis of Commercial Tattoo Ink on the US Market
2024, Analytical Chemistry