Up to 90% of tattoo inks in US may be mislabeled, chemistry researchers find in survey

photo of rows of colorful tattoo inks in bottles displayed on a counter under framed traditional tattoo designs
The FDA is currently deciding how to implement new regulations surrounding the ingredients in and labelling of tattoo inks. (Image credit: AP Photo/Desmond Boylan)

Tattoos are an incredibly common form of permanent self-expression that date back thousands of years. Most tattoo artists follow strict health and sanitation regulations, so you might assume that tattoo inks are carefully regulated, too.

But as work done by my team of chemistry researchers suggests, up to 90% of tattoo inks in the U.S. might be mislabeled. This isn't just a case of a missing pigment or a minor discrepancy. These inks contained potentially concerning additives that weren't listed on the packaging.

What's in an ink?

All inks are made up of one or more pigments, which are molecules that give tattoos their color, and some kind of carrier for that pigment. Before the 20th century, pigments used in tattooing included ash, charcoal, minerals or other natural materials. Around the middle of the 20th century, though, tattoo artists started making their own inks using synthetic pigments and dyes.

Today, nearly all pigments used in tattoos are made of synthetic molecules that allow for bright colors — with the exception of white and black pigments.

In the past few decades, tattoo ink manufacturing has shifted from individual artists making their own to large companies manufacturing inks and selling them to artists. My team wanted to figure out whether these inks contained the ingredients advertised, so we analyzed 54 tattoo inks from the U.S. market.

Unlisted ingredients

More than half the inks my research team analyzed contained unlisted polyethylene glycol, also known as PEG. A variety of medical products contain PEG, including laxatives. It can cause allergic reactions, however, and in the case of tattooing, research has suggested that repeated exposure to PEG could lead to kidney failure.

We also found propylene glycol in 15 inks, though it wasn't listed as an ingredient in any of them. Propylene glycol is generally nontoxic and structurally similar to glycerin, which is used to thicken the ink. Even though propylene glycol is safe for most people, some people are highly allergic to it. In fact, it was the American Contact Dermatitis Society's 2018 Allergen of the Year.

An allergic reaction to propylene glycol can cause a skin rash, itching and blistering.

In several inks, my research team found unlisted ingredients that are common in cosmetics but have not been tested in tattoo inks. These include BHTdodecane and 2-phenoxyethanol. In low concentrations, 2-phenoxyethanol can be a preservative. But the Food and Drug Administration has warned that it could get passed to infants through breastfeeding and lead to vomiting and dehydration in babies.

Of the 54 inks we analyzed, 29 reported the correct pigments, while the rest either did not report or reported the wrong pigments. This is a known problem in tattoo inks that ink manufacturers have not yet addressed.

Pigment concerns

Studies have found that carbon black, the primary black pigment used in tattooing, can be contaminated with some of the same cancer-causing molecules found in car exhaust and cigarette smoke.

Many red, yellow and orange pigments are azo pigments, which contain two connected nitrogen atoms. These pigments give ink bright, vivid colors, but over time they may break down into carcinogens.

The pigments in many tattoo inks are made up of synthetic molecules. (Image credit: Amy Harris/Invision/AP)

Regulations in Europe prohibit the use of copper-containing pigment blue 15 and pigment green 7, which my work observed to be the only blue and green pigments in the inks we tested. The EU banned these pigments over concern that their use in hair dyes may cause bladder cancer, though researchers haven't studied that connection in tattoos yet.

A new focus on regulation

The FDA is beginning to pay more attention to what is in tattoo inks. In 2022, Congress passed the Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act, or MoCRA, which gave the FDA expanded authority to regulate tattoo inks.

The FDA is still deciding how to implement MoCRA, but the act will require accurate ingredient labeling and expand the FDA's authority to recall ink. In the past, tattoo inks have very rarely, and only voluntarily, been recalled because of bacterial contamination.

So what does this mean for tattoo clients and artists? Right now, there's no clear research consensus on whether tattoos are safe or not, as they can cause infection and allergic reactions. Plus, tattoos vary widely in size, color and physical location on the body.

Studies like the one from my lab are an important piece in establishing what is actually in a tattoo, so that researchers can better understand any adverse events, such as long-term allergic reactions, that they might cause.

Understanding what is in ink also helps physicians identify what particular health concerns they should look for in tattooed individuals.

The tattoo-related health issues that researchers do know about come from unskilled artists following poor sanitation protocols. To prevent potential health concerns, those considering a tattoo can work with an experienced and trained artist who follows best practices for hygiene and tattoo aftercare.

This edited article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

John Swierk
Assistant Professor, Chemistry, Binghamton University, State University of New York

The Swierk group is broadly interested in understanding and controlling radical reactions initiated by single electron transfer, most often via photo- or electrochemistry. Use of spectroscopic and electroanalytical methods is central to much of the research in the group. One major area of emphasis within the group deals with understanding photoredox reactions. This class of reactions is transforming modern synthetic chemistry by substituting hard-to-handle, expensive and toxic reagents (e.g., HSnBu3) with short-lived excited states that can themselves be potent oxidants or reductants. Challenging bond-forming reactions can be accessed with this chemistry and, often, a variety of functional groups can be tolerated. Despite the promise of photoredox methods, a mechanistic understanding is lacking. Using a variety of experimental approaches and kinetic modeling, the Swierk group seeks to completely characterize photoredox catalytic cycles and identify the kinetically limiting steps, with an eye towards informing the design of new reactions.

  • Eagleman
    admin said:
    Tattoo ink ingredients don't always match what's labeled on the bottle.

    Up to 90% of tattoo inks in US may be mislabeled, chemistry researchers find in survey : Read more
    I was watching a St. Jude commercial and noted that every single child diagnosed with Cancer had a parent or parents with TATTOOS. I called up St. Jude and said I would donate 25,000.00 dollars contingent on them answering one question. Why did their commercial show that every parent of a child diagnosed with cancer have Tattoos? They hung up on me and the next day the commercial was taken off air. I think they came to the same conclusion as me. Either certain inks cause cancer in offspring or a combination of inks cause this cancer not in the originator but in the offspring. Kids are dying by mistakes made by parents. The reason St. Jude took the commercial off the air was so nobody realized what a genius like me already knows. FYI, I do have an IQ over 150.
    Reply
  • saintpetejackboy
    When I was in federal prison and county jail, I seen guys get tattoos by burning triple antibiotic ointment as a candle and collecting the soot that built up to make ink - they would also burn plastic chess pieces - and also tattooed people with Badger Paint and other weird shit.


    Humans are like cockroaches. You can go inject nasty shit into your arm every day and still live many decades - nothing really makes sense. Carcinogenic molecules, doesn't make sense - why doesn't every cigarette smoker develope cancer? Some people get cancer and never smoked before.

    Forget all the science - the religious rules are basically 'do not scar or mark your bodies for the dead', something like that. I put more weight behind that than "all the ink is toxic and everybody is going to die."

    I never had a single tattoo. I think is skips a generation. My parents are tagged up all over. It just was not something I ever desired - except when I wanted glow in the dark veins and an artist told me he would have to do it after hours since the ink was not legally sanctioned or whatever - but guess what - it could be very toxic and some people die tomorrow and other people go on to push 100 years old just drinking the shit like Ovaltine and taking daily baths in it for skin care.

    I don't mean to dispell any alarm or lead people into a false sense of security - toxic shit is toxic. I just don't think this is as big of a deal as maybe it is made out to be here. Humans for generations have been doing even worse crazy shit to their bodies with sometimes barely any consequence - we are incredibly resilient and all of our data is chock full of 'well, this person should have died but uh... Turns out you don't need most of your brain.'

    For chemicals in general, I look at how long Shulgin and Hoffman toiled the mortal coil. You could go inject an LD50 of bleach tomorrow based on your weight and you still might just survive it.
    Reply
  • tobiolopainto
    Eagleman said:
    I was watching a St. Jude commercial and noted that every single child diagnosed with Cancer had a parent or parents with TATTOOS. I called up St. Jude and said I would donate 25,000.00 dollars contingent on them answering one question. Why did their commercial show that every parent of a child diagnosed with cancer have Tattoos? They hung up on me and the next day the commercial was taken off air. I think they came to the same conclusion as me. Either certain inks cause cancer in offspring or a combination of inks cause this cancer not in the originator but in the offspring. Kids are dying by mistakes made by parents. The reason St. Jude took the commercial off the air was so nobody realized what a genius like me already knows. FYI, I do have an IQ over 150.
    150 of what? hamsters?
    Reply