were red varieties, specifically pigment red 170/210 (36%) and pigment red 22 (35%). PB15 was also observed in imaging studies of adverse tattoo reactions. Chronic allergic reac- tions were the most common type of adverse response observed in skin samples (Brungs et al., 2022; Serup et al., 2020). Additionally, PY14 contains an azo func- tional group, raising particular concerns due to its potential to release PAAs. Research by Lachenmeier et al. (2023) found that red and yellow tattoo pigments emitted signifi- cant levels of PAAs (Fels et al., 2023). Fur- thermore, there has been a documented case where a patient experienced an aller- gic reaction to tattoo inks containing PY65 (INTENZE brand), that aected all tattooed areas (González-Villanueva et al., 2018). Research on the metabolic breakdown of tattoo inks beneath the skin remains limited, resulting in a substantial knowledge gap in this area (Serup et al., 2020). The pigments that we identified in our study are known to degrade under sunlight or during laser irra- diation (such as that used in tattoo removal), raising additional health concerns due to the potential formation of toxic by-products. For example, o-toluidine, a known human carcinogen, has been identified as a decom- position product of various organic pigments (Foerster et al., 2020; Serup et al., 2020). Compounds derived from commonly used pigments, such as PO13, are classified as sensitizers by both manufacturers and the European Chemical Agency; notable exam- ples include the carcinogens aniline and 3,3’-dichlorobenzidine, which are degrada- tion products of various pigments (Engel et al., 2007; Hauri & Hohl, 2015; Serup et al., 2020). The disazopyrazolone pigment PO13 has also been shown to aect cytokine release in reconstructed human skin from punch biopsies of tattooed skin (Kurz et al., 2023). Another pigment, PB15, is listed in Annex 1 of Germany’s cosmetics code, which restricts its use in tattoo inks (Schreiver et al., 2016). The use of PB15 is prohibited because pyrolysis (i.e., the chemical decomposition of a material through the application of heat in the absence of O) can produce hazardous substances such as hydrogen cyanide, ben- zene, and 1,2-benzenedicarbonitrile (Sch- reiver et al., 2016). Concerns also extend to TiO 2 , a potential human carcinogen, possibly due to the for-
TABLE 3
ICP-OES Data of Tattoo Inks to Confirm the Presence of BaSO 4 , Cu, and TiO 2
Sample Identification Ba 455.403 (mg/g)
Cu 327.393 (mg/g)
Ti 334.940 (mg/g)
Golden Yellow
Trace
– –
0.0565
Golden Rod
–
–
Lemon Yellow Bright Orange
0.0062 0.0058
0.0035
0.0525
–
High quantity
Note. Ba = barium; BaSO 4 = barium sulfate; Cu = copper; ICP-OES = inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectroscopy; Ti = titanium; TiO 2 = titanium dioxide.
BaSO 4 ) would have been observed in the LY and GY inks. The EDX analysis, however, did not show elemental Cu and Ba in the case of either ink. Interestingly, the EDX data indi- cated that the stated inks contained impurities not listed on the product label. For example, the D-GY ink had excessive levels of Na, and the D-BO ink had a small amount of Al and Si. Moreover, the EDX analysis was consistent with the XRD data and revealed that the D-BO ink contained a higher concentration of Ti than did the D-GY inks, which have the same ingredients according to the label on the ink’s bottle. Overall, C, O, and N concentrations were all high in all the inks analyzed. The car- bon tape holder, which was not entirely cov- ered by the inks or pigments, is responsible for the high-intensity peaks of C in the spectra. The existence of components revealed in the SEM and EDX examinations was confirmed by XRD analysis but in dierent quantities. ICP-OES Analysis Analyses by XRD and EDX exhibited limited sensitivity when detecting small amounts of Ti, Cu, and Ba. Consequently, ICP-OES proved valuable in verifying the existence of these elements (Table 3). ICP-OES analysis was conducted to assess tattoo inks, with ink samples subjected to acid digestion (using HNO 3 and hydrogen peroxide [H 2 O 2 ]) in an ETHOS UP microwave digester. It should be noted that Ti cannot be digested in HNO 3 (it requires hydrofluoric acid [HF]), so our results are not accurate for quantitative analysis. The ICP-OES analysis, however, clearly showed that the GY, LY, and BO inks contained Ti, and this finding was consistent with the data from the EDX and XRD analy-
ses. We found that only the LY ink contained concentrations of Cu that could be properly measured by ICP-OES. And this technique confirmed the presence of Ba in the LY and BO inks. A closer look at the spectra, how- ever, showed that the GY ink also contained Ba, although below the limit of quantifica- tion. The detection of Ba could be a match to only the MSDS of the GY and BO inks and not to the labels.
Health Implications Related to Tattoo Ink
The inconsistency between the ingredients reported on the MSDS and the experimental data highlights a major issue, namely that the manufacturer-provided MSDS cannot be relied on for a comprehensive and accurate characterization of tattoo ink components. The MSDS also falls short in accurately report- ing the quantities of each ingredient present. From both consumer and medical perspec- tives, ingredient mislabeling is a critical con- cern due to its potential health implications. Our study found PY14, PY65, PB15, and PO13 in tattoo inks—these inks are prohibited under European Union Registration, Evalua- tion, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemi- cals (REACH) regulations since 2015 (Food and Drug Administration, 2015; Hauri, 2011; Serup et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2021). These pigments have been banned because they con- tain substances such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), metals, and primary aromatic amines (PAAs), all of which pose toxicological risks to human health (Moseman et al., 2024). PO13 was detected in a subset of skin biopsies with allergic reactions (12%), but the most commonly identified pigments
15
September 2025 • Journal of Environmental Health
Powered by FlippingBook