ArticleToxics2025
Heavy Metal Content in Tattoo and Permanent Makeup Inks and European Standards-Is There Still a Health Risk?
Article in Toxics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond Total Content: Assessing the Bioaccessibility of Metals in Tattoo Inks Using Validated Extraction Media.Analytical science advances · 2026Article
- Is tattooing associated with an increased risk of cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Review
- Assessment of Dermally Bioaccessible Elements by Sweat-Simulated Extraction: Analytical Approach and Application to Tattoo Inks.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Tattoos and permanent makeup involve intradermal pigment deposition and may introduce toxic trace elements into the body. Despite increasing popularity, harmonized EU regulations on tattoo ink composition only came into force in 2022 under REACH. This study evaluated the chemical safety of 41 commercially available inks in the EU following the implementation of these restrictions. Twelve heavy metals were analyzed (Cd, Pb, As, Hg, Zn, Cu, Ni, Cr, Co, Sb, Se, Mn). Copper showed the highest concentrations (mean 1751 mg/kg; max 25,701 mg/kg), while cadmium was lowest (mean 0.13 mg/kg). Exceedances of EU limits were recorded for Ni (24 samples), As (20), Cr(VI) (16), Cu (10), Sb (8), Co (6), and Pb (5); mercury was not detected in any ink. Dermal exposure was modeled across three tattooing scenarios using SED, MoS, HQ, and LCR indicators. Unacceptable non-cancer risk (MoS < 100) was mainly associated with copper (up to 85.4% of products), with additional concerns for zinc and arsenic (~50% of samples in higher-use scenarios). HQ values > 1 were most frequent for Ni, Cr(VI), and Cu, affecting up to 68.3%, 43.9%, and 58.5% of inks, respectively. Lifetime cancer risk above 1 × 10
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.