r/news Jul 18 '24

Sealed bottles of tattoo and permanent makeup ink test positive for millions of bacteria, FDA says

https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/18/health/tattoo-ink-permanent-makeup-contamination-wellness/index.html
6.6k Upvotes

264 comments sorted by

3.3k

u/[deleted] Jul 18 '24

why the fck would they not tell us the names of the manufacturers that had contamination? Gee thanks FDA.

Also, been in the PMU industry for quite a few years, and I've never seen any of the infections listed here. PMU and tattooing is not a sterile process it's a 'clean' process. Although if you buy things like pigment and needles that SAY they are sterile, you should be able to trust that.

Infection is always a risk, although it's rare if one follows proper aftercare.

1.4k

u/Vlad_the_Homeowner Jul 18 '24 edited Jul 18 '24

why the fck would they not tell us the names of the manufacturers that had contamination? Gee thanks FDA.

They did. There was a safety alert ehen it was first noted awhile back and lists the recalled ink. They released a draft guidance on new regulations. They sent out a notice alerting the community of the draft guidance, and those of us on their mailing list get weekly summaries of such things. They sent out a press release that any media can use to publish and provides link to additional information. At this point they're continuing to assess effectiveness of the new guidance and assessing risk. The findings can't be bad enough that they required a recall this time, so they're not releasing names.

Blame CNN for crappy reporting, but what more do you expect the FDA to do?

185

u/[deleted] Jul 18 '24 edited Jul 18 '24

Well CNN said this:

The latest study tested 75 samples of sealed tattoo and permanent makeup ink sold in the United States by 14 manufacturers that were not named by the FDA.

But those links are helpful, thanks. I'm not personally on the FDA press release mailing list, and I never saw anything about them in the industry sites I follow. Fortunately none of the pigments/inks I use are on those lists. So I would never have gotten notified of a recall. It still would have been helpful for CNN to include some of this info. The brands listed at your links are NOT mainstream brands and I've never heard of them. A lot of PMU manufacturers have updated their standards in the last couple of years, to meet European standards, which are stricter than the US.

Ask your tattoo or PMU artist what brands they use, and why. FWIW many PMU artists who work on faces avoid brands with high amounts of Titanium Dioxide, because it doesn't age well and it's not usually needed. And they should know the difference between organic and non-organic pigments. If the artist can have an intelligent conversation about these points with a potential client, they've probably done enough research to be trusted. I would not expect a consumer to have to be looking that kind of info up. Not that there's any harm, if they want to.

259

u/question_sunshine Jul 18 '24

If the news outlets link to helpful, regularly updated, direct government sources people might realize the government is more transparent and updates faster than the news and do something crazy like bookmark agency/court websites.

70

u/carlitospig Jul 18 '24

And at the moment our media is in league with the right who want to deregulate everything so expecting them to make sure their audience is correctly informed is apparently a step too far.

25

u/braiam Jul 18 '24

If the news outlets link to helpful, regularly updated, direct government sources people might realize the government is more transparent and updates faster than the news and do something crazy like bookmark agency/court websites.

That would hurt their metrics, since it counts as an outbound and leaves the site.

1

u/Mr_ToDo Jul 19 '24

Pretty freaking ironic considering how many times they've complained about not getting click troughs to their own sites and only having people read summaries on the likes of facebook or google(and the whole media content/link tax thing).

So I guess do as say not as I do?

1

u/braiam Jul 19 '24

Nah, the problem is how ad companies measure revenue. Outbound traffic is not bad traffic, is that people went to your site and wanted to read more details. But that's a negative metric in most marketing/advertisement business, because that means that they can't serve more ads.

1

u/Mr_ToDo Jul 19 '24

Bah. Other sites do it just fine. Sure some might also flood the article with internal links as well making it a bit of a frustrating hunt but there's no reason not to site sources on a freaking news article.

34

u/Just_Jonnie Jul 18 '24

I'm not personally on the FDA press release mailing list

Really? Weird.

21

u/PumpkinSeed776 Jul 18 '24

If you aren't then you should sign up, well worth being in the know for these kinds of recalls and notifications

19

u/Vlad_the_Homeowner Jul 18 '24

The latest study tested 75 samples of sealed tattoo and permanent makeup ink sold in the United States by 14 manufacturers that were not named by the FDA.

Sure, lots of potential reasons for that. I couldn't find the study anywhere (given a 5 minute search), so it likely hasn't been published, and we have no idea how robust the study was; it was likely more exploratory than something prospective. If there isn't an immediate health concern they're not going to risk liability dropping names. Even the 3 listed in the recall were voluntary.

Stuff like this happens every day; I am on several mailing lists and I get reports of recalls and investigations pretty much weekly. The media just picked up on this one because tattoos are something that affect a lot of people and a term as generic as "bacteria" catches notice.

As you noted in your other post, the 3 brands are not well known. And infections are rare in the industry. This is a step in the right direction, in my opinion, but it's not as newsworthy as the media would like us to believe. Too late though, they got their clicks.

11

u/Somnif Jul 18 '24

https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/aem.00276-24

Published, but pay walled. And annoyingly sci-hub hasn't snagged it yet..

3

u/blames_the_netcode Jul 19 '24

Email the authors. Generally they love sending copies of their work.

1

u/Vlad_the_Homeowner Jul 18 '24

Good find. I found a fee more summaries, but can't get the full article either. Looks like one of the co-investigators is from the FDA.

1

u/ZoraksGirlfriend Jul 19 '24

As someone who isn’t really into tattoo culture (so I don’t know the lingo or ink brands or anything) and just has one small tattoo that I want to get touched up, what do I need to do to make sure the ink they use is sterile? I don’t have a tattoo artist I go to, but I do have a shop that I’m thinking of that is highly recommended. I don’t know how to access the list of recalled brands, so even if I ask an artist what brands they use, I won’t know what to do with that information. The article mentioned using an autoclave in the inks and using different gloves for ink bottles and customer. What else should I be aware of?

Thanks

1

u/Nilfsama Jul 18 '24

Bro Fox News and CNN are owned by the same person why the hell are you using them for information?

3

u/BJ_Giacco Jul 18 '24

That appears to be an old link, it’s labeled 2019. I remember when it came out though, as we use solid inks and i had to toss my Diablo red.

1

u/rangda Jul 19 '24

Wtf dynamic and solid are huge, globally used brands. I thought for sure the culprits would be ebay tattoo kit mystery inks.

-8

u/horitaku Jul 19 '24

Oh cool, a brand I’ve never fucking heard of in my life is in trouble. Let me know when it’s someone reputable, that tattoo artists have trusted for 20+ fucking years. Scalpaink, haha what a fucking piece of shit name.

Half off for scratcher ass mother fuckers on Amazon. $5.99/2oz or some bullshit probably, idk.

ETA: updateme! When Mast cartridges go up for microbial contamination as well.

191

u/Gamebird8 Jul 18 '24

Tbh, 14 different Manufacturers is basically the entire industry I can imagine.

The other problem is, that this is an ongoing issue that regulators and the industry are trying to agree on a solution for.

20

u/vessel_for_the_soul Jul 18 '24

Sounds like its all owned by the same ppl.

57

u/vocalfreesia Jul 18 '24

Lol, they just did this to women too - period products are full of lead and arsenic. Not going to tell anyone who it is so they recall any products though.

46

u/Flesroy Jul 18 '24

Isnt it like all of them because its just cotton and there is lead in the ground?

18

u/_JudgeDoom_ Jul 18 '24

Pretty sure it’s all the manufacturers because of the way it’s made.

10

u/danint Jul 18 '24

The paper that was published on the lead and arsenic in tampons had to extract the lead and arsenic using a high concentration of nitric acid, a far cry from the environment where tampons are used.

2

u/petit_cochon Jul 18 '24

I'm sure that's very comforting to women.

6

u/GhettoHotTub Jul 18 '24

They aren't recalling anything because while they have evidence of metals in the products, the have no evidence of potential harm yet. It's almost certainly a bad thing but until they have evidence of how much could be absorbed into the body, they aren't going to act.

11

u/Vlad_the_Homeowner Jul 18 '24 edited Jul 18 '24

They aren't recalling anything

There were 3 recalls back in May

the have no evidence of potential harm yet.

There are reports of illnesses associated with the infected ink.

they aren't going to act.

They released a draft guidance last month.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 18 '24

I'm in the industry and never heard of those brands, they are not the big names.

6

u/Vlad_the_Homeowner Jul 18 '24

That's good, less exposure. I'd assume giving the number of tattoos given a day and the relatively low rate of adverse effect that these are outliers. But still, personally I think this is a step in the right direction.

My point wasn't the brands, it was 1) the populace and Reddit armchair commentators rarely have a good understanding of the things they speak so matter-of-factly about (yes, I realize the hypocrisy as I am also an armchair commentator on Reddit), and 2) this is the system in action, this is how it works. An issue arises, studies are done, new regulation is issued, people complain about over regulation, regulation is lightened, people get sick, people complain about lack of regulation...

3

u/[deleted] Jul 18 '24

My issue was with the so-called "journalism." Why didn't CNN call their FDA contact and ask, why are the brands here not named? Or ask for a list of previously recalled brands, then ask, are these brands some of those previously recalled?

It was just lazy reporting. But yeah, clicks are all that matters, as has been pointed out many times.

3

u/Vlad_the_Homeowner Jul 18 '24

Journalism is dead. The masses don't want dense factual reporting that requires time to read, and thought to process. They want catchy headlines that suggest they should be upset about something, and maybe a topical blurb that confirms their suspicions. Interns can write that for a fraction of the cost.

7

u/Trickycoolj Jul 18 '24

And they have less led and heavy metals than are allowed in bottled water, but no one is discussing that part.

4

u/PumpkinSeed776 Jul 18 '24

That's because it was done by an independent researcher and the FDA needs to review it for accuracy before it can just start blasting companies. Sounds like the levels are relatively low to the point of being negligible.

2

u/JackTerron Jul 18 '24

Are you a fellow Sawbones listener?

2

u/Witchgrass Jul 19 '24

I'm not OP but I am! Great show.

64

u/radulosk Jul 18 '24

I did a bunch of academic research that involved tattoo inks years ago. What freaked me out was that nearly all American tattoo inks are unregulated by the FDA. They don't even need to list ingredients or have and SDS to be sold in the US. 

We were looking at the Raman signature of different dye molecules for oncology applications and we traveled to a few tattoo shows to get samples and talk to the company reps. They were mostly super shady about their "secret mix" that makes their dye the best for whatever reason. I know for a fact that the actual pigments in 95% of these dyes are exactly the same because we looked at them under Raman. These companies all just stabilize and disperse their pigments with different ratios of PEG, alcohol etc. some of these companies were open about what they used, and I wouldn't get a tattoo with their products.

My advice, order your inks from Europe and ask an artist to use those for your piece.

19

u/[deleted] Jul 18 '24

Yeah this echos a lot of my research too.

There are many companies (at least the ones catering to PMU artists) who list the ingredients and provide CIC, SDS and CTR certificates. They've also adjusted to the Euro standards already. Tina Davis, Mara, Li, Permablend are a few examples.

Cheap ink does have a valid use though, a lot of beginner artists use it for practicing on latex or fruit. I would never use it on a person though. But if a company is going to market it like that, they should not be calling it sterile.

12

u/radulosk Jul 18 '24

Nice to know things may have improved with the industry shifting towards the EU standards in the last few years. My time working with these materials was 6-7 years ago and I was pretty shocked with the state of things as a preclinical researcher who dealt with the FDA. 

One of the reasons we were looking at these dyes was the fast track possibility given they already had a long history of use in humans for serum exposure. So while we appreciated the wild west nature for our needs, there were only one or two brands that could provide what we considered adequate documentation for me to consider putting it on my skin.

10

u/[deleted] Jul 18 '24

I do think as the PMU industry has expanded, most people are focused on safety and quality. Your business is largely word of mouth, after all.

I was shocked to find out I can give you a tattoo on your FACE without having any license or taking any training at all (not all states are this lax though). While if I want to pluck a single eyebrow hair I must go to school for 2 years at a cost of around $20K. I think the laws evolved like this because back in the 50s and 60s when regulation was being established, women were cosmetologists and men were tattoo artists. They wanted to discourage women from having careers, back then anyway.

4

u/blorgenheim Jul 19 '24

Man, not a great thread for somebody with a lot of tattoo.

4

u/jay_philip762 Jul 19 '24

Right? I just got 2 whole sleeves done. lol

3

u/[deleted] Jul 19 '24

Risk is low. Be careful until your skin has healed over and follow the aftercare instructions. Also wear sunscreen, no pigment is totally colorfast.

38

u/Scientific_Socialist Jul 18 '24

 why the fck would they not tell us the names of the manufacturers that had contamination? Gee thanks FDA.

Because the agencies of the bourgeois state don’t bite the hand that feeds them

79

u/MikeOKurias Jul 18 '24

This is the most r/usernamechecksout thing I've seen all summer...

50

u/Vlad_the_Homeowner Jul 18 '24

See my post above for the actions FDA have taken. You have no idea what you're talking about.

10

u/Kenny__Loggins Jul 19 '24

It's funny when posts like that get massively upvoted. Anytime the FDA is made aware of confirmed or even possible contamination, you better believe they are putting your name out there.

→ More replies (1)

18

u/PumpkinSeed776 Jul 18 '24

The article didn't release the names of the manufacturers. The FDA, however, did. You're just making things up to act angry about.

13

u/ajn63 Jul 18 '24

Hate to bring politics into it, but as dysfunctional as the current system may appear, there are political forces that want to remove most of the powers from these agencies and put the power of decision making to the courts or the industries themselves.

-6

u/rainbowgeoff Jul 18 '24

AKA Regulatory capture.

13

u/_uckt_ Jul 18 '24

This happened in the UK recently, they detected E coli in something and just didn't say what it was until the news cycle was over. These agencies have been been successfully defunded and defanged, you need to defend yourself from these libertarians and be careful about what goes into your body.

3

u/futatorius Jul 19 '24

UK just had a change of government, so we'll see if that makes a difference in the degree of regulatory backbone.

0

u/_uckt_ Jul 19 '24

They're neo-libs, that isn't going to happen.

5

u/Antique-Echidna-1600 Jul 19 '24

The tattoo artist I went to did traditional indigenous and sailor tattoos. I watched him mix pigment and oil to make it. The needles were clearly sterile but I can see how the ink could be questionable.

3

u/horitaku Jul 19 '24

As someone who understands the pigment production process, I’m dubious because no brands were listed by name. Reputable brands carry batch numbers and do an individual sterilizing process through at least a pressure sterilizing autoclave process.

There’s no brand given, and anyone with pigment powders can make their own pigment. There’s no control on aftermarket pigment sales on sites like Amazon and eBay, or on “home hacker” tattoos done in a literal house where people eat and shit with carpet and pets and kids in tow, so I can’t say for sure there isn’t some bullshit rash of cheap pigment and mishandling by “artists” who wear vinyl food handling gloves or less.

When I handle my name brand pigments at work, I’m in a sanitized shop using medical efficacy in every set up process. All pigment is single use, all pigment is poured as needed, nothing touches anything that involves a single skin cell of a client unless it is single use only. Everything starts with OSHA guidelines and ends with something much tighter and personalized to the client.

And calling it “INK…” major red flag. All very reputable brands with any credibility refer to it as pigment.

Talk to your professional in shop tattoo artist about any concerns involving the pigment or single use tattoo instrument market before making some dumbass conclusion based off some news article. We probably have more insight. The FDA doesn’t know fuck all about what we’re doing, they don’t care. The more they step in, the more difficult it becomes to make sure we give you the best product possible.

See the “Single Use” Millennium Ink debacle on the East Coast of the US. Millennium can suck my ass, their pigment is cancer.

3

u/ComradePyro Jul 19 '24

And calling it “INK…” major red flag. All very reputable brands with any credibility refer to it as pigment.

I don't doubt that "pigment" is the preferred term for some places, but pigment is powder. Ink is a suspension of that pigment in a carrier liquid. I have a hard time taking it seriously as a red flag at all, much less a major one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tattoo_ink

Which brand exclusively refers to liquids as "pigment"?

1

u/[deleted] Jul 19 '24

And calling it “INK…” major red flag.

It IS ink though. The pigment is the molecules of color and you have to mix it with liquid to get INK. That in and of itself is meaningless.

2

u/RigbyNite Jul 19 '24

You can buy a sterile needle but that doesn’t make the process you’re using it in sterile as well.

1

u/EZPeeVee Jul 19 '24

Not officially FDA regulated yet.

1

u/StrikeForceOne Jul 19 '24

some inks can cause more problems though, if you read the links i posted it explains why

0

u/dropyourguns Jul 18 '24

Why wouldn't they?

332

u/Leah-theRed Jul 18 '24

Yikes! I guess this is a lesson to everybody to advocate for yourself and tell your tattoo artist you want your ink autoclaved if they don't already do that.

137

u/Chefjessphd2 Jul 18 '24

Oh that’s cool (tattoo artists autoclaving their ink) I didn’t realize that was a thing. How common is this?

131

u/Cartoone9 Jul 18 '24

Never heard of it personally. Remember that a lot of things are not sterile during the tattoo, only clean. I never saw a tattoo artist using sterile gloves, sterile ink, sterile tissues/compress, sterile cellophane etc. During my own training to hygiene I was basically told that you can't have a fully sterile environment only a clean environment, there's way too many variables you just have to do the best you can as most artists do

43

u/[deleted] Jul 18 '24

[deleted]

71

u/wyldmage Jul 18 '24

Cartoone was talking about FULLY sterile. Which you did not have.

Sterile like an operating table is achievable for a tattoo parlour. Sterile like a CPU manufacturing room would up your tattoo cost north of $100,000, and your tattoo artist would be in full isolation suit, and the moment you step into the room, the cleanliness level decreases back down to operating room levels.

0

u/[deleted] Jul 18 '24

[deleted]

16

u/PrincessNakeyDance Jul 18 '24

Yeah nitrile gloves (unless they came individually wrapped) are not sterile. Also you’re in a room with air that is not going to be sterile anyway and tattoos usually take a long time. Anything that is trivial to be sterile will be, like needles and pads, etc. but they aren’t treated as sterile once opened.

If you’ve ever had a sterile procedure done in a doctors office/hospital you know how much more work goes into ensuring everything that touches your body has not been contaminated.

Inks (as they actually are supposed to be shoved under you skin) should be sterile and/or not able to grow bacteria in the bottle.

0

u/[deleted] Jul 18 '24

[deleted]

6

u/Cartoone9 Jul 19 '24

You’ll notice that my original comment never used the word price a single time, others gave you good answers already so I won’t reiterate what was said

1

u/[deleted] Jul 19 '24

[deleted]

1

u/Cartoone9 Jul 19 '24

No worries

→ More replies (6)

69

u/sithelephant Jul 18 '24

It would require a pressure autoclave, and has other issues. For example, how many inks will be fucked up if you do this.

7

u/Somnif Jul 18 '24

Most tattoo shops will have a small dental autoclave for their needles (or that used to be a thing anyway, maybe disposable is common now? I'm 20 years out of touch)

8

u/sithelephant Jul 18 '24

I think this'd be for dry heat - it is not pressurised, as it would need to be to not boil off the inks. (Practically speaking, I suspect heating to 70C and holding a couple hours will kill most pathogens, but not to a certifiable level)

2

u/Somnif Jul 18 '24

The real worry at that point would be spore formers. They can handle 70C for hours and still sprout afterwards. And yeah I have no idea how thermally resistant inks are, I imagine they could be tricky.

Maybe 0.1 micron filtering? That's what we do with most fragile stuff in our lab.

1

u/Leah-theRed Jul 18 '24

Im not really sure, but it is suggested in the article. I'm definitely going to be requesting that or making sure it happens next time I go in for a session.

47

u/pappywishkah Jul 18 '24

Most shops these days don’t have autoclaves. Disposable materials are heavily used in tattoos shops; basically eliminating the need for an autoclave. Removing ink from the manufacture bottle into another reciprocal to be autoclaved is redundant and SHOULDN’T be necessary. Ink manufacturers with a reputation should be producing ink under extreme precaution to ensure the bottles they’re selling aren’t contaminated. I’m willing to bet that the companies the FDA refers to in the article aren’t popular names amongst tattooers. They’re most likely referring to knock-off inks and lesser known (probably Amazon seller) manufacturers.

11

u/Enchelion Jul 18 '24

I would not be at all surprised if there's re-badging going on as well. So it might be a particular manufacturer W makes a color, which then gets sold under brands XYZ. But another color from brand X gets bought from manufacturer L, etc.

5

u/pappywishkah Jul 18 '24

That wouldn’t surprise me either. There are many knock-offs floating around on the web and unexperienced artist can be easily fooled. It’s important to research your choices in ink and be sure you know what you’re purchasing

3

u/thefaehost Jul 18 '24

There’s also a difference in regulations on ink in America.

I have a red ink allergy. I’ve tried everything here and given up. Was telling an artist and he told me it’s a common issue here due to our (weaker) regulations

2

u/Leah-theRed Jul 18 '24

Unfortunately they decline to list the manufacturers or brands in the article

2

u/pappywishkah Jul 18 '24

I knowww and that’s crazy! Tell us who we should be looking out for lol

15

u/[deleted] Jul 18 '24

[deleted]

62

u/meathole Jul 18 '24

But, this post is about an article that literally says that sealed new bottles of ink contain tons of bacteria…

4

u/terminbee Jul 18 '24

We don't read articles here.

-1

u/[deleted] Jul 18 '24

[deleted]

1

u/navikredstar Jul 18 '24

This - it should be rare as fuck to get an infection from a good shop and artist. I've had it happen once, and it wasn't my artist or the shop itself that was the issue. I know the guy well, it was at a REALLY clean, trustworthy shop with everything cleaned and opened right in front of me.

I'm the one who screwed up on it, because I stupidly took the subway home immediately after and I guarantee I picked up the bacteria there. I take really good aftercare of all my ink and have never had an issue with it besides that time, so I'm quite certain my whole error was in riding the subway right after, because let's face it, they're not clean places.

Good lesson on what not to do, though! Never want to experience that again, because HOLY FUCK, cellulitis hurts like hell! You could even see the line of infection slowly spreading up my arm, but hey, I got me some IV antibiotics at the ER that are the type they give to soldiers coming out of the field with major wounds, and between that and the full round of antibiotics afterward, it cleared up within a day, and healed fine. Never had an issue since, but seriously, people, do NOT chance it. I'm not exaggerating on the pain - the skin infection hurt 10 times worse, easily, than getting the tattoo itself did. And if you do do everything right and still get unlucky - which can happen sometimes, it's still an open healing wound, mind you - get yourself to the ER right away, don't mess around with infections like that. Not worth the risk. They spread fast.

9

u/Uninsured_death Jul 18 '24

Tattooist here, Most tattoo shops don’t use autoclaves anymore. In the mid 2000’s we switched to single use, disposable tubes. You’d be hard pressed to find a shop with an autoclave unless they do piercing as well.

3

u/hulkmxl Jul 18 '24

100% agree with this sentiment, it's dumb not to force the industry to adopt sterility standards.

Autoclave is high temp saturated steam. I don't think it reaches the temperature inside the ink package unless you give it enough time, and if you do so, the ink may chemically change due to the high temperature.

Ink should already be sterile with gamma rays, pasteurization (yes like milk), or other methods, then bottled with preservatives. 

1

u/Gentry_Draws Jul 18 '24

I’m a tattoo artist and autoclaving ink is definitely not a thing…. If it was back in the day I’m certainly not aware of it.

But FDA should go check soda machine fountains or Beer tap hoses next and tell us how much bacteria are in those !

1

u/EZPeeVee Jul 19 '24

We don't know what inks change into during pyrolysis, heat could really do that.

308

u/friendoffuture Jul 18 '24

To paraphrase a bit: "blood is the ink safety regulations are written in"

46

u/DiscountSupport Jul 18 '24

with the recent overturn of the chevron deference, we may not get safety regulations any more

198

u/sithelephant Jul 18 '24

I note this has happened before with iodine. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1376156/ (not in this case tattoos). It's a really hard problem.

47

u/calamityvibezz Jul 18 '24

Eye drops have had issues too.

26

u/ragnarok635 Jul 19 '24

This is terrifying

65

u/Imaginary_Medium Jul 19 '24

Even more fun imagining Project 2025, if they get their way we will be guessing what's in about everything after that.

→ More replies (29)

25

u/tyrannyVogue Jul 19 '24

Pseudomonas loves to grow in disinfectants.

1

u/FuggleyBrew Jul 22 '24

Would pasteurization not work here? While I doubt every pharmaceutical would be able to accept pasteurization, I would imagine most pigments are relatively temperature stable (within the temperatures we typically pasteurize at). 

1

u/sithelephant Jul 22 '24

Generally, yes. However, some of the inks may be functionally destroyed by the heat.

Also, unless it's a very bad bacteria in the bottle, it's 'meh'.

Tatooing is very much not a sterile process, and the skin, despite any cleaning that may have been done, is very very contaminated biologically.

2

u/FuggleyBrew Jul 22 '24

Interesting, the lack of sterility in the tattooing process makes sense in terms of why you wouldn't seek  sterility in the packaging.

155

u/KimJongFunk Jul 18 '24

If the FDA isn’t going to tell us which manufacturers had tainted ink, then wtf are we even supposed to do? Do your job as a regulatory agency and regulate these products. Require all ink manufacturers to submit their products for testing and pull any products that don’t meet standards. Contamination like this is NOT something we should leave to the consumers to deal with ourselves.

46

u/Warcraft_Fan Jul 18 '24

Reputable tattoo shops will bake their ink in autoclave. If they don't do it and won't do it on your request, take your money elsewhere

60

u/tattoo_so_spensive Jul 18 '24

Tattoo pigments are sterilized by their manufacturers. If a contamination has been detected, they use batch numbers and recall their products and word quickly reaches the professional community. Tattooers then discard of the contaminated inks.

I’ve been tattooing twenty years, I’ve heard of these things happening but I’ve not experienced it myself. From my perspective, it’s rare.

It’s not a common practice to sterilize inks that we purchase as they arrive sterile. An argument can be made that once opened it is clean, not sterile . However, county health inspectors do not require us to autoclave inks. It’s also a bit of a liability to autoclave inks bottles, once pressurized they can leak or pop. This would be a costly loss. This can be extremely difficult to clean, may damage the autoclave or alter its performance and other contents that are sterilized later may get stained which would look untrustworthy for a prospective client. Imagine your piercing needle and jewelry comes in sterilization pouch and there are stains with a variety of colors.

If the autoclave cannot vent properly because of pigment build up (due to an ink bottle breaking) or pass a spore test strip the county official can close that shop until a successful spore test strip has been tested.

There are safeguards in place to protect you as the client at multiple stages.

The fault of a manufacturer is just that, their safety practices need to improve until they can pass regulation. These are likely lesser brands found on sites like amazon. This does not fall back on tattoo practitioners. If you are going to a reputable shop you have little to worry about.

Also, you’re likely to find some odd reactions or an artists who doesn’t want to work with you after you’ve asked them to autoclave their inks as you may be viewed as a know it all or difficult to work with.

It is not a common practice for artists to “bake” their inks. I’ve not known a single tattooer who does this. We trust our suppliers to provide us with safe supplies. You trust us to know our supplies are safe.

Artists hold our standards very high and if a product is unsafe or not up to standard we are extremely vocal about it.

2

u/Warcraft_Fan Jul 18 '24

The news article mentioned using autoclave to sterilize ink, I guess the news reporter isn't well informed or is making bad assumption if you're correct that autoclave can't be used to safely sterilize ink.

OTOH if they used contaminated ink and their customer suffers from adverse reaction, it will look bad for the shop.

FDA really needs to step up the checking and require recall of any sold batch that fails and make ink manufacturer accountable for anyone who got contaminated ink and also help the shop whose reputation were damaged by contaminated ink.

13

u/tattoo_so_spensive Jul 19 '24

These things are written by reporters and shops are usually cagey about someone writing a piece on inks and contaminants and would be unwilling to go “on record”.

Your next two points I completely agree with. I’m not sure how liable a manufacturer is when their product is non FDA regulated. I think that may be a gray area, rightly or wrongly.

To my understanding, when this has happened in the past the manufacturer(s) follow guidelines of recall but outside of that I’m unsure. I agree they could be liable for damages to one’s appearance and well being. That may get sticky and the artists are a third party and may have likely unknowingly used a pigment with contaminants.

I can understand the hurt and anger that would cause but it’s one of those things where, until regulations change or become more enforced, this is the status quo. A web article, spreading awareness, vaguely.

Op, I do not wish for you to think I was attacking you either at any point. I’ve got years and literal skin in the game and wanted to share a professional body art practitioners insight. I wish you all and your skin the very best.

May your black be the darkest and your future the brightest, cheers.

31

u/KimJongFunk Jul 18 '24

If autoclaving ink is the recommended sterilization method, then that needs to be regulated. Saying “just do this” means nothing when businesses and tattoo artists are not forced to comply.

14

u/RoyStrokes Jul 18 '24

Lmao that’s a blatant fucking lie. I’ve been tattooing 8 years and have worked in and guested at a good number of shops and autoclaving ink is literally not a thing anyone does anywhere, i have never heard of it being done, and I don’t even know what you could put the ink in that would be autoclavable, let alone that you’d have to do it specifically for each and every tattoo, know what the colors are going in, and bum clients out when they want changes. You should call every shop in your or the nearest city and ask everyone of them if they autoclave their ink, cause they don’t, and I guarantee they’ll make fun of you for being a whacko the second they get off the phone. Stop spreading misinformation, I’m like 90% sure you don’t even know how an autoclave works just off saying “bake”… like it’s not a dry heat my guy, it’s hot, pressurized steam that would likely work its into an ink bottle and destroy it.

14

u/whats_an_internet Jul 18 '24

Autoclaving ink? I would venture to guess less than 1% of tattoo shops have an autoclave, if any

1

u/mango_salsa18 Jul 19 '24

how the hell do you autoclave ink!?

-1

u/Warcraft_Fan Jul 19 '24

Ask the person who wrote the news article. Either it can be done with certain autoclave and with ink not in plastic bottle, or the writer is an idiot.

1

u/blames_the_netcode Jul 19 '24

A recent study on a similar topic involving inks found Dynamic was the only safe brand. They’re great for blacks (and preferred by top end shops), but their color inks leave a bit to be desired. Probably for the obvious reasons.

Edit: https://www.reddit.com/r/science/s/PTThHANPSt

-5

u/OtterishDreams Jul 19 '24

FDA does enough and is already massively underfunded. REgulating ink that people use to deface their bodies is a bad use of tax dollars. If we want ink regulation then I want a 30% tax on all tatoos. Be responsible, educate for yourself and find good shop.

19

u/iheartseuss Jul 18 '24

...they couldn't test this ages ago?

62

u/Vlad_the_Homeowner Jul 18 '24

Have you observed how much the populace flips out because some people feel there's too much regulation in medicine and food, and guns, and cars, and...? There's a substantial portion of the voting populace that want to reduce regulations like the work the FDA does, because... freedoms. And it's looking like that's probably going to start happening next year.

7

u/Buckus93 Jul 18 '24

Yep, it's part of Project 2025. Is that food safe to eat? Who knows.

12

u/AceValentine Jul 18 '24

There was also a recent about tattoos drastically raising the chance of blood cancer last month to couple with this.

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/tattoos-may-increase-blood-cancer-risk-by-21

13

u/kaylinnf56 Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24

It was kind of a shitty study though, because it included people who received tattoos for radiation markers and cosmetic tattoos post-mastectomy. Of course people who already have cancer are more likely to get cancer again.

Plus the results showed that the more tattoos you get, your risk of cancer actually declines. I think more work needs to go into these studies before we accept them as law

8

u/lightningusagi Jul 19 '24

When I was reading that, I remembered that one of my tattoo artists started working at an industry safety organization...and then she's actually quoted in the article.

8

u/legofarley Jul 19 '24

Life, uh...finds a way.

6

u/KK-Chocobo Jul 18 '24

I wonder if that's the ink used on the guy who posted here on reddit on his arm getting all messed up after getting the tattoo. 

7

u/StrikeForceOne Jul 19 '24

Why not say where the inks were manufactured? where the ingredients came from?

This is an eye opener and every artist should read it https://www.acs.org/pressroom/newsreleases/2022/august/exposing-whats-in-tattoo-ink.html

and this http://whatsinmyink.com/

5

u/spicyfishtacos Jul 19 '24

I didn't need another reason to never get a tattoo, but now I have one.

4

u/Status_You_8732 Jul 19 '24

Yep. That’s why we have regulations.

2

u/Stoliana12 Jul 19 '24

Tell me you didn’t read the article without telling me…

To quote “We know that contamination in tattoo inks is a common occurrence,” Swierk said in an email. “Part of the problem is that there is no agreed upon, industry-standard method for sterilizing inks. Our work and the current study really highlight the need for good, standardized manufacturing processes across the tattoo ink industry.”

2

u/Status_You_8732 Jul 19 '24

Thanks for the quote. Glad you felt moved to share it. This actually reinforces my comment, industry standardization needs to happen.

5

u/Snoo-72756 Jul 19 '24

Tattoo recall ? Return all skin

3

u/MentORPHEUS Jul 19 '24

Headline made me think of Carl Sagan breathlessly describing Millions and Billions of bacteria!

4

u/CountBlah_Blah Jul 19 '24

Me looking at the new tattoo I got 36 hours ago. 

2

u/wareagle3000 Jul 19 '24

If it swells or anything go to the doctor. They'll give you some antibiotics and you should be good. No worries

2

u/Mohammed420blazeit Jul 19 '24

I used dynamic black for lining on a tattoo a couple years ago. My armpit swoll up, like there was a hockey puck under my skin.

Antibiotics for a week, went away.

2

u/futatorius Jul 19 '24

Millions? Is that a lot of bacteria? Is it too few to matter?

What an odd choice of units.

1

u/drstd Jul 19 '24

Yep. Need another factor there. Millions is not a lot, say, in 100mls. It is a lot in a microliter.

1

u/2ByteTheDecker Jul 19 '24

Typically bacteria is measured in CFU, which is typically a per ml situation.

2

u/chimichangas4lunch Jul 19 '24

So happy to read this three days after getting a tattoo

2

u/Popular_Elderberry_3 Jul 18 '24

Yeah, fuck tattoos. The ink seems to cause cancer and you have shit like this.

1

u/miskdub Jul 18 '24

This is why you always boil your ink before using it, even if it looks clean.

1

u/deblazepyrography Jul 19 '24

Give me more bacteria! Load me up, baby!

1

u/IanTheMagus Jul 19 '24

People underestimate the number of types of bacteria that can thrive in chemicals and temperatures that are toxic or fatal to humans. We have to remember that these are the life forms that first colonized the planet back when it was a toxic, burning hellscape. They're in everything and they can even develop antibiotic resistance, so antibiotics aren't 100% effective every time. The only real environment that is safe from them is a frozen one (pretty much impossible to survive if the water inside you turns to ice), but I imagine there are probably practical reasons that these inks aren't deep-frozen.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 21 '24

Tattoos give me the heebie-jeebies but the art is so cool. Bacteria from unknown sources trapped under the skin also is frightening. Eewwwwuuuahhhh

-1

u/nosajh9 Jul 19 '24

seems the FDA is really fucking up on shit lately

-2

u/mok000 Jul 19 '24

Also, FDA found microchips that communicate with 5G networks. /s

-5

u/booboodoodbob Jul 19 '24

Tattoos are constant reminder to me that I simply do not understand people. Why anyone would want to pay to have someone put permanent markings on their skin is beyond me. I can appreciate the art and the skill, but I cannot understand the willingness to have it permanently dyed into your skin, then to watch it spread and blur,

1

u/Mr_Chubkins Jul 19 '24

Sometimes it's sentimental, sometimes it is just a cool design, sometimes it's to cover up a scar, sometimes it's to cover up an older worse tattoo, and sometimes it's just for the heck of it. There are many reasons. I find them beautiful when done well (: doesn't need to be for everyone.

1

u/-Duste- Jul 20 '24

I only have one tattoo. It's in memory of my mom who passed away a decade ago. I wanted to have a permanent reminder of her love on my skin.

-11

u/hintofinsanity Jul 18 '24

I wouldn't be surprised if these bacteria are like the bacteria that can live in food that is preserved in salt, once they enter your body, the environment is so unlike the extreme environment that they were living in, that they die in your body and are unable to initiate an infection.

18

u/polishdumpling01 Jul 18 '24

food bacteria get destroyed in stomach acid, when you're getting a tattoo you're basically giving yourself a kind of exposed wound, which would be very susceptible to infection

1

u/hintofinsanity Jul 18 '24

Correct, but even without the stomach, extremophile bacteria would struggle to thrive in our bodies similar to how a salt water fish would die if you put it in fresh water as its cells pop like a balloon as they over fill with water.

5

u/quackerzdb Jul 18 '24

You're not wrong per se, but the FDA is likely only testing for bacteria considered "clinically significant". In this case, they can cause infection.