Abstract | BACKGROUND: OBJECTIVES: METHODS:
Tattoo inks from 39 companies were evaluated. Inclusion criteria included availability to purchase inks online through US tattoo product wholesalers or individual Web sites. Brands were grouped based on prevalence of use: common, uncommon, or rare. For common brands, 8 colors (primary colors, secondary colors, black, and white) were purchased. For uncommon and rare brands, 5 colors (primary colors, black, and white) were purchased. Each ink was tested with standard chromotropic acid method procedures; concentration of formaldehyde released was quantified using spectrophotometry. RESULTS: In total, 127 tattoo inks were purchased and tested. Ninety-three (73%) tested positive for formaldehyde release; 34 (27%) tested negative. Formaldehyde release did not correlate with color or brand. At least 1 ink from all brands (except 1) was positive for formaldehyde release. CONCLUSION:
|
Authors | Yujie Linda Liou, Lindsey M Voller, Walter Liszewski, Marna E Ericson, Paul D Siegel, Erin M Warshaw |
Journal | Dermatitis : contact, atopic, occupational, drug
(Dermatitis)
2021 Sep-Oct 01
Vol. 32
Issue 5
Pg. 327-332
ISSN: 2162-5220 [Electronic] United States |
PMID | 33273225
(Publication Type: Journal Article)
|
Copyright | Copyright © 2020 American Contact Dermatitis Society. All Rights Reserved. |
Chemical References |
- Coloring Agents
- Disinfectants
- Naphthalenesulfonates
- Formaldehyde
- chromotropic acid
|
Topics |
- Coloring Agents
(adverse effects, chemistry)
- Dermatitis, Allergic Contact
(etiology)
- Disinfectants
(adverse effects, analysis)
- Formaldehyde
(adverse effects, analysis)
- Humans
- Ink
- Naphthalenesulfonates
- Spectrophotometry
- Tattooing
|