If you’re thinking about getting a tattoo, there’s something important you should know: A recent study conducted by Binghamton University, State University of New York, has revealed alarming details about green and blue tattoo inks in Europe. Researchers found that many inks contain unlisted ingredients and, in some cases, even banned substances.

Tattoo inks in Europe are regulated by the European Union’s REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorization, and Restriction of Chemicals) regulations, introduced in 2022. These regulations restrict the use of around 4,000 substances. Some pigments, such as Pigment Blue 15:3 and Pigment Green 8, have been banned entirely.

In a study led by chemist John Swierk, the research team analyzed ten green and blue tattoo inks from five manufacturers that claim to be REACH-compliant. Shockingly, the findings were quite troubling. Swierk’s previous research in the U.S. had already revealed that 45 out of 54 inks didn’t match the ingredients listed on their labels.

“Our study doesn’t make conclusions about the safety of tattoos, but it’s an important first step in answering the question, ‘Are tattoos really safe?’” said Swierk. “Without knowing what’s inside a bottle of tattoo ink, we can’t predict possible short or long-term adverse reactions, such as allergic responses or even more serious health concerns. We aren’t against tattoos, but we believe clients and tattoo artists deserve full transparency about what they’re using.”

The team used various methods to analyze the inks, with the primary technique being Raman Spectroscopy, commonly used in the art world to identify pigments. Two key findings emerged from the study:

1. Non-compliance with REACH: 9 out of 10 inks analyzed were not REACH-compliant. Some failed to list all ingredients, while four contained prohibited substances.

2. Problems with Pigment Identification: The study revealed that Raman Spectroscopy is unreliable for identifying certain forms of Pigment Blue 15. There are three structures of Pigment Blue 15, but only one is banned. However, the equipment used for identification struggles to distinguish between them. As a result, the researchers argue that the REACH ban on Pigment Blue 15 may not be enforceable.

“There are existing regulations that aren’t being enforced, possibly because enforcement efforts are lagging,” Swierk noted. “While our study can’t determine whether the inaccurate labeling of tattoo inks is intentional, it highlights the urgent need for stricter manufacturing standards and enforcement of existing regulations.”

Swierk’s lab continues to research tattoo inks, focusing on how pigments break down under light, particularly the lasers used in tattoo removal, and gaining insight into the mechanisms of how pigments are inserted into the skin.

This study was also supported by Assistant Professor Huiyuan Guo, doctoral students Kelli Moseman and Sage Sanders, and undergraduate researcher Sasha Noble.