4 ms·

Citations for what makes you think the inks have "unknown" effects, and/or cause cancer or autoimmune disorders? If you don't have a source, what has led you to

Citations for what makes you think the inks have "unknown" effects, and/or cause cancer or autoimmune disorders? If you don't have a source, what has led you to believe it's true? I'm talking normal color inks, not unconventional ones like the ones that glow in the dark. I would think that if a third of the population has a tattoo, we'd actually know with almost certainty what the effects are.

copperx 3y ago
> I would think that if a third of the population has a tattoo, we'd actually know with almost certainty what the effects are. I wouldn't count on it. It took us 100 years to find out smoking was extremely bad, even though the majority of the population was doing it.
- bongoman37 3y ago
  We knew smoking was bad for a long time. It took time to push through tobacco industry's lobbying and massive amounts of advertising convincing people against what they could evidently see in front of them. I don't think tattoo industry has remotely near that level of push.
  - wkat4242 3y ago
    Yeah it's very telling of the power this industry has that smoking is still not banned in most countries. And that new techniques with no existing user base like vaping were not stopped before they ever started.
pengaru 3y ago
I saw some special on youtube years ago, maybe from VICE, where they reported on folks needing lymph node surgery who had substantial tattoos. The removed lymph nodes were enlarged and visibly full of ink.
toast0 3y ago
The FDA takes a light touch [1] on tattoo ink in comparison with many other things that go in people's bodies. > FDA considers the inks used in intradermal tattoos, including permanent makeup, to be cosmetics. When we identify a safety problem associated with a cosmetic, including a tattoo ink, we investigate and take action, as appropriate, to prevent consumer illness or injury. The pigments used in the inks are color additives, which are subject to premarket approval under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. However, because of other competing public health priorities and a previous lack of evidence of safety problems specifically associated with these pigments, FDA traditionally has not exercised regulatory authority for color additives on the pigments used in tattoo inks. The actual practice of tattooing is regulated by local jurisdictions. As regards long term population studies... we'd also need to know if what's in tattoo inks has changed over time, which seems plausible? [1] https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetic-products/tattoos-permanent-makeup-fact-sheet https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetic-products/tattoos-perm...
- talldatethrow 3y ago
  Considering the FDA constantly approves things that have tiny affects bet and placebo, yet have massive side effects with genuine risks, I wouldn't really take any ok from the FDA as proof of safety anyway.

copperx 3y ago

> I would think that if a third of the population has a tattoo, we'd actually know with almost certainty what the effects are. I wouldn't count on it. It took us 100 years to find out smoking was extremely bad, even though the majority of the population was doing it.

bongoman37 3y ago
We knew smoking was bad for a long time. It took time to push through tobacco industry's lobbying and massive amounts of advertising convincing people against what they could evidently see in front of them. I don't think tattoo industry has remotely near that level of push.
- wkat4242 3y ago
  Yeah it's very telling of the power this industry has that smoking is still not banned in most countries. And that new techniques with no existing user base like vaping were not stopped before they ever started.

pengaru 3y ago

I saw some special on youtube years ago, maybe from VICE, where they reported on folks needing lymph node surgery who had substantial tattoos. The removed lymph nodes were enlarged and visibly full of ink.

toast0 3y ago

The FDA takes a light touch [1] on tattoo ink in comparison with many other things that go in people's bodies. > FDA considers the inks used in intradermal tattoos, including permanent makeup, to be cosmetics. When we identify a safety problem associated with a cosmetic, including a tattoo ink, we investigate and take action, as appropriate, to prevent consumer illness or injury. The pigments used in the inks are color additives, which are subject to premarket approval under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. However, because of other competing public health priorities and a previous lack of evidence of safety problems specifically associated with these pigments, FDA traditionally has not exercised regulatory authority for color additives on the pigments used in tattoo inks. The actual practice of tattooing is regulated by local jurisdictions. As regards long term population studies... we'd also need to know if what's in tattoo inks has changed over time, which seems plausible? [1] https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetic-products/tattoos-permanent-makeup-fact-sheet https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetic-products/tattoos-perm...

talldatethrow 3y ago
Considering the FDA constantly approves things that have tiny affects bet and placebo, yet have massive side effects with genuine risks, I wouldn't really take any ok from the FDA as proof of safety anyway.