Media release

From: Flinders University

Think before you ink: New study uncovers hidden risks in tattoo inks

One in four Australian adults have at least one tattoo, but new research suggests that what’s in the ink may pose greater risks than the size and design of the tattoo.

A new Flinders University study has revealed that the ingredients listed on tattoo ink labels often don’t match what’s actually inside the bottle.

The findings, published this month as the cover story in the Journal of Environmental Health, raise fresh concerns about the safety and regulation of tattoo inks.

“Using a combination of advanced analytical techniques, we found discrepancies between labelled and actual ingredients in a range of commercially available yellow tattoo inks,” says PhD candidate Ms Batool Aljubran, whose research is supported by the King Faisal University in Saudi Arabia.

“These hidden components raise serious questions about consumer safety, regulation, and the breakdown of pigments in the body.”

Tattoos have surged in popularity worldwide, yet pigments injected into the skin can trigger allergic reactions, inflammation, and even systemic health effects.

The Flinders University study analysed inks marketed as lemon yellow, golden yellow, golden rod and bright orange, containing pigments such as Yellow 14 and 65, Blue 15 and Orange 13.

The results showed not only discrepancies with label claims, but also the presence of unlisted elements such as aluminium, sodium and silicon.

Senior author Professor Claire Lenehan, from the College of Sciences and Engineering, says these findings highlight gaps in oversight.

“This study is part of our lab’s ongoing research to investigate the composition, safety, and health implications of tattoo inks,” says Professor Lenehan.

“Our earlier work, led by Dr Tristan Fraser, has shown that carcinogenic compounds and DNA-damaging chemicals can be released during tattooing, ageing, or removal.”

Fellow environmental health researcher Benjamin Boyle adds that tattoo pigments can degrade under sun exposure, ageing, or laser removal, further compounding potential risks.

Together, this body of work aims to inform public health advice, regulatory policy, and safer tattooing and removal practices in Australia and internationally.

Permanent body art has grown in popularity in recent years, with millions of people having black/monochrome or colourful tattoos. But researchers warn that this comes risk because there are currently few regulations, laws and safety criteria for tattoo and permanent cosmetic formulations.

The paper, ‘Decoding Tattoo Inks: Multiple Analysis Techniques Reveal Discrepancies in Ingredient Composition and Elemental Content When Compared Against Label Claims’ (2025) by Batool A Aljubran, Kirstin E Ross, Ula N Alexander and Claire E Lenehan has been published in the Journal of Environmental Health, DOI: 10.70387/001c.143999 https://doi.org/10.70387/001c.143999

Acknowledgements: The research was supported by Microscopy Australia under the National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy, through the facilities and technical assistance of Flinders Microscopy and Microanalysis.