A new study has found Australia falls short of EU chemical safety standards, prompting calls for routine testing rather than public alarm.
A new study has found that the chemical makeup of tattoo inks sold in Australia remains largely unmonitored – a finding that researchers say means there should be more routine testing rather than public alarm.
The study, published this week in the Journal of Hazardous Materialsby researchers at UNSW Sydney, analysed the chemical composition of 15 black and coloured tattoo inks from major international brands purchased through Australian suppliers.
While all inks failed to meet current European Union (EU) safety standards for tattoo inks, the authors stressed the findings should not be interpreted as evidence of harm to people with tattoos.
Corresponding author, UNSW Professor William Alex Donald, said the study exposed a regulatory gap and underscored the need for systematic, routine testing of tattoo inks sold in Australia.
“We need further targeted studies to confirm the specific chemical forms of some regulated substances,” he said.
“This means examining how inks behave once injected into the skin.
“It also means understanding how factors such as ageing, sunlight exposure and tattoo removal might influence long-term exposure. So the results are best seen as a signal for closer scrutiny, rather than a verdict on the safety of tattooing itself.”
Surveys estimated more than 20% of Australian adults have at least one tattoo.
Tattoo ink is a complex mixture of pigments, solvents and additives. It is designed to remain in the body long term, injected into the thick layer of living tissue below the skin’s surface.
This method of ‘inking’ creates a permanent exposure pathway that bypasses many of the body’s natural protective barriers.
Since 2022, the EU has strictly enforced chemical limits for tattoo inks. Australia has no binding national regulatory framework that aligns with those standards and instead relies on voluntary compliance and the occasional government characterisation study.
Using advanced analytical techniques, the researchers detected multiple substances restricted under EU law, including eight metals, including antimony, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, selenium and tin, at concentrations exceeding EU limits in at least one ink sample. Certain organic compounds banned under EU tattoo-ink regulations were also identified.
The researchers found bright coloured inks had additional toxic compounds not currently restricted under tattoo-ink legislation, including high levels of pigment-associated metals.
Titanium was detected at concentrations of up to about 10,000 parts per million in a light-blue ink, while aluminium and zirconium were also present at very high levels in the same ink. These metals are commonly associated with pigments that are used to improve colour and stability.
While not currently restricted under EU tattoo-ink regulations the researchers said their presence at such high concentrations raises important toxicological questions because tattoo pigments could persist in the skin and migrate to lymph nodes.
It is important to note that the study only measured the chemical composition of inks and not health outcomes. The study also did not assess how much of these substances are absorbed by the body or what effects they could have over time.
Lead author Dr Jake Violi, also from UNSW, said people with tattoos were not automatically at risk.
“We are not saying people should not get tattoos,” Dr Violi says.
“We are saying the chemical content of inks matters – and there is very little routine checking of what is actually sold in Australia.”
Related
If you are thinking about getting a tattoo, the Cancer Council suggests asking if the inks used comply with the European standards (updated to EU Commission Regulation 2020/2081), which set the requirements and criteria for the safety of tattoos.
Australia’s only government survey of tattoo inks was conducted in 2016, with an update in 2018. The resulting report found most inks tested would not meet European guidelines. It also had limited methodological detail and predated the EU’s current, legally binding rules.
Across the world, investigations document widespread non-compliance with EU standards. This indicates tattoo inks remain a significant and under-regulated source of toxic metal exposure.
In the United States, only 11% of inks were labelled accurately, the researchers wrote. While in Sweden, more than 90% of inks failed labelling requirements and concentrations of metals above regulatory thresholds were found across multiple samples. In Turkey, most inks breached the EU limits for metals, with several products demonstrating cytotoxic effects in the lab.
The researchers said European standards for tattoo inks were only introduced recently, so it would only be a matter of time before the rest of the world adopted safety regulations. This needs a lot more focused work to both identify and measure specific regulated chemicals, especially where safety rules depend on the type of chemical, not how much of it is present.
“Australia has limited publicly available testing data,” Professor Donald said.
“The chemical composition of inks currently sold here remains largely unknown.
“Because tattooing is now a mainstream form of body art, regular monitoring and aligning Australia’s standards with international best practice just makes sense.”
