Updated 12/15/2022
Some misinformed, illogical or absurd arguments are floating around to displace 316L with F138 (previous formula was hawked as 316LVM).
Whoever is perpetrating this SCAM to deceive piercers claiming F138 is superior to 316L in the application for Body Jewelry is trying to make 10 times the price with absolutely no added value for you or the customer.

A quote from Fontana, Corrosion Engineering will show how absurd the are.

     "A ridiculous example (to make a point) would be blaming the auto maker if your car corroded because you drove it through a lake of hydrochloric acid. The car could be made of tantalum, but the cost would be astronomical, nobody would buy it..."

A ridiculous example for cars, yes, but that is what is being argued to deceive piercers and shops to use F138, (an exotic alloy designed to survive as a surgical implant as long as possible bonded to tissues inside the harsh liquid environment of the body). For hip and knee replacements it is slightly better but adds no value for body jewelry.

The makers of jewelry want you to use this exotic metal.
Their problem is, you are not buying into the scam so they are looking for ways to compel you to make your "car out of tantalum" (the point of it all).

Your freedom to choose safe and effective products is the Root Principle practiced around the world, endorsed by ASTM, OSHA, FDA, WTO, AAMI and all organizations that create standards, This principle is under attack by "advocate-piercers" who are lobbying health departments to make rules in the interests of manufacturers of F138 body jewelry to compel shops to use F138, banning the safe and effective commercial grade 316L. Such as in Ohio. They are wrong.

We have truth on 316L side: Commercial factory grade 316L is the Industry Standard because it is proven safe by being safely used for more than 30 years by tens of thousands of piercers hundreds of  millions of piercings. There is no argument that can dispute it. ASTM Organization (that created ASTM-F138 standard) uses this principle as the basis that determines what is acceptable: safe and effective usage over time in a specific application.

The arguments used by advocates for F138 are all specious, every argument is shown to be misleading and false. Though false, they are used to exploit the health departments using pseudo-scientific sounding arguments to purposely mislead.

Everyone has the right to advocate for what they believe, including asking you to use F138 but you have the right to oppose their plan.

We demand as our right, the freedom to choose proven safe and effective jewelry, and nothing less will do.

Wes Wood, Updated June 9, 2018
Also read the incredulous Kentucky Rules.

Even more absurd: (equally as absurd)
The European Union has outlawed 316L
requiring the use of Titanium for initial piercing.