Published by the FDA, (Black)
Comments in Blue by (ww) Westley Wood
Cosmetics Safety Q&A: Tattoos and Permanent Makeup
https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/resources-consumers-cosmetics/cosmetics-safety-qa-tattoos-and-permanent-makeup

Critique of an FDA Tattoo Q&A

FDA in Black
(Q) Are Tattoos and permanent makeup safe?... FDA is loking into it… because of their growing popularity. For example, we [FDA] are looking at tattoo removal, adverse reactions to tattoo colors, and infections that result from the use of these products. Consumers should think carefully before getting a tattoo or permanent makeup and consider these facts:
 [(ww) The message for the reader is: tattoos are dangerous: there is tattoo removal and you need to think carefully, very carefully because you can have adverse reactions to the colors and even get infections from  the use of the ink.
The words speak for themselves: the FDA has a conclusion before looking into these things: think CAREFULLY. “Look into it” is the lie: Propaganda.

Do you think for one second, they will find that tattooing and the pigments are not a public health problem? Think carefully why the FDA has orchestrated Congress to change the very definition of tattoo: from indelible (pigment) to easily removed temporary tattoo. If they did not have this preconceived agenda they would say it is a waste of public money, that the FDA should be “complaint” driven and respond when they see something harmful, and that is it. All adverse events are isolated cases, not public “outbreaks” or dangers.  

(ww) WARNING The above is imagination, not likely, in any way shape or form. Also notice the last sentence is repeated twice trying to frighten citizens by - not Facts - but  exaggerations, and the absurd "hepatitis" claim, to instill fear and rejection of tattooing. Unsupported claims: "adverse reactions to tattoo colors." No one even knows this, or has any evidence the pigments (the colors) caused a reaction. The COLOR part of tattoo ink is an inert insoluble pigment crystal, a form that remains for life in the skin. The pigment, which is the whole of the color ingredient, does not cause reactions, it just "sits" there. There is no evidence that the pigments cause any adverse reaction because they do not decompose in the body except in the separate digestive tract, where they do not go.

The "infections" fear used here, are so few and minor they are of no "Public Health" concern nor a drain on Public Health Funds. As Clare Chalmers has written:  though infections are minor the warnings needed to be used to discourage tattooing because it is an effective argument.

(Q)*(Point 1)  Some people have had bad reactions to tattoo and permanent makeup inks. Some have suffered permanent disfigurement.
(ww) YIKES! Shameful not knowing anything about the effects of disfigurement, or what disfigurement is. Disfigurement does not mean a faded or a crooked tattoo line or faded red heart. (ww) “Some have suffered permanent disfigurement” writes the FDA (EU?). Yikes again! The message is “It can happen to you!”   Disfigurement results in social alienation, most often the ruination of a person’s social life. "Disfigurement… increases the risk of mental health issues, substance misuse, chronic disease such as cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes, as well as poverty, crime, and violence”  Writers should  research and read the literature. (Pacella et al., 2013; Hughes et al., 2017)
This is low Propaganda designed to scare the reader. There are many reasons a person could have an unwanted event after a tattoo, including allergy, infection, damage, even washing. The writer might need to re-study  Bertrand Russell’s well know informal fallacy from Logic 101 in school:: “Post hoc, ergo propter hoc.“ (After it therefore caused by it.) "The fallacy lies in a conclusion based solely on the order of events, rather than taking into account other factors potentially responsible for the result that might rule out the connection.^{[2]"  Wikipedia}

(Q)*(Point 2) Tattoos and permanent makeup are not easily removed and in some cases may cause permanent discoloration.
(ww) Laser removal causes discolorations and worse, even turn some pigments black. It should be honestly addressed that Laser removal doesn't really "remove" the ink from the body, just blasts it into pieces and some of the ink is taken away. A laser blasts the pigment apart at 100s of degrees, into unknown substances (admitted to be toxic) and it is dismissed by laser practitioners as "unknown" where or what happens to the debris? It is  treated again and again: because the body works fast to mitigate and stop the damage. The body heals too fast, so some debris remains.

(Q)*(Point 3) No color additives are approved for tattoos, including those used in permanent makeup.
(ww) HERE IT IS! The Emperor's clothes..

No colors are approved. The end of safe and effective tattoo pigment colors, (following the EU).
The change in terminology is important: The Q&A went from "tattoo colors" and "tattoo inks" earlier to "color additives" which bans all pigments not approved for tattoo. There are no pigments made for the application of tattoo from the color pigment manufacturers

MoCRA is the set-up to justify the FDA to control Tattoo Ink then take over everything tattoo as we know it.

MoCRA's upside-down wording designed to give the FDA authority over items (Tattoo) that do not include removal instructions, requiring the existence of something not existing. Tattoo is redefined to fit the definition of a "Cosmetic." Orwellian trickery. Ergo Tattoos are  removable like all cosmetics. Since pigments cannot be removed they must be removed from the market (R.Rox Anderson 2005).

FDA slots Tattoo as Number 16 "Cosmetic" subject to the rules of Cosmetics.

Color pigments are synthetic and manufactured for each specific application. None are made for tattoo.. Color manufacturers, such as "--XYZ--" refuse to sell pigments for tattoo use. So how do Tattoo Ink companies get pigments if the manufacturers refuse to sell to them?

The FDA and medical world have opposed tattooing with lies about the pigments and exaggerations about the efficacy of laser removal without telling customers that laser removal produces harmful toxic chemicals. They say “We don’t know.”

(Q)*(Point 4)  Unsterile*(UK word, see note below) tattooing equipment and needles can transmit infectious disease, such as hepatitis;
(ww)-A throw away to produce unnatural fear. (Total BS).

(Q) It is extremely important to confirm that all equipment is clean and sanitary before use.
(ww)  Extremely important? There is no evidence that the equipment or tattoo needles actually transmit infectious diseases, especially the Hepatitis scare-mongering. Zero evidence for this claim.

(Q)*(Point 5) Contaminated inks have caused infections, even when the tattoo artist followed hygienic procedures.
(ww) (The infections were sourced from TAP WATER mixed with the ink. Contaminated inks are extremely rare because the perpetrators are outside the tattoo industry. Lone wolves with sores on his hands tattooing without gloves in a park using toner and guitar string motivated by greed with little knowledge or care about tattoo. When they are found they should be dealt with. Those tattooed in such conditions share the blame.

These wolves have nothing to do with tattoo. They must not be confused with the tattoo industry and our LEGENDARY  habits of cleanliness and safety. Our industry does not need a raft of legislation and policing to TRY and prevent the wolves. they are few and far between.

(Q)*(Point 5) If you get a tattoo at a facility not regulated by your state or at facilities that use unsterile, a UK word, equipment or re-use ink [A contradiction], you may not be accepted as a blood or plasma donor for twelve months.
(ww) Further proof that the UK is ghost writing  anti-tattoo propaganda is the use of the non-American word UNSTERILE. A non American usage, the same giveaway is in the title of the Draft. Guidance for Industry (FDA?) using the non American "INSANITARY" whereas In American English "unsanitary" would be defined as previously sanitary but no longer sanitary. Proof of UK source.
The USA is a different culture than the UK. The USA has a right to be different with our own tattoo history and use of tattoo. The UK is a state whose citizens do not have "rights" guaranteed by a Constitution, citizens not controlling their destiny and should not be influencing FDA.

On its merits this last point (5) is a mouth full of incipient propaganda, totally a mishmash one thing having nothing to do with the other. Uneducated is what it is.
The Red Cross (USA) stopped prohibiting donors.

In the USA, states have the task of overseeing the health of residents to have tattoo regulations: state's rights. Those getting tattoos are indeed adequately protected in tattooing and do not need the creation of a huge Federal bureaucracy that will cost billions in new tax revenue.

Tattoo is a cultural practice that belongs to the people, always has, as was recognized by states and localities in the USA REVERSING PROHIBITIONS declaring tattoo cannot constitutionally be a prohibited activity because it is a cultural practice by the people. Tattoo exists  without permission. Since there is no health threat there is no need for concern, just leave it be and let the FDA just watch and advise. This is enough to protect the health of the people.

We have a constitutional right to indelibly publish on our bodies.
September 29, 2024