Journal of Environmental Health Sciences (한국환경보건학회지)

Korean Society of Environmental Health (한국환경보건학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Health Risk Assessment of Toxic Chemicals (Phenol) in Tattoo Inks

문신용 염료에 들어 있는 유해화학물질(페놀)의 인체 위해성 평가

  • Cho, Sam Rae (Department of Environmental and Occupational Health, Graduate School, Korea University) ;
  • Kim, Kyong Hee (Institute for Environmental and Occupational Health, Korea University) ;
  • Choi, Jae Wook (Department of Environmental and Occupational Health, Graduate School, Korea University)
  • 조삼래 (고려대학교 대학원 환경 및 산업보건학과) ;
  • 김경희 (고려대학교 환경의학연구소) ;
  • 최재욱 (고려대학교 대학원 환경 및 산업보건학과)
  • Received : 2019.02.14
  • Accepted : 2019.02.20
  • Published : 2019.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objectives: This study examined the safety of tattoo ink by analyzing the phenol contents in tattoo inks and its risk assessment of selected phenol. Methods: A sample of 30 tattoo inks was purchased, the phenol contents were analyzed, and a risk assessment on dermal exposure from tattooing was carried out. Hazard identification was collected from toxicity data on systemic effects caused by dermal exposure to phenol, and the most sensitive toxicity value was adopted. Exposure assessment ($Exposure_{phenol}$) was calculated by applying phenol contents and standard exposure factors, while dose-response assessment was based on the collected toxicity data and skin absorption rate of phenol, assessment factors (AFs) for derived no-effect level ($DNEL_{demal}$). In addition, the risk characterization was calculated by comparing the risk characterization ratio (RCR) with $Exposure_{phenol}$ and $DNEL_{dermal}$ Results: The phenol concentration in the 30 products was from 1.4 to $649.1{\mu}g/g$. The toxicity value for systemic effects of phenol was adopted at 107 mg/kg. $Exposure_{phenol}$ in tattooing was from 0.000087 to 0.040442 mg/kg. $DNEL_{dermal}$ was calculated at 0.0072 mg/kg (=toxicity value 107 mg/kg ${\div}$ AFs 650 ${\times}$ skin absorption rate 4.4%). Thirteen out of 30 products showed an RCR between 1.02 and 5.62. The RCR of all red inks was above 1. Conclusions: Phenol was detected in all of the 30 tattoo inks, and the RCR of 13 products above 1 indicates a high level of risk concern, making it necessary to prepare safety management standards for phenol in tattoo inks.

Keywords

References

  1. Mi-Ra Jeong, Hui-Seong Lee. Ji-Young LEE, Sun-Hwa Lee. Analysis of Heavy Metals in Dyes and Pigments Used in Make up Tattoo. Journal of the Korea Convergence Society. 2018; 9(4): 321-329. https://doi.org/10.15207/JKCS.2018.9.4.321
  2. Fekete GL, Fekete JE. Tattoo-associated skin reactions-clinical cases. Acta Medica Marisiensis. 2013; 59(3): 172-174. https://doi.org/10.2478/amma-2013-0041
  3. National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency (NECA), Pilot study for understanding the present situation of decorative tattoos; 2015. p. 13-18.
  4. Khetarpal S, Molenda M, Seiger E, Pui J, Obagi S. Blue foot: a second case of "tattoo blow-out" pigment spread successfully treated with the QSNd: YAG laser. J Drugs Dermatol. 2010; 9(11): 1429-1431.
  5. Sergeant A, Conaglen P, Laurenson IF, Claxton P, Mathers ME, Kavanagh GM, Tidman MJ. Mycobacterium chelonae infection: a complication of tattooing. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2013; 38(2): 140-142. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2230.2012.04421.x
  6. Andrea Bassi, Piero Campolmi, Giovanni Cannarozzo et al. Tattoo-Associated Skin Reaction: The Importance of an Early Diagnosis and Proper Treatment. BioMed Research International; 2014. p. 7-14.
  7. Biswas A. Pseudoepitheliomatous tattoo reaction. Diagnostic Histopathology. 2011; 17(6): 272-275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mpdhp.2011.03.002
  8. Australia Department of Health. Characterisation of tattoo inks used in Australia; 2016. p. 13-27.
  9. Giovanni Forte, Francesco Petrucci, Antonio Cristaudo, Beatrice Bocca. Market survey on toxic metals contained in tattoo inks. Science of the Total Environment. 2009; 407: 5997-6002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.08.034
  10. European Commission Joint Research Centre (EC JRC). JRC Technical Report; Safety of tattoos and permanent make-up Compilation of information on legislative framework and analytical methods; 2015. p. 99-128.
  11. Khandekar Shubhangi, Dive Alka, Upadhyaya Neha, Mishra Rakesh Kumar, Gupta Shalini. Cancer Risk in Tattoos: A Review. IOSR Journal of Dental and Medical Sciences. 2013; 5: 62-64.
  12. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). Skin Notation Profiles_Phenol; 2011. p. 2-5.
  13. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). Toxicological Profile for Phenol; 2008. p. 75-76
  14. National Institute of Environmental Research (NIER). Guideline for the preparation of data on the risk of chemical substances; 2017. p. 81-100.
  15. European Chemicals Agency (ECHA). Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment; 2011. part. B-G.
  16. European Chemicals Agency (ECHA). Annex XV Restriction report; Substances in tattoo inks and permanent make up; 2017. p. 16-63.
  17. D. M. Conning, M. J. Hayes. The dermal toxicity of phenol: an investigation of the most effective firstaid measures. British Journal of Industrial Medicine. 1970; 27(2): 155-159.
  18. Mark A. Warner, James V. Happer. Cardiac Dysrhythmias Associated with Chemical Peeling with Phenol. Anesthesiology. 1985; 62: 366-367. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000542-198503000-00030
  19. Menachem R. Wexler, David A. Halon, Aliza Teitelbaum, Georg Tadjer, Isaac J. Peled. The Prevention of Cardiac Arrhythmias Produced in an Animal Model by the Topical Application of a Phenol Preparation in Common Use for Face Peeling. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. 1984; 73(4): 595-598. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-198404000-00013
  20. Pullin TG, Pinkerton MN, Johnson RV, et al. Decontamination of the skin of swine following phenol exposure. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 1978; 43: 199-206. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0041-008X(78)80044-1
  21. Robert J. Feldmann, Howard I. Maibach. Absorption of some organic compounds through the skin in man. The Journal of Investigative Dermatology. 1970; 54(5): 399-404. https://doi.org/10.1111/1523-1747.ep12259184
  22. Bozena Baranowska-Dutkiewicz. Skin Absorption of Phenol from Aqueous Solutions in Men. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 1981; 49: 99-104. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00377662
  23. Thomas J. Franz. Percutaneous absorption on relevance of in vitro data. The Journal of Investigative Dermatology. 1975; 64: 190-195. https://doi.org/10.1111/1523-1747.ep12533356
  24. H.S.Patel, A.P.Pajel, S.N.Shah. Azo Dyes Based on Phenol-Furfural Oligomers. International Journal of Polymeric and Polymeric Biomaterials. 1998; 43: 313-323.
  25. Regensburger J, Lehner K, Maisch T, Vasold R, Santarelli F, Engel E et al. Tattoo inks contain polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons that additionally generate deleterious singlet oxygen. Exp Dermatol. 2010; 19(8): e275-281. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0625.2010.01068.x
  26. Danish EPA. Risk Assessment of Hazardous Substances in Tattoo Inks based on the project, "Chemical Substances in Tattoo Ink"; 2012. p. 3-10.
  27. Ji-Eun Seo, Jinho Lee, and Bae-Hwan Kim. A Permeation Characteristics Study of Water- or Oil-soluble Substances through Condition Setting for the In Vitro Skin Absorption Method. J Environ Health Sci. 2017; 43(1): 77-86
  28. Kyo-Hyun Park, Se-Hoon Jung, Ho-Sang Shin, and Bae-Hwan Kim. Permeation Characteristics of Hazardous Substances in Tattoo Dye using Franz Diffusion Cells. J Environ Health Sci. 2016; 42(1): 61-70