Interestingly, the increased risk was not related to the size of the tattoo, which would make sense if the issue is simply immune reaction to the inks used in the tattoo.
Another tool in the kit to dissuade junior from getting a tattoo.
2 Likes
I wonder if itâs causation vs. correlation (I THINK those are the correct wordsâŠ)âmaybe those with tattoos have other types of behaviors that contribute to odds of getting lymphoma
9 Likes
I donât think it is a lifestyle correlation. Lymphomas have been linked to environmental issues - 9/11 survivors, Round-up users, etc. There very likely could be something carcinogenic in the materials used in getting tattoos.
2 Likes
Itâs an epidemiology study. The ONLY thing it says is that they are correlated. Any reference to causation would be pure speculation, at least based on that study.
10 Likes
Subsequently, a 2016 report from the Australian Governmentâs Department of Health, National Industrial Chemicalâs Notification and Assessment Scheme (NICNAS), looked into the composition of 49 tattoo inks and found a mismatch between content and labelling, as well as concern about some components. Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs), a group of chemicals which are known carcinogens, was found in a fifth of the samples tested and in 83% of the black inks tested by NICNAS. Other hazardous components included barium, copper, mercury, amines and various colourants. In order to achieve the permanent effect, tattoo ink is injected into the dermis â the deeper layer of the skin â and stays in the skin for a lifetime. Over time, macrophages take up pigment and may transport it into the lymphatic system and lymph nodes. This means other tissue in the body can be exposed to potentially carcinogenic materials in the tattoo ink.
Europe has been culling certain tattoo pigments over the past few years due to health concerns. But who knows what type of ink your tattoo artist is using?
3 Likes
This is interestingâfrom 2017. Australian case of woman with lymphoma which apparently came from a tattoo she had gotten 15 years earlier. The ink appeared under microscope.
According to the article, it was not a lymphoma. It was an immune reaction to the ink.
1 Like
Doctors in Australia suspected that a woman had a type of cancer called lymphoma, but they were stunned when they put her enlarged lymph node under a microscope â and instead found black tattoo pigment from 15 years ago to which her immune system was just now reacting.
Yes, which means it wasnât cancerous, it wasnât lymphoma. It was an inflammatory mass.
3 Likes
From the article:
This is an important point. People forget that the skin is a living organ. A very large one. Some substances injected into it might not mesh well with it.
Did you see the word âbutâ? As in, but it wasnât a lymphoma. The article is very clear about that.
The chance of a man developing lymphoma over his lifetime is 2.38%. The chance of a woman developing lymphoma is 1.92%. So this study is saying that, for people with tattoos, the risk is 2.86 and 2.31% respectively. So getting a tattoo is correlated with adding roughly 0.5% higher incidence of lymphoma.
Moreover, the results were either non-significant or marginally significant, which, for a sample size of 12,000 indicates a very weak relationship.
Itâs interesting, but hardly conclusive.
5 Likes
We live in a country where people routinely refuse to wear seatbelts, drive motorcycles without wearing a helmet, refuse to vaccinate their kid against measles⊠aka self-destructive behavior with known risks of disability and death.
And somehow the marginal increase in the risk of lymphoma (a disease many people have never heard of) is going to convince them not to get tattoos? You have more faith in the analytical reasoning skills of your fellow citizens than I do!
My friend who works in the ER of a large urban hospital still refers to motorcycles as âdonor mobilesâ. No, helmets will not prevent catastrophic brain injury in every type of accident. But NOT wearing a helmet means the probability of surviving an accident goes WAY down. Much higher risk factor than tattoos, no?
3 Likes
In recent years, tattoos have been commonplace and a large percentage of people have one. Go to any beach or pool and look around.
Lately, I read so many articles about the possible carcinogens in everyday products - things like dental floss. If these items can cause problems, how can putting a foreign object (ink) under your skin, not have potential for harm (whether that is cancer or the delayed allergic reaction in the second article.)
Lymphoma is a lifelong disease (it is a considered a blood cancer), there is treatment, it can go into remission, but there is no cure. My husband unfortunately has a form of Lymphoma and has done very well. Which is why this thread has struck a nerve with me.
1 Like
As does the probability of surviving, but being left severely and permanently brain damaged. When I worked trauma ICU, the people who survived motorcycle accidents, and to a similar degree, bad car accidents, scared me to death. I had such a hard time emotionally distancing myself that I had to leave that unit.
These patients were just above brain dead, with families who couldnât or wouldnât agree to take them off life support. Once they were stabilized hemodynamically, they would be discharged, often to distant rehab centers, never to be seen again by any of us who took such intimate care of them. Truly disturbing.
One of the trauma surgeons who worked at our hospital had a bumper sticker on his car that said âGet your sixteen year old a motorcycle for his last birthday.â Chilling.
Back to topic, this correlation obviously needs more study. Given the rising popularity of tattoos, it is concerning, albeit certainly not well established.
3 Likes
There is risk driving a car. There is risk stepping into a shower. There is risk swallowing food. People never think twice about these, but when thereâs a relative risk increase in something that translates to still be almost zero absolute risk, they freak out. 
1 Like
Who is freaking out here? Donât put words in everyoneâs mouth. Most of us are pointing out the logical fallacy in assuming that if you get a tattoo youâre going to get lymphoma.
And most rational adults mitigate risk when they can and when it doesnât involve huge costs or inconveniences. It takes two seconds to buckle a seatbelt (and yes, youâll get a little wrinkled if you are wearing a silk cocktail dress). It takes 10 bucks to buy a no-slip bathroom rug to keep outside the shower. And it takes 15 minutes to get trained in the Heimlich maneuver (Iâve worked in restaurants and the training was mandatory) and another five to learn how to do it safely on a child.
This isnât âfreaking outâ. This is relatively routine and easy life hacks.
âThere is risk swallowing foot.â
great typo!
3 Likes
Little touchy there? 
I wasnât responding to you. I was responding to the mediaâs portrayal of an epidemiological study.
@kiddie, fixed my typo 
This topic was automatically closed 180 days after the last reply. If youâd like to reply, please flag the thread for moderator attention.