Log in

View Full Version : Question about tats



Pages : 1 2 [3]

Eric Stoner
12-10-2007, 11:18 AM
Quite an odd statement from someone who doesn't seem to get the picture that none of the tattooed people here really give two cow patties what you think in the first place. Also you've been damn near berating every tattooed person here for near the entire thread. Fucking hypocrite.

So where are your FACTS coming from? I don't see you providing any proof. Just mouthing off for who knows what reason.

And I trust my tattooists, thats why I use them.

Wait a minute. This is out of control and it's probably partly my fault. If people want to get tattoos that's their business. If they think they are attractive or even "art".- that's their OPINION ( pluralistic society ; Free Country etc. ) to which they are absolutely entitled. I'm not going to argue subjective stuff like "art appreciation" so just try to relax.

There was a newspaper article in the New York Daily News last week reporting on the FDA looking into ink content and mentioning that some; repeat SOME people with tats have reported discomfort while getting an MRI ( usually a burning sensation at the tattoo site ) resulting from metallic content in the ink and that it can generate artifact. I'm sorry, I don't have a link.

If you go on the net and Google "FDA tattoo ink" or " tattoo MRI" you'll find plenty of stuff.

As far as "trusting your tattooist" is concerned that's fine as long as they KNOW.
HOW do they know what's in the ink ?

DJ Machismo
12-10-2007, 11:22 AM
Wait a minute. This is out of control and it's probably partly my fault. If people want to get tattoos that's their business. If they think they are attractive or even "art".- that's their OPINION ( pluralistic society ; Free Country etc. ) to which they are absolutely entitled. I'm not going to argue subjective stuff like "art appreciation" so just try to relax.

There was a newspaper article in the New York Daily News last week reporting on the FDA looking into ink content and mentioning that some; repeat SOME people with tats have reported discomfort while getting an MRI ( usually a burning sensation at the tattoo site ) resulting from metallic content in the ink and that it can generate artifact. I'm sorry, I don't have a link.

If you go on the net and Google "FDA tattoo ink" or " tattoo MRI" you'll find plenty of stuff.

As far as "trusting your tattooist" is concerned that's fine as long as they KNOW.
HOW do they know what's in the ink ?

I trust my tattooists, thats all you need to know. If I didn't have 100% faith in them and their inks I wouldn't be using them.

Why are you so intent on picking everyone's answers apart? Are you trying to prove something? Show that you are cool because you don't have a tattoo on your forehead therefore you don't love tattoos? What is it?

Eric Stoner
12-10-2007, 12:24 PM
Tell you what. If you're happy then I'm happy. If you don't care what might be in the ink then there's obviously nothing to worry about.

DJ Machismo
12-10-2007, 12:31 PM
Tell you what. If you're happy then I'm happy. If you don't care what might be in the ink then there's obviously nothing to worry about.

That's cool.

Though I just would like to state that I care what is in the ink, I never said I didn't care. I said I trust my tattooists on that issue.

Getting false inferences from what people say is a lot of what caused a good amount of the turmoil in this thread I believe.

Scarlett.Oz
12-10-2007, 01:45 PM
I haven't read any studies on the subject but I have been witness to many an MRI.
The problems with metal objects is that they can cause a 'flare' on the image. Often with small pieces of jewellery (which I think would contain more metallic substance than a large tattoo) the 'flash' is minimal enough to see what they're looking for, usually they just take it out to avoid the hassle. Old people with new hips can still get an MRI despite the flash, just makes it harder to see. I have been witness to many an MRI, on tattooed and un-tattooed people and have never seen this 'flash' occurring because of a tattoo (or cosmetics).
Furthermore; I have had several MRI's on a certain area of my spine, this area also has a black tattoo on it and I have experienced no discomfort or burning. Ever.
The only burning of the skin I've seen from any similar machines is from radiotherapy which is most definately not a 'slight discomfort', it's a burning and bubbling of the skin from radiation, not magnetic resonance, could this be what they're thinking of? In which case it doesn't discriminate, it kills all fast growing cells (skin).
Whoa, ok, I'm off on a tangent but yeah, I think this may be an urban myth.

The industry as a whole seems to be much more regulated than what I've seen elsewhere. For example: In Australia you cannot practice as a tattoo artist without the correct training and all shops/parlours must hold health certificates etc. Whereas in the UK you can buy 'kits' on the internet.

AlexxaHex
12-10-2007, 03:30 PM
Knock yourself out.

Btw- how do you tat-fans make sure there are no toxins in the ink ? Many tat-inks contain LEAD; MERCURY and CADMIUM among other things you probably wouldn't want to absorb. The FDA is looking into it. Seriously.
There are people with tats who can't have MRI's because the ink contains iron and throws off the whole machine.
I haven't even touched the "dirty needle" issue or how much fun tattoo removal can be.
Happy trails.

You are a fucking idiot. "The FDA is looking into it". HAHAHA! Where are your sources? Can you prove this? And who cares if they are? It has been proven that tattoos are safe. I'm studying to be a tattoo artist and I know what is in ink - mostly vegetable plastic and some insect pigments. We follow cross-contamination procedures and dispose of each needle after each use, sometimes we even get a new needle during a piece even if there is no cross-contamination issue because they get dull during large pieces. I have never ever seen a needle being re-used.
People who are tatted can't get MRIs?? Are you joking or just stupid?
Get your facts straight and get out of this thread because you are obviously outnumbered in your uninformed, biased and illogical opinions.

Scarlett.Oz
12-10-2007, 05:17 PM
Yay for Alexxahex }:D

Eric Stoner
12-11-2007, 09:19 AM
You are a fucking idiot. "The FDA is looking into it". HAHAHA! Where are your sources? Can you prove this? And who cares if they are? It has been proven that tattoos are safe. I'm studying to be a tattoo artist and I know what is in ink - mostly vegetable plastic and some insect pigments. We follow cross-contamination procedures and dispose of each needle after each use, sometimes we even get a new needle during a piece even if there is no cross-contamination issue because they get dull during large pieces. I have never ever seen a needle being re-used.
People who are tatted can't get MRIs?? Are you joking or just stupid?
Get your facts straight and get out of this thread because you are obviously outnumbered in your uninformed, biased and illogical opinions.


If you actually READ what I posted you would not come at me like that.

Namecalling is SUPPOSED to be against the rules, isn't it ?

Ask the FDA why they've opened an investigation into ink manufacture and content ?
People have been known to have allergic reactions and get infections DESPITE precautions.Or are you going to try and claim that NOBODY is ever allergic to tat ink? Or that NOBODY has ever gotten an infection from getting a tattoo? It's a tattoo parlor; not an O.R. Not everybody gets tattoos from licensed artists who presumably are trained and properly licensed. Some states are stricter than others in licensing and inspecting tattoo parlors. I haven't even touched the foreign tattoos that people get or the Chinatown places where cleanliness is next to impossible. Just because YOU are getting the proper training which most artists
already have ( hopefully) doesn't mean that EVERY tattooist is properly trained and ALWAYS follows hygenic protocol 100 % of the time

I NEVER said people with tats can't get MRI's. What I DID say is that SOME people with tats have reported discomfort at the tattoo site and it reportedly is caused by the metallic content of the ink. Why do you think some originally blue ink turns green over time ? The microscopic copper fragments are oxidizing. When you get an MRI you are supposed to remove all metal but if there are metal traces in your tat it CAN ; in SOME cases create "artifact" which supposedly makes the film harder to read.

Blade
12-11-2007, 09:44 AM
For 5 pages now we have been tryin to convince you that you are mis-informed but you won't hear us. You are set in your ways and nothing anyone says or does will change your mind.
The data that you are trying to present as facts is ages old and false.
Tattoo equipment is sterilized before use, every artist i know uses an autoclave to sterilize needles before use, disposes of needles after use, puts on gloves etc. Hell I've gotten tats in places that were MORE sterile than hospitals.
If someone goes to a guy who tats out of his house then yes the chance for infection is there, but anyone who doesnt go to a hack artist has a SLIM chance for adverse reactions.
I have been getting tatted for 20 years now and the improvements in the industry are mind boggling.
Please stop with the bullshit you are trying to pass off as fact.

pjstj
12-11-2007, 10:25 AM
Got many tatts and have many MRI for a broken back
hmm I didnt melt

Eric Stoner
12-11-2007, 10:42 AM
For 5 pages now we have been tryin to convince you that you are mis-informed but you won't hear us. You are set in your ways and nothing anyone says or does will change your mind.
The data that you are trying to present as facts is ages old and false.
Tattoo equipment is sterilized before use, every artist i know uses an autoclave to sterilize needles before use, disposes of needles after use, puts on gloves etc. Hell I've gotten tats in places that were MORE sterile than hospitals.
If someone goes to a guy who tats out of his house then yes the chance for infection is there, but anyone who doesnt go to a hack artist has a SLIM chance for adverse reactions.
I have been getting tatted for 20 years now and the improvements in the industry are mind boggling.
Please stop with the bullshit you are trying to pass off as fact.

For some reason it appears that a few of you INSIST on deliberately misunderstanding me.

YES- Most tattooists are 100% professional - clean as a whistle afaic. I NEVER said anything different.
YES- Most tattooists are scrupulously hygenic. Again, I NEVER said they weren't.
YES- Tattooing today is light years ahead of where it was years ago both artistically (some of today's tats ARE artistically impressive; even to me) and from a public health standpoint.
YES- Almost all tattoo ink is safe. Most of the problems result from older inks that
did have microscopic metallic content in some of the pigments. Allergic reactions are rare but they DO happen.

The problem is it's NOT a perfect world. Just as some people cut hair without being properly licensed so do some tattooists.

I'm not being entirely tongue in cheek when I say : "If you must get a tattoo; at least get a good one" meaning inter alia- go to a licensed tattoist with a good reputation. Spend the extra money to make sure you're not risking your health.
And while you're at it- try to promote the better artwork.

I'll be surprised if you have a problem with anything I just posted.

OdysseusNJ
12-11-2007, 10:46 AM
It seems that instead of Christmas spirit, bickering is in the air. I move this thread either be allowed to die, or morph into a cool thread filled with tat pics and no bickering, possibly shifted to Pic Post area. Use the block or unsubscribe features if need be.

I wager one Rollins arm. Does anyone call or raise?

madmaxine
12-11-2007, 10:48 AM
MY story-
I have 3 tattoos, all on my scalp (since my skin is a big selling point for me as a dancer, I won't have visible ones.)

1) My last name-family pride and also for Identification in case something unfortunate should occur to me

2) A Celtic trifoil- as a birthday gift from my friend

3) A shamrock- to represent my Luck in life & a superstition to hope for more Luck in the future

I have these because I FEEL deeply about what brought them about (Family, Friends, & Faith.)

I wish more people would save up for high-quality body art- it's not the tattoo itself so much as how good it looks.
& Ultimately the wearer has responsibility for the Art- they have to consent to sitting down to have it inked.

Tattooing is also a great way for artistic, talented people to make a living- We all know Artists starve sometimes these days...LOL

TigersMilk
12-11-2007, 11:04 AM
I'm not being entirely tongue in cheek when I say : "If you must get a tattoo; at least get a good one" meaning inter alia- go to a licensed tattoist with a good reputation. Spend the extra money to make sure you're not risking your health.
And while you're at it- try to promote the better artwork.


It took you that long to say that? :bored:

Ho hum...

Scarlett.Oz
12-11-2007, 12:18 PM
Yay for good art.
http://i16.tinypic.com/7w5qsnr.pnghttp://i7.tinypic.com/72s6ozt.pnghttp://i6.tinypic.com/6ku37nl.png

Eric Stoner
12-11-2007, 12:56 PM
It took you that long to say that? :bored:

Ho hum...

No. I've been saying that all along IF you bothered to actually READ the whole thing instead of going knee-jerk or cherry picking a snippet or two you don't like or disagree with.

Eric Stoner
12-11-2007, 12:57 PM
Yay for good art.
http://i16.tinypic.com/7w5qsnr.pnghttp://i7.tinypic.com/72s6ozt.pnghttp://i6.tinypic.com/6ku37nl.png

I like the Michele Pfeiffer as CATWOMAN.

TigersMilk
12-11-2007, 01:13 PM
No. I've been saying that all along IF you bothered to actually READ the whole thing instead of going knee-jerk or cherry picking a snippet or two you don't like or disagree with.

Ha! I did read the whole thing sadly I might want my time back too. Every sentence that was reiterated the same way in the same paragraph. Plus, your forehead placement, what's pretty and what's not, what's art and what isn't, chemicals in the ink, MRI's, licensed and cleanliness of tattooists arguments was just sad.::) All of them. Wait, did I mention they were all weak and unfounded arguments based upon random unsupported articles you blindly googled? Oh wait a little more, there were no referenced articles to your statements anywhere in your posts.

Yea I read none of it. </sarcasm>

Eric Stoner
12-11-2007, 02:02 PM
Ha! I did read the whole thing sadly I might want my time back too. Every sentence that was reiterated the same way in the same paragraph. Plus, your forehead placement, what's pretty and what's not, what's art and what isn't, chemicals in the ink, MRI's, licensed and cleanliness of tattooists arguments was just sad.::) All of them. Wait, did I mention they were all weak and unfounded arguments based upon random unsupported articles you blindly googled? Oh wait a little more, there were no referenced articles to your statements anywhere in your posts.

Yea I read none of it. </sarcasm>

Have a nice day.

Blade
12-11-2007, 11:54 PM
For some reason it appears that a few of you INSIST on deliberately misunderstanding me.

YES- Most tattooists are 100% professional - clean as a whistle afaic. I NEVER said anything different.
YES- Most tattooists are scrupulously hygenic. Again, I NEVER said they weren't.
YES- Tattooing today is light years ahead of where it was years ago both artistically (some of today's tats ARE artistically impressive; even to me) and from a public health standpoint.
YES- Almost all tattoo ink is safe. Most of the problems result from older inks that
did have microscopic metallic content in some of the pigments. Allergic reactions are rare but they DO happen.

The problem is it's NOT a perfect world. Just as some people cut hair without being properly licensed so do some tattooists.

I'm not being entirely tongue in cheek when I say : "If you must get a tattoo; at least get a good one" meaning inter alia- go to a licensed tattoist with a good reputation. Spend the extra money to make sure you're not risking your health.
And while you're at it- try to promote the better artwork.

I'll be surprised if you have a problem with anything I just posted.
This is not what you have been sayin at all, you are now back pedaling.
I'm done with this thread, it and you(and your lame arguement) are boring me

AlexxaHex
12-12-2007, 12:15 AM
I'm done with the arguing. It's getting really stupid in here.

So here's some links to some great tattoo artists:

lestat1
12-12-2007, 12:50 AM
If tats were temporary, and only lasted a year or other such finite period of time less than death (okay hyperbole but the point is temporary), I could totally undersdtand. But permanent? I don't have the balls for that and I don't get it. I can't bring myself to throw out old things I don't think I need, much less make a permanent decision about my body. Y'all are much braver than I am.

RebeccaSolidarity
12-12-2007, 03:05 AM
"just pointing out that all generalizations are false"

every single last one of them ;)