Are Tattoos Attractive?

[cgksheff 44]

...........

 

Do keep up!

 

Don't show your ignorance.

• Read the article.
   
  
• Discard the scaremongering element.
   
  
• Follow the leads to original sources.
   
  
• Realise that there is something to be aware of.
  

Edited September 28, 2013 by cgksheff

[Bonzo77 13]

my opinion is that tattoos is a bad habit of 80-90s. It looks good when you are young...

 

Tattoos is a bad habit?

 

Judging by the ignorance of some people on this thread..........you must be covered in them!

[avidcameron 10]

Have you read my comment?

 

I'll type this slowly for you...

 

I scoff because the daily mail publishes many such articles, "Oh, such and such causes cancer" with another article within a week or two saying "Such and such a same product/ item is a CURE for cancer".

 

Do keep up!

 

Worse still the DM proclaim X causes cancer etc. while printing adverts for X in another section of the paper.I don't think product X was the ink used in tattoos,however.

 

PS I am sure that ink must have toxic qualities.

[ccit 10]

Originally Posted by Plain Talker:

I scoff because the daily mail publishes many such articles, "Oh, such and such causes cancer" with another article within a week or two saying "Such and such a same product/ item is a CURE for cancer".

I would not know the articles to which you refer but that in itself is irrelevant as we are discussing this one article about research into the possibility of carcinogenic substances in the ink used for tattoos. If there is a risk, would you want your children to take it or would you rather play safe and encourage them not have one? I don't doubt that most parents would choose the latter.

 

Tattoos have become much more popular in recent years and some people are covering large parts of their body with ink. The research needs to go on to determine if there is a risk.

BTW thank you for your concern about 'keeping up' and yes, thankfully I can just about manage it. I'm typing fast because I can and I do hope that you are keeping up too.

Edited September 28, 2013 by ccit

[Plain Talker 11]

I would not know the articles to which you refer but that in itself is irrelevant as we are discussing this one article about research into the possibility of carcinogenic substances in the ink used for tattoos. If there is a risk, would you want your children to take it or would you rather play safe and encourage them not have one? I don't doubt that most parents would choose the latter.

 

Tattoos have become much more popular in recent years and some people are covering large parts of their body with ink. The research needs to go on to determine if there is a risk.

BTW I'm typing this quickly because I can and I hope that you are keeping up too.

 

Keeping up perfectly well, thank you.

 

You'll not change my opinion that much of what is published in the Daily Fail is rubbish, passing for journalism.

[ccit 10]

I would not expect to change your opinion and have no reason to do so. The post was only intended to disseminate the information. It is for the individual to make up their own minds, just as you have done. If it makes just one person stop and think again about having a tattoo then that has got to be useful.

Edited September 28, 2013 by ccit

[melthebell 864]

I would not know the articles to which you refer but that in itself is irrelevant as we are discussing this one article about research into the possibility of carcinogenic substances in the ink used for tattoos. If there is a risk, would you want your children to take it or would you rather play safe and encourage them not have one? I don't doubt that most parents would choose the latter.

 

Tattoos have become much more popular in recent years and some people are covering large parts of their body with ink. The research needs to go on to determine if there is a risk.

BTW thank you for your concern about 'keeping up' and yes, thankfully I can just about manage it. I'm typing fast because I can and I do hope that you are keeping up too.

 

tattoo ink HAS changed over the years as we progress, its now safer than it used to be and also the pigmentation is better

also obviously the rules and regulations has made tattooists in general better and safer

[ccit 10]

That's good news melthebell but the fact remains that if someone has had a fairly recent tattoo and presents him or herself to National Blood Transfusion Service as a potential donor they would not be accepted. Well, at least that is how it used to be for many years when I was a donor. It begs the question - why?

[Gazza58 10]

That's good news melthebell but the fact remains that if someone has had a fairly recent tattoo and presents him or herself to National Blood Transfusion Service as a potential donor they would not be accepted. Well, at least that is how it used to be for many years when I was a donor. It begs the question - why?

 

I wasn't allowed to donate blood shortly after being tattooed,but was welcomed back for many years after.

[melthebell 864]

That's good news melthebell but the fact remains that if someone has had a fairly recent tattoo and presents him or herself to National Blood Transfusion Service as a potential donor they would not be accepted. Well, at least that is how it used to be for many years when I was a donor. It begs the question - why?

i suppose its down to being careful, it is a procedure that could cause a blood disease, that doesnt mean in 99% of the time it does

but theres also other people that CANT give blood too, its NOT just people who have been tattooed

[Gazza58 10]

i suppose its down to being careful, it is a procedure that could cause a blood disease, that doesnt mean in 99% of the time it does

 

Just looked it up.you can donate blood four months after being tattooed.

[Isabelle 10]

That's good news melthebell but the fact remains that if someone has had a fairly recent tattoo and presents him or herself to National Blood Transfusion Service as a potential donor they would not be accepted. Well, at least that is how it used to be for many years when I was a donor. It begs the question - why?

 

Their website states you can't donate blood if:

"You've had a tattoo, semi-permanent make up or any cosmetic treatments that involves skin piercing in the last 4 months."

I think it used to be 12 months after a tattoo or piercing.

I'm assuming it is because of the risk of acquiring a blood-borne infection such as HIV or hepatitis from the tattoo or piercing needles. Some infections take a while to show up in a blood test. I don't think it relates to the tattoo ink, otherwise it would be a permanent ban.