AK and Greenpeace Find Harmful Chemicals in Children’s Temporary Tattoos

Labortests Reveal Harmful Chemical Cocktails in Temporary Tattoos

The study identified a total of 31 distinct concerning chemicals across the tested items. In some instances, a single temporary tattoo was found to contain up to 12 different problematic substances, a phenomenon the AK describes as a chemical cocktail. While none of the tested products exceeded currently applicable legal thresholds, the findings have sparked concerns regarding the safety of products frequently applied to children’s skin for extended periods.

Presence of Prohibited and Toxic Substances

The laboratory analysis detected a range of substances known for their potential health risks. Six of the tested samples contained materials—including specific solvents, plasticizers, and a polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAK)—that are restricted in the European Union due to their classification as reproductive toxins or suspected carcinogens.

Furthermore, heavy metals were found in nearly all of the samples. Blei (lead) and nickel were detected in 14 of the 15 products. While lead is considered harmful to development, nickel is known to potentially trigger allergies, particularly following prolonged skin contact.

Detection of Forever Chemicals

The investigation also identified the presence of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), often referred to as forever chemicals due to their extreme persistence in the environment. These compounds were discovered in four of the tested tattoos. Specific findings included:

* PTFE (Teflon): Detected in products from Müller and Thalia. * Fluorinated compounds: 6:2-FTOH and 8:2-FTOH were identified in additional samples.

Although these concentrations remained below current legal limits, they reportedly exceeded the thresholds proposed under a planned EU-wide ban on PFAS. Medical professionals, such as South Tyrolean dermatologist Dr. Alexandra Vent, have emphasized that for products marketed to children, adherence to existing thresholds should not be the sole priority. Dr. Vent noted that the necessity of these substances should be questioned and that the precautionary principle should be applied to minimize avoidable contamination.

Regulatory Gaps and Retailer Transparency

The study highlighted a systemic issue in current chemical regulations: legal limits typically assess substances in isolation rather than evaluating the cumulative effect of multiple chemicals acting in combination. The AK and Greenpeace argue that this approach fails to account for potential cocktail effects, where the interaction of various substances may enhance their individual impacts.

The investigation also identified significant issues regarding consumer information. According to data from the AK and Greenpeace, three products sold by Amazon completely lacked the legally required list of ingredients, leaving consumers unable to identify which chemicals were being applied to their skin.

In response to these findings, the AK and Greenpeace are calling for more stringent chemical regulations that account for the combined effects of multiple substances. Additionally, they are advocating for a comprehensive, strict ban on the use of PFAS in consumer products. The full report detailing the findings is titled Chemie auf der Haut (Chemistry on the Skin).