A study says:<\/p>\n
The study population consisted of 11,905 individuals, and the response rate was 54% among cases (n = 1398) and 47% among controls (n = 4193). The tattoo prevalence was 21% among cases and 18% among controls. Tattooed individuals had a higher adjusted risk of overall lymphoma (IRR = 1.21; 95% CI 0.99\u20131.48). The risk of lymphoma was highest in individuals with less than two years between their first tattoo and the index year (IRR = 1.81; 95% CI 1.03\u20133.20). The risk decreased with intermediate exposure duration (three to ten years) but increased again in individuals who received their first tattoo \u226511 years before the index year (IRR = 1.19; 95% CI 0.94\u20131.50). We found no evidence of increasing risk with a larger area of total tattooed body surface. The risk associated with tattoo exposure seemed to be highest for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (IRR 1.30; 95% CI 0.99\u20131.71) and follicular lymphoma (IRR 1.29; 95% CI 0.92\u20131.82). [eClinicalMedicine<\/strong><\/a>]<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Keeping in mind this is a single study with no confirmation, it’s a bit dismaying that a seemingly harmless activity such as getting a tattoo can result in cancer.<\/p>\n
Hopefully, if confirmed, the composition of tattoo ink can be changed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
A study says: The study population consisted of 11,905 individuals, and the response rate was 54% among cases (n = 1398) and 47% among controls (n = 4193). The tattoo prevalence was 21% among cases and 18% among controls. Tattooed individuals had a higher adjusted risk of overall lymphoma (IRR \u2026 Continue reading