Reported risk evidence comparison

Chemical products: nickel — reported risk evidence

The acquired cohort contains 48 official alert references published from 2012-03-16 to 2026-03-27. This page compares 8 selected, distinct product descriptions, including tattoo ink, permanent make-up, permanent makeup. The other 40 records still contribute to the cohort counts but are not displayed: descriptions may repeat, lack the display inputs, or fall outside the eight-description display limit. The recorded risks raise separate evidence questions about nickel. Compare the product features and dated findings below before scoping an investigation. These historical observations do not determine your product’s compliance or a market failure rate.

Evidence retrieved 2026-10-07. Source versions and topic-specific limits are listed below.

Dated official observations

Compare the product features and reported failure mechanism

The source wording below describes the reported case at that time. Read each complete report before using it in an investigation.

Tattoo ink · SR/00900/26

Report published 2026-03-27 · notifying country France · reported origin United States

Reported product description: Tattoo ink, 30 ml. Product sold online, in particular via ptitrock.com. [1]
Reported risk explanation: The product contains nickel, but its presence is not indicated in the list of ingredients. Consumers are not aware of its presence and may suffer allergic reactions or skin sensitisation. Moreover, the product has an excessive concentration of benzoic acid, phenol and benzothiazolinone (measured values: 1.7%, 0.002% and 0.0026%, respectively). Benzoic acid causes skin irritation. Phenol is corrosive, can cause eye and skin irritation or damage, and might be mutagenic. Benzothiazolinone causes skin irritation and may cause an allergic skin reaction. The product does not comply with the REACH Regulation. [1]
Reported measures, verbatim: Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): ImporterCategory of measure(s): Withdrawal of the product from the marketDate of entry into force: 10/03/2026Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): OtherCategory of measure(s): Removal of this product listing by the online marketplaceDate of entry into force: 03/04/2026 [1]

Read the official alert ↗

Tattoo ink · SR/03611/25

Report published 2025-10-24 · notifying country France · reported origin United States

Reported product description: Blue tattoo ink, 30 ml. Product sold online, in particular via eBay, Amazon and Allegro. [2]
Reported risk explanation: The tattoo transfers contain diethylene glycol monobutyl ether (DEGBE), which is prohibited in these types of products. DEGBE may cause damage to the reproductive system. Additionally, the product fails to include key warnings: mixture for use in tattoos or permanent make-up, contains nickel and methylisothiazolinone, which can cause allergic reactions. The product does not comply with the REACH Regulation and Classification, Labelling and Packaging (CLP) Regulation. [2]
Reported measures, verbatim: Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): OtherCategory of measure(s): Removal of this product listing by the online marketplaceDate of entry into force: 18/09/2025Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): OtherCategory of measure(s): Removal of this product listing by the online marketplaceDate of entry into force: 31/10/2025Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): OtherCategory of measure(s): Removal of this product listing by the online marketplaceDate of entry into force: 31/10/2025 [2]

Read the official alert ↗

Tattoo ink · SR/03492/25

Report published 2025-10-10 · notifying country France · reported origin People's Republic of China

Reported product description: Mixture for tattooing or permanent makeup, 29.6 ml. Product sold online, in particular via dhgate.com [3]
Reported risk explanation: The product has an excessive concentration of nickel (measured value up to 0.06 mg/kg by weight). Nickel can cause skin irritation, induce sensitisation or elicit allergic responses. The product also contains benzisothiazolinone (measured value: 0.0020%), which is prohibited in cosmetic products. Benzisothiazolinone causes skin irritation and may cause an allergic skin reaction. The product does not comply with the REACH Regulation. [3]
Reported measures, verbatim: Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): OtherCategory of measure(s): Removal of this product listing by the online marketplaceDate of entry into force: Unknown [3]

Read the official alert ↗

Permanent make-up · A12/00791/24

Report published 2024-03-29 · notifying country Estonia · reported origin Israel

Reported product description: 10 ml transparent bottle with a white label and with a brown liquid inside. The label contains the following information in English: brand OMG Universe; concentration pigment for professional use only; shake well before use; test before application; best use before 01.03.2027. Product sold online. [4]
Reported risk explanation: The product has an excessive concentration of cobalt and nickel (measured values: 15.8 % each by weight).Cobalt is a skin and respiratory sensitiser and may cause cancer.Nickel is a strong sensitiser and causes allergic reactions if present in articles that come into direct and prolonged contact with the skin. The product does not comply with the REACH Regulation. [4]
Reported measures, verbatim: Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): ImporterCategory of measure(s): Withdrawal of the product from the marketDate of entry into force: 02/02/2024 [4]

Read the official alert ↗

Permanent makeup · A12/00777/24

Report published 2024-03-29 · notifying country Estonia · reported origin Germany

Reported product description: 10 ml transparent bottle with a white label and with a brown liquid inside. The label contains the following information in English: High concentrated fine permanent makeup colour. Shelf lifetime after opening 365 days. Expiration date: 12/2029 [5]
Reported risk explanation: The product has an excessive concentration of cobalt and nickel (measured values up to 5.7 mg/kg and 5.8 mg/kg). Cobalt is a skin and respiratory sensitiser and may cause cancer. Nickel can cause skin irritation, induce sensitisation or elicit allergic responses. The product does not comply with the REACH Regulation. [5]
Reported measures, verbatim: Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): RetailerCategory of measure(s): Withdrawal of the product from the marketDate of entry into force: 29/10/2023 [5]

Read the official alert ↗

Tattoo ink · A12/00886/23

Report published 2023-04-28 · notifying country Sweden · reported origin Republic of Korea

Reported product description: Tattoo ink for permanent make-up (eyebrow pigment), 10 ml bottle with brown liquid. Pigment number 19. [6]
Reported risk explanation: The product has an excessive concentration of nickel and cobalt (measured values: 12 mg/kg and 2.4 mg/kg, respectively). Nickel can cause skin irritation, induce sensitisation or elicit allergic responses. Cobalt is a skin and respiratory sensitiser and may cause cancer. The product does not comply with the REACH regulation. [6]
Reported measures, verbatim: Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): OtherCategory of measure(s): Discontinued professional use of the productDate of entry into force: 15/12/2022 [6]

Read the official alert ↗

Tattoo ink · A12/00617/23

Report published 2023-03-31 · notifying country Sweden · reported origin United States

Reported product description: Tattoo ink in a black bottle. The product is also sold online. [7]
Reported risk explanation: The product has an excessive concentration of naphtalene, arsenic and nickel (measured value 1.08, 0.91 and 1.5 mg/kg respectively). Naphthalene is an irritant if inhaled or in contact with skin and might cause cancer. Arsenic is toxic and might cause cancer. Nickel can cause skin irritation, induce sensitisation or elicit allergic responses. The product does not comply with the REACH Regulation. [7]
Reported measures, verbatim: Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: ImporterCategory of measure(s): Ban on the marketing of the product and any accompanying measuresDate of entry into force: Unknown [7]

Read the official alert ↗

Tattoo ink · A12/01774/22

Report published 2022-12-16 · notifying country Germany · reported origin People's Republic of China

Reported product description: Tattoo ink for permanent make-up, in a 12 ml plastic bottle with the indications at the bottom "MFD: 07/2021 EXP: 07/2024". The product is advertised for an ash blonde colour. Product sold online. [8]
Reported risk explanation: The product contains an excessive concentration of arsenic, cobalt and nickel (measured values up to 1.44 mg/kg, 7.98 mg/kg and 16.4 mg/kg, respectively). Arsenic is toxic and might cause cancer. Cobalt is a skin and respiratory sensitiser and may cause cancer. Nickel can cause skin irritation, induce sensitisation or elicit allergic responses. The product does not comply with the REACH Regulation. [8]
Reported measures, verbatim: Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): RetailerCategory of measure(s): Stop of salesDate of entry into force: UnknownType of economic operator taking notified measure(s): RetailerCategory of measure(s): Removal of this product listing by the online marketplaceDate of entry into force: Unknown [8]

Read the official alert ↗

What this acquired cohort contains

48 distinct official alert references, published between 2012-03-16 and 2026-03-27. Counts describe the acquired reports, with no market denominator.

Report year	Recorded alerts
2012	5
2013	3
2014	5
2015	4
2016	2
2017	1
2019	5
2020	9
2021	1
2022	1
2023	4
2024	5
2025	2
2026	1

Recorded risk labels within this evidence task

Label combinations are source facts within one comparison; they do not create separate guides with identical preparation tasks.

Chemical: 48 recorded references

Source selection, exclusions and calculation method

Filter the acquired, completely parsed English weekly XML releases. Deduplicate official alert references. Group by product category and the complete set of conditional evidence-question topics supported by actual risk text. Risk-label combinations remain recorded cohort facets and do not create buyer intents. Brand, product name, model, origin, notifying country, measurement-only changes and different wording of the same questions do not create intents. Unrecognized mechanisms stay internal for enrichment. Count report years and notifying countries deterministically. Display at most eight newest descriptions with at least 40 characters after whitespace normalization, nonempty reported measures and distinct casefolded descriptions; break date ties by official identifier. All cohort records count even if their description is shorter or not displayed. This is not a representative sample. Counts concern this acquired corpus only.

One acquired version per official public alert reference. Display at most eight newest distinct product descriptions whose normalized whitespace-collapsed text contains at least 40 characters and has nonempty reported measures; ties sort by official identifier. The complete cohort includes shorter descriptions. This is an explicit display selection, not a representative sample.

8 distinct descriptions displayed; 40 cohort records not displayed. Missing fields: {'measures': 7}.

These are selected, dated enforcement observations in the acquired weekly reports, not a random market sample, market-wide failure rate, proof of current product status, or a determination about your product. Notification country is not a complete sales-market or jurisdiction-coverage field. A quoted legal/standard reference is the report’s statement, not independently verified current law or a mandatory test panel.

Calculation safety-gate-evidence-comparison-10; units recorded alerts; no incidence denominator.

Turn the reported failure mechanism into a scoped investigation

Use this checklist to gather your business or product details before speaking with a specialist. The items below explain what to record and suggest useful supporting documents. You can add your own answers in the editable project brief.

Metal-contact configuration and analytical scope — what evidence do we have?
Record the metal/finish identity and actual skin-contact/use conditions. Check whether the reported concern is composition or release, and whether your analytical method and sample represent the relevant surface. Do not substitute one measurement type for another.
Useful evidence: Material/finish and contact-use details, supplier and analytical method/results, surface/lot traceability and current criterion review.
Reported context: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]
Can we trace the affected component, formula or design revision across our supplied products?
Compare the reported descriptions with your own identifiers and change records. Treat missing or “Unknown” source fields as unresolved; they do not establish that no action was needed.
Useful evidence: Product identifiers, revision history, supplier/batch traceability and market/operator records.
Who would own an evidence review and any resulting corrective-action decision?
Read the reported measures as historical observations. Establish your own operator roles, sector-specific rules, decision owner and communication responsibilities before adopting another case’s response.
Useful evidence: Supply-chain responsibility map, applicable-law review, investigation scope and documented decision/communication workflow.

Work packages and dependencies

Conditional: Product-risk evidence and operator-role review — Compare the recorded product features and failure mechanism with your product. Confirm the applicable product regime, deciding evidence, operator responsibilities and justified next steps. This does not assume that GPSR or a representative appointment applies to every alert category.

Questions for providers

Which specific product features and reported risk mechanism make these cases relevant or irrelevant to our product?
What current legal, standards or scientific sources support your proposed investigation criteria, and what cannot be concluded from these dated alerts?
Which existing evidence can answer the risk question, what additional work is justified, and who owns any resulting corrective-action decision?

Sources and data dates

Read the official document in context. The audit details identify the precise locators and preserved versions used for this page.