SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Macrophage immune cells in the skin can capture pigments from tattoos and hold them in place, causing tattoos to persist even after new macrophages move in to deal with the contaminants:
[...] That's what French scientists observed from studying tatted mice. In their model of tattoo persistence [open, DOI: 10.1084/jem.20171608] [DX], published Tuesday in the Journal of Experimental Medicine, macrophages — immune cells that ingest foreign or unhealthy debris in the body — play a starring role. Targeting these cells, the authors suggested, might help improve tattoo removal procedures for people.
As a tattoo is given, macrophages descend to capture invading ink. Probably because the ink granules are too bulky for the microscopic Pac-Mans to break down, they hold onto the pigment, your body art shining through their bellies.
With time, these original macrophages die and release their pigments, which get vacuumed up by new macrophages, starting the cycle over, said Sandrine Henri, a researcher at the Immunology Center of Marseille-Luminy who led the study with her colleague Bernard Malissen.
[...] Jared Jagdeo, a dermatologist at the University of California, Davis, has also wondered whether macrophages impede tattoo removal by reabsorbing lasered ink particles. Since 2014, he has performed a laser removal procedure that uses anti-inflammatory ointment to suppress macrophages. "It makes a difference," he said, noting that he often removes tattoos in 10 or fewer treatments [instead of 20].
(Score: 3, Interesting) by KiloByte on Tuesday March 13 2018, @10:31AM
Why would this matter? The body is yours, and this alteration, while permanent, doesn't noticeably degrade the body's abilities (it interferes with some medical monitors, that's the only non-social downside I'm aware of).
This! In places in the US, tattoos are more widespread among non-dumb population, but at least here in Poland, having a tattoo is a strong signifier of being wilfully ignorant and proud of it. This is how criminals and regular low-class (not necessarily money-wise) people mark themselves to stand out. This causes a cycle as the rest of the population: those intelligent, those average, and those who are poor but honest, distance themselves from tattoo-bearers, which in turn reinforces that group's urge to keep away from the normies even more.
Thus, just like certain kinds of clothing, tattoos are a social signifier. And with current use of that signifier, it's a warning against interacting with such a person. Which is unfair to those who merely made a mistake, thinking a tat can be "cool", but the social convention is so strong that not knowing any better is by itself telling.
Ceterum censeo systemd esse delendam.