All tattoo artists and shop owners will be required to use single-use ink starting Dec. 12, 2015 under new amendments to the New York State Public Health Law.

“[The bill] passed legislation to try and particularly prevent any Hepatitis or any other communicable diseases in the tattoo industry,” New York State Sen. Phil Boyle said.

However, this has sparked major controversy in the tattoo industry.

“We started hearing from small business people from tattoo shops in the district that I represent to say that it was going to create quite a few problems with them including increasing the cost of the tattoos and making them lose considerable amounts of money for ink they have already purchased,” Boyle said.

An online petition to reword the law has reached over 48,000 signatures. Bridget Punsalang, a tattoo artist from Saratoga County and the creator of the petition, said the bill undermines and complicates the already proven safe procedures.

“The standard procedure by any properly trained tattoo artist involves purchasing large bottles of inks, and pouring them into small plastic, single use, disposable ‘ink caps,’ just enough for the procedure, which are thrown away during clean up,” Punsalang said on her petition.

Tim Beck, the owner and tattooer of Freedom Ink Tattoo Company in Peoria, Illinois, commented on the petition that the bill is as “absurd as an ultrasound tech having single shots of gel to put on a stomach or a bartender not allowed to have full bottles of liquor behind him or her to pour out of; being required to buy single shots from a liquor company.”

Corinne Galatulas, a senior sociology major at Stony Brook University, also thinks that the law is unnecessary.

“The outbreaks of diseases from needles and tattoos is pretty small, and it’s not like the current method isn’t sanitized/safe since the used ink is discarded,” Galatulas said.

However, tattooing is a self-regulated industry, Punsalang said. There are no rules or regulations for tattoo artists to be accountable for possibly contaminated tools they use, according to the bill.

“We are taught, and then we teach tattoo artists,” Punsalang said in an interview. “When I was taught the requirements, avoiding cross-contamination were drilled into me for a year before I even tattooed anyone.”

Kaitlin Kozak, a Stony Brook freshman biology major, said this law should be put into effect with no dispute.

“Research is everything,” Kozak said. “I actually researched New York tattoo laws to see what their sanitation procedure is like. Couldn’t really find anything other than that you need to be 18 or a minor must be assisted by a parent or guardian.”

Boyle wishes to keep the bill in place. However, he is advocating to change the language used to address the concerns that have been brought to his attention.

“I’m trying to get my colleagues in the state legislature vote in the state senate and the state assembly to amend the language, to modify the language on the legislation to say ‘we still require single-use needles but no longer require single-use ink containers — capsules,’” Boyle said.

The overarching problem that the industry will face is the fact that, according to Boyle, the law cannot be changed before it goes into effect on Dec. 12 because the senate is not in session until January.

“I’m hoping we get all of our ducks in a row so that we pass this legislation early in January,” Boyle said, “and it would be retroactive so that the tattoo shops don’t need to make these big changes and cost them thousands of dollars realizing that the laws are in effect.”

Punsalang does not agree that it will be that simple to change the language. She would rather see the law delayed then have it be retroactive.

“But that’s the problem because [when] a law comes into effect the various counties are going to start enforcing it,” Punsalang said. “So bringing it retroactive to Dec. 12 helps no one. We need to have it so that it’s delayed so that it’s not written into the Department of Health regulation.”

Boyle said there is no guarantee that the law will be fixed in January, but wants to tell the tattoo shops not to worry anyway.

“I’m trying to get support so everyone knows, to make it public, that there is an agreement — tattoo shops you shouldn’t worry about this, it’s going to be fixed — and so they don’t need to go and spend all the money for something that is only going to last for 3 weeks.” Boyle said. “Again there is no guarantee it’s going to be changed in January, but that’s what I’m looking to find, to get the support.”

The New York Amsterdam News published a study in 2012 concluding that “tattoos increase risk of Hepatitis C.”

“A few major research studies have not shown Hepatitis C to be spread through licensed, commercial tattooing facilities,” the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website states. “However, transmission of Hepatitis C (and other infectious diseases) is possible when poor infection-control practices are used during tattooing or piercing.”

“Tattoo artists are required, on a federal level, [to take] a bloodborne pathogens and infections control class through OSHA,” Punsalang said. “Because the one person in a tattoo shop who is most likely to contract Hepatitis is the tattoo artist. Because we have a risk of needle sticks and becoming in contact with other people’s’ body fluids and blood and things like that.”