This tattoo is permanent, pain-free, and might soon come in the mail
CipherX, a London-based biotech company, has developed disposable “Microdot” patches that create permanent tattoos without the pain, noise or conventional needles associated with tattoo guns. The Verge tested the product and found the application quick and effectively painless, suggesting it could make permanent body art more accessible to people deterred by traditional tattooing.
Each patch is about the size of a US quarter and uses 112 microscopic biodegradable needles to place pigment in the upper skin layers. After an applicator pressed the patch onto the skin, it was covered with a bandage and left for 15 minutes; CipherX says it hopes eventually to offer the patches as a consumer-ready product, potentially by post.
- CipherX’s microneedle patches offer permanent tattoos without conventional needles.
- The test application took seconds and was reportedly painless.
- Each patch uses 112 biodegradable microneedles and processes for 15 minutes.
New here? Start with this
Permanent tattoos usually involve a machine driving needles into the skin to deposit ink, a process that can be painful and requires trained practitioners. CipherX is a London biotechnology company developing an alternative using small, single-use patches.
The patches use many tiny biodegradable needles to deliver pigment near the skin’s surface, then are removed after a short period. If the approach proves suitable for wider use and regulation, it could change how some people access permanent body art, including through products sent directly to consumers.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters argue that pain-free, disposable tattoo patches could widen access to permanent body art for people who dislike needles, cannot tolerate conventional tattooing, or want a simpler and less intimidating experience. Standardised, single-use patches may also reduce some hygiene concerns and make small designs more convenient, while preserving the personal expression that tattoos can offer.
The case against
Critics argue that making permanent tattoos as easy to order and apply at home risks encouraging impulsive decisions with consequences that are difficult and costly to reverse. They may also question whether consumer-by-post use can reliably ensure safe application, informed consent, appropriate aftercare and robust oversight of pigment quality, skin reactions and long-term results.