I’ve already mentioned the permanence of a tattoo deters me from getting one. I’m just not sure if 30 or 40 years down the line I want the signs of my personal end times to be further illuminated by formerly vibrant colors and patterns disappearing under folds and ripples of less than elastic skin. I guess in a way, I’m too shallow to commit to the something below skin deep.

On a recent episode of Dr. Phil, a mother complained her daughter was addicted to the ink. Phil in his infinite wisdom decided that the best way to convince young Kristina of the error of her ink-covered ways was to show her a photo of what she’ll look like at age 65 with all those tattoos.

An AP article by Andrew Bridges, offers some hope for folks like me that don’t want to be an ink-stained age spot down the line. Freedom-2 LLC, a Philadelphia company plans to launch a couple innovations in creating real but semi-permanent tattoos.

The first launching next year has special polymer encapsulated pigments that can remain permanent but are easy to remove too. A few non-invasive pulses of a laser can make the tiny microcapsules of ink break open, dissolving the tattoo while the body safely reabsorbs the released pigment.

A second ink using similar technology is proposed for release in 2008. Instead of being removed by laser, the capsules of ink would slowly dissolve on their own over time. The tattoos would naturally vanish in six months, a year or two years.

“It will be like wearing a tattoo like it’s jewelry, where you will be able to take it off. It will just fade on its own,” Martin Schmieg, the company’s president and CEO suggests.

Comparing tattoos to jewelry is still a stretch considering the discomfort and cost involved. Except maybe in Hollywood where even the pain of divorce doesn’t stop anyone from marrying five times over - now, they can change those tattooed loved ones’ names just as easily. I bet Tom Arnold wishes it’d been so easy to get Rosie of his ass.