What forensic methods have been used to test artifacts claimed to be made from human skin?

1. Microscopic and histological examination: the first line of inquiry

Visual inspection and histology remain foundational: experts examine tanning patterns, epidermal structure, collagen, and other skin-specific microanatomy to decide whether an object retains features of human skin versus animal hide or processed leather, and such microscopic work was explicitly cited in the Buchenwald lampshade report as part of the confirmation that the piece was “certainly human skin” ^{[1] [5]}.

2. Genetic testing and DNA profiling: identity, species and limits

Genetic examinations—ranging from species identification to human short tandem repeat (STR) profiling—are used to determine whether tissue is human and, when material and preservation allow, to recover individual genetic markers; the lampshade reanalysis combined genetic testing with microscopy across several laboratories to reach its conclusion ^{[1] [6]}. However, degraded or heavily processed samples can yield low or partial profiles and risk contamination, so DNA results are frequently interpreted alongside other evidence rather than standing alone ^[6].

3. RNA and microRNA assays: tissue-type identification for degraded material

When standard histology or DNA is inconclusive, molecular markers such as mRNA and microRNA can indicate the tissue of origin—researchers have developed mRNA panels targeting skin-specific transcripts (CDSN, LOR, KRT9) and microRNA expression profiles that can distinguish organ tissues and aged or degraded samples, making them valuable tools for identifying whether a specimen is skin and whether it matches human expression patterns ^{[2] [3]}.

4. Immunohistochemistry and biomarker timing: wound vitality and context

Immunohistochemical stains for fibronectin, collagen types, Ki67 and other markers are standard in forensic dermatopathology to assess skin structure, wound vitality, and timing of lesions; these techniques are better known in forensic casework for dating injuries but are also relevant to assessing whether tissue-bearing artifacts preserve cellular markers consistent with human skin ^{[7] [8] [9]}.

5. Microbial forensics and skin microbiome profiling: a newer corroborative angle

High-throughput sequencing of bacterial communities can provide a “microbial signature” consistent with human skin and may help link an object to human contact or a human source when human DNA is absent or degraded; several studies and reviews highlight microbial community comparison as a potential independent line of evidence in forensic identification ^{[4] [10] [11] [12]}. This approach is still developing and is usually presented as corroborative rather than definitive.

6. Imaging and alternate physical analyses: revealing hidden features

Noninvasive imaging (ALS/UV, stereomicroscopy) and surface analysis help expose tanning, suture marks, protein fluorescence or impact marks that are invisible under normal light and guide sampling for molecular tests; forensic dermatology toolkits and crime-scene light sources are routinely used to reveal subtle features on skin-derived materials ^{[13] [14]}.

7. Combining methods and interpreting ambiguity: why multi-disciplinary testing matters

Contested artifacts—especially historical items that have been stored, treated or previously tested—are best evaluated by multidisciplinary protocols combining microscopic, genetic, molecular and microbial assays across independent labs; the Buchenwald lampshade case illustrates this model, where a prior 1992 report had left uncertainty and a later, multi-lab reanalysis produced a firmer conclusion ^[1]. Many sources stress that individual methods have limitations—degradation, contamination, database gaps or experimental status—so triangulation is essential ^{[2] [6] [4]}.