[HN Gopher] Microplastics found in live human lung tissue
___________________________________________________________________
Microplastics found in live human lung tissue
Author : prostoalex
Score : 189 points
Date : 2022-04-07 15:08 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.iflscience.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.iflscience.com)
| avodonosov wrote:
| How to stop that? High tax on plastic production?
| phito wrote:
| The cat's already out of the bag.
| drekipus wrote:
| I keep thinking about this, and I really wish it was that
| simple.
|
| Maybe attacking it from the other angle, recycling and
| collection, might yield better results..
|
| But people will always toss their junk food wrappers which
| blows into the creeks and etc, there's a huge need for a
| societal wide change and look at this stuff.
| avodonosov wrote:
| One does not exclude the other - the money from the tax can
| be payed for the recicled plastic.
|
| This is called "deposit return system".
| t0bia_s wrote:
| Is that surprising after two years of trusting in science that
| told us to breath through masks? Even environmental activists
| suddenly disappeared and was silence during covid. So much
| plastic waste from masks, vaccines, tests, bags for lunches from
| closed restaurants, etc... And suddenly there are microplasts
| everywhere.
| titzer wrote:
| You're being downvoted, but you're not wrong. Microscopic
| particles of whatever material masks are made of absolutely do
| flake off and end up in your lungs.
|
| Is that why the planet is full of microplastic pollution? Not
| by a long shot. That'd mostly be due to snacks, water bottles,
| fishing nets, toothbrushes, flip flops, packaging of all kinds,
| beauty products, toothpaste...oy, the list is endless.
| t0bia_s wrote:
| Sure, but the waste and plastic production significantly
| increased during covid. It was around 129 billion disposable
| masks used every month around the world, according to the
| American Chemical Society. I'm not sure if that number is
| lowering or not with totalitarian Chinese policy.
|
| - https://www.dailysabah.com/life/environment/disposable-
| masks...
| stevenjgarner wrote:
| Wouldn't that follow if microplastics have already been found in
| human blood? https://phys.org/news/2022-03-scientists-
| microplastics-blood...
| cwkoss wrote:
| What are the most common sources of microplastics that are
| retained in the human body? (Excreted microplastics concern me
| less)
|
| I would expect it is mostly synthetic fiber from clothing,
| followed by processed food, but seems like we probably don't have
| that data yet.
| bantunes wrote:
| We make fun of the Romans for eating out of lead plates and
| slowly going crazy, and yet here we are surrounded by a substance
| that might cause cognitive impairment as well
| https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7068600/
| WithinReason wrote:
| Is there any research on proven negative effects? This paper is
| only about "potential" negative effects. From the conclusion:
|
| Following the intake of microplastics into the human body,
| their fate and effects are still controversial and not well
| known. [...] Not enough information is available to fully
| understand the implications of microplastics for human health;
| istorical wrote:
| Have you tried a cursory Google search? I don't know if you
| refer specifically to the negative effects of microplastics
| in lungs or microplastic exposure in general, but a search
| for "microplastics human effects" will provide you with weeks
| of reading material if you'd like to be depressed.
| WithinReason wrote:
| Microplastics in general. Maybe my googling skills are
| failing me, but all I can find is about "potential" risks,
| "possible" harm and unquantified in vitro studies, nothing
| showing actual harm. Which leads me to believe that if so
| many people are looking so hard for so long, maybe there is
| nothing to find.
| headmelted wrote:
| That seems incredibly optimistic.
|
| Asbestos exposure often takes up to 50 years to have a
| detectable impact, then kills in short order.
|
| Lead poisoning can take an incredibly long time to
| identify unless you find the source of exposure up front.
|
| Plastics haven't even existed for a century, and have
| been ubiquitous only in the last few decades.
| bamboozled wrote:
| What do you think the likelihood of there being no negative
| impacts will be ? Honestly?
|
| I mean, there's a reason why you don't eat plastic packaging
| and I'm sure it could be made to taste nice...
| EGreg wrote:
| As it accumulates more and more -- probably ! Like
| acidification of the oceans is alright until it's not
| jahewson wrote:
| The Romans asked the same question.
| giantg2 wrote:
| "effects are still controversial and not well known"
|
| That's probably what the Romans were saying back then. Or
| when uranium plates were used. Or when PFOAs were/are used in
| good contact.
| itslennysfault wrote:
| I mean.... not just the Romans. We used Lead too. In pipes,
| in paint, in gasoline. Everyone was literally breathing it
| daily in all major cities until the mid 80s.
| likpok wrote:
| The Romans knew about and documented the risks of asbestos,
| so don't be so sure.
|
| They also knew about some of the risks of lead. Vitruvius
| (during Augustus) wrote that water through clay pipes is
| better and purer, and others comment about how the care you
| need to take when preparing food in leaden vessels.
|
| e.g. https://penelope.uchicago.edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_rom
| ana/wi...
| parineum wrote:
| > That's probably what the Romans were saying back then
|
| You can use that argument to support the implication that
| everything might be dangerous.
| giantg2 wrote:
| Technically everything does contain some level of danger.
| We just say that something isn't dangerous when it falls
| below some level (subjective or objective).
| WithinReason wrote:
| You could make the opposite argument about just as many
| things. Remember COVID vaccines?
| StreamBright wrote:
| Very civilisation has its own poison. Romans were eating from
| lead plates, we used to use lead in car fuel that made us dumb
| (https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/03/220307162011.h..
| .) and now this. If humanity survives we are going to be those
| crazy dumb people who used plastic.
| e2le wrote:
| > lead in car fuel that made us dumb
|
| It wasn't just car fuel, we would also cover the walls of our
| homes with lead paint. A practice that still continues in
| some countries.
|
| > As of 31 May 2020, 75 countries have confirmed they have
| legally binding controls to limit the production, import and
| sale of lead paints, which is 39% of all countries. In many
| countries, using lead paint in homes and schools is not
| prohibited, creating a significant risk of children's
| exposure to lead.
|
| https://www.who.int/news/item/31-05-2020-global-progress-
| tow...
|
| One has to wonder whether the individuals who insist on
| selling lead paint have any morality or sense of ethics.
|
| We've known about the harmful effects of lead additives in
| paint since at least 1786 (efforts to ban lead paint began
| around 1921) before it's ban in 1976 (US).
|
| The unimaginable number of people who have likely being
| afflicted by health issues (learning disabilities, poor
| health, shortened lifespan) through no fault of their own,
| knowingly by those who manufacture and sell the products
| creating such debilitating issues, it's difficult to imagine
| there being any possible forgiveness for such actions.
| adriand wrote:
| > One has to wonder whether the individuals who insist on
| selling lead paint have any morality or sense of ethics.
| We've known about the harmful effects of lead additives in
| paint since at least 1786...it's difficult to imagine there
| being any possible forgiveness for such actions.
|
| The list of companies doing exactly this is very, very
| long. You can still buy packets of deadly carcinogens at
| the corner store. We're still belching vast amounts of
| carbon into the atmosphere. We're manufacturing all sorts
| of molecules that have either proven or suspected harmful
| effects and distributing them liberally across the
| globe...it's a pervasive facet of our capitalist system.
| iratewizard wrote:
| If only we had hundreds of millions starving to death to
| prevent the horrors of _crony_ capitalism.
| hans1729 wrote:
| That's an interesting paper, thanks for sharing.
| slowhand09 wrote:
| Serious? Maybe. Or not. I have titanium, steel, plastic,
| amalgum(sp), ceramic, graphite, and possibly glass inside my
| body. Pretty sure I got some asbestos, synthetic fibers, cotton
| and wool fibers, etc from various jobs. Plus plenty of smoke,
| washed with carcingenic solvents, inhaled quantities of dust...
|
| And I run with scissors
| KSPAtlas wrote:
| Next you're gonna tell me you drink straight lead
| Flankk wrote:
| Wow, you're so cool. I bet you drink alcohol with sunglasses
| on.
| yellow_lead wrote:
| What's the relevance?
| dataflow wrote:
| Something I still can't wrap my head around: are microplastics
| like these big/visible? The definition of microplastic is plastic
| < 5mm in length, but how big are the ones people talk about in
| articles like these? Is the implication that they're floating in
| the air and we just don't see them because they're too small? Or
| are they actually large enough to be visible but we somehow still
| get them into our bodies somehow?
| adrianwaj wrote:
| Take a glass of water and shine a light through it in a dark
| room. Look into it and you should see tiny white filaments that
| look like tiny hairs floating around. I think that's what they
| mean.
|
| If that doesn't work, leave it for a few hours and check the
| top surface or bottom of the glass. You can also try with
| urine.
|
| Also, if you leave it for a few days, these filaments may
| grow... that is beyond microplastics and moving into synthetic
| biology.
| Havoc wrote:
| Thought we'd already concluded its bloody everywhere
| FourHand451 wrote:
| I think that's probably true, but I do think it's useful to
| continue testing that conclusion. For example, if we looked
| somewhere and didn't find microplastics, we could then start
| trying to figure out why.
| WithinReason wrote:
| I'm sure you would also find small particles almost every other
| matter in the lungs. Do we know if plastics are worse for us than
| everything else?
| lumost wrote:
| The concern with plastics is that many of the hydrocarbons
| present are analogues of hormones and other bio active
| ingredients.
|
| Unfortunately the list of chemicals plastics degrade into is
| too vast to be exhaustively studied.
| toiletfuneral wrote:
| RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote:
| Is the ubiquity of micro plastics actually evidence that they are
| pretty benign?
|
| Microplastics are pretty much everywhere, but globally (apart
| from Covid-19) humans are living longer, healthier lives. Despite
| all the news, we have one of the lowest rates or
| crime/war/violence ever in recorded human history. We are making
| huge intellectual strides.
|
| I don't think we really have very good evidence that we are being
| harmed in any significant degree by micro plastics.
| hnhg wrote:
| Microplastics eventually turn into nanoplastics:
| https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/05/210504112641.h...
|
| We don't know the long term effects of these but it looks like
| their presence will be an inevitability. Given that
| nanoplastics will be able to cross cell membranes, it would be
| prudent to conduct more research into them.
| hombre_fatal wrote:
| If humans were at peak fitness, I think there would be more
| promise in this hypothesis.
|
| But with the explosion of health issues like obesity and heart
| failure, confounded by everything from diet to endocrine
| disruption, it's hard to conclude that we should be leaving
| stones unturned.
|
| Also, longevity is only one metric. End-to-end quality of life
| seems to be more revealing to me about the state of our health,
| not just how long medicine can prop us up despite our issues.
| For example, why are 26% of men under 40 suffering from
| erectile disfunction? Why are more people on medications for
| mental health? etc. To what extent does any part of the system,
| including microplastics, impact these issues?
| ricardobeat wrote:
| This argument can apply to a lot of other known-to-be-dangerous
| substances: particulate matter from cars, VOCs, BPA... I don't
| think we should stop caring about them?
| andybak wrote:
| Depends if you mean "we have evidence they aren't harmful" vs
| "we have no evidence they are harmful".
|
| The former is a very good reason to stop caring about them
| (while remaining vigilant).
|
| The latter requires a more complex risk/benefit analysis but
| is still enouraging.
| steve76 wrote:
| sangnoir wrote:
| I'd hate it if plastics end up being "the great filter" for
| humanity. It's mind boggling how our reach consistently exceeds
| our grasp.
| moffkalast wrote:
| Well despite being everywhere they at least seem to be mostly
| inert and don't really cause much issues as far as I'm aware?
|
| Our ancient ancestors were filled to the brim with parasites
| and still managed to do mostly fine.
| titzer wrote:
| For the past few years, pretty much everywhere I've traveled,
| either vacationing or living, I've picked up garbage. Three
| oceans, four continents, I can only offer my anecdotal experience
| of 500 bags or so, but holy good god damn. Our oceans are
| absolutely riddled with plastic pollution, to the tune of 8
| _million tons_ added annually. That 's two pounds of plastic per
| person _added_ to the oceans every year.
|
| It's too late to avoid the consequences. The planet is riddled
| with this junk. It's already been sucked up into Earth's massive
| recycling systems. Earth is just full-on blasting our ground-up
| waste right back at us and funneling it into our lungs and
| stomachs.
|
| Whatever the effect of microplastics is on human health, we can't
| escape the consequences now.
|
| Pretty much all you can do is _hope_ it ain 't too bad. And argue
| about it. Because it's here, it's getting worse, and it's going
| to be with us for a very long time.
| 88840-8855 wrote:
| And we have done this in less than 100 years. I find this
| incredible and fascinating how much impact we had in such a
| short time.
|
| And to add one more thought. I still believe that we are too
| many people. Overpopulation has been proven not to be an
| existential that as we won't run out of resources, but i can
| imagine that those 8 billion of us are creating way too much
| trash that is impossible to handle.
|
| By the way. Just 15 years ago i learned in school that we are 6
| billion. Today we are 8 billion already.
| cwkoss wrote:
| People talk about how the Haber process of fixing nitrogen
| has averted starvation, but I wonder if in a century we'll be
| talking about how the Haber process created a plague of
| overpopulation.
| 8note wrote:
| Rich societies are generally plagued by a lack of
| reproduction, so I don't think that's likely as more of the
| world becomes rich
| titzer wrote:
| If you watch a movie shot around a coastal ocean area before,
| oh, about 1990, it's likely that there was little to no ocean
| plastic there. Before 1960, and it was basically guaranteed,
| and before 1930 or so, plastic did not exist. Today, beaches
| are so bad that most places that don't have regular cleanup
| will accumulate visible amounts of plastic debris. Just
| think, every coastline in the world, literally tens of
| thousands of miles, are now washing up this floating garbage
| we produce.
|
| It's inescapable now. Pretty much every coastline in the
| world, you can find something, unless someone is actively
| cleaning it up, _with a finetooth comb_. Of course, it 's
| much worse depending on the currents and how often cleanup
| might happen there. But damnit, after thousands of hours out
| there, I am cursed with the eyes of a hawk, I'll find a
| bottlecap, a ring, a bottle, some plastic bits, something.
| Anything blue or white or red is almost certainly plastic.
|
| It makes it bittersweet to watch movies shot at the beach
| anymore. Everything is tainted now. That old world is gone.
| Look away, I guess. Or get out your fine-toothed comb, stoop
| for hours, to pretend, for a few tide cycles, that there
| isn't a steady drip of this junk washing up.
| hathawsh wrote:
| FWIW, I have long wondered where all the plastic trash in the
| ocean was coming from. A recent video [1] from Mark Rober was
| very enlightening: the trash from poor communities (without
| collection services) gets picked up by rain and wind and flows
| into waterways.
|
| [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXDx6DjNLDU&t=353s
| titzer wrote:
| I've seen stuff like this firsthand. It's hard to say for
| sure what makes up the bulk ocean-wide. A major issue is
| government corruption. It's highly likely that western money
| dumped into places like this to help improve the situation
| gets gobbled up by various boondoggles that do not end up
| making a dent. Case in point, I spent weeks in Fiji cleaning
| up garbage. The town got a grant from the central government
| for some hundreds of thousands of dollars to help their
| sanitation issues. They bought _one_ garbage truck.
| Meanwhile, people were burning garbage in their backyards, or
| down the street, because they didn 't want to pay the taxes
| associated with garbage service. And plenty would just dump
| on the beach at night. That was Fiji, which has a boatload of
| tourist money coming in and is rapidly developing. In Africa,
| shit looks bleak.
| parineum wrote:
| > It's too late to avoid the consequences
|
| What _are_ the consequences?
|
| I'm legitimately unaware of any macro side effects of plastic
| pollution aside from it being ugly.
|
| I know microplastics are found in everything and that seems bad
| (I don't want to eat plastic) but is it actually harming me?
| That fact that it's so persistent leads me to believe that it's
| just passing right through animals and not really breaking down
| and polluting the environment (again, aside from being plastic
| in a place I don't want it).
| walleeee wrote:
| Among the other answers here, there is some evidence
| micro/nanoplastics measurably change behavior (and by
| implication cognition) in crustaceans[0]
|
| though it's unclear what this reveals w.r.t humans it does
| seem to suggest we ought to be wary given that we have
| inadvertently (and effectively irreversibly) filled ourselves
| and our habitats with the stuff
|
| https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsbl.2020.003.
| ..
| missedthecue wrote:
| Some insist that it causes infertility issues, but the
| scientific jury is still out on this one.
| parineum wrote:
| This seems like the go-to FUD or, more likely, the possible
| consequence people glom onto when it's reported/suggested.
|
| Like you said though, jury is still out. I obviously don't
| expect it to turn out to be good for humanity but I just
| wonder if there's any documented side effect, to humanity
| or the ecosystem/biosphere.
|
| I have to imagine you can also find an amount of glass of
| similar similar size all around. The only saving grace for
| glass is that it doesn't float.
| knodi123 wrote:
| of note, fertility issues were also one of the main
| symptoms of evil witchcraft, back in the days when
| witchcraft was considered a valid health concern.
| titzer wrote:
| Macroplastics kill fish and birds. Microplastics attract and
| concentrate other pollutants and additives like BPA have
| known adverse effects on human health. Even if inert (a
| stretch, TBH) zooplankton consumption of microplastics causes
| them to eat less, accelerating deoxygenation of global
| oceans[1].
|
| [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-22554-w
| lil_dispaches wrote:
| My feeling is that the cosmetics industry has a lot to do with
| micro-plastics. Where does the glitter go?
| DoneWithAllThat wrote:
| Claims a single study.
| Biologist123 wrote:
| I've heard rumors of a leading investor putting together a fund
| specifically to short companies which he expects to go bust
| defending toxicity lawsuits. The key issue - I understand - is
| toxicity caused by interactions of chemicals approved before
| interaction. The further argument is that mass sterility will
| have huge economic implications.
| whimsicalism wrote:
| > I've heard rumors of a leading investor putting together a
| fund
|
| This is textbook "how to repackage an anecdote to be more
| palatable to HN readers."
| BobbyJo wrote:
| I wonder how much of the decline in the birthrate is a by-
| product of fewer unplanned pregnancies directly cause by
| decreasing fertility.
|
| When you're trying to have a baby, and it takes 10 times to get
| there, it's not that big of an issue. When one mistake ends in
| pregnancy vs. ten mistakes, it can make a considerable
| difference.
|
| Just a thought.
| x3iv130f wrote:
| My 10 cent hypothesis would be social detachment leads to
| falling birthrates.
|
| It is well known that people don't have the same strong
| community bonds to those in the same physical space that they
| used to.
|
| In an environmemt like this sex becomes rarer and riskier as
| partners are more unknown.
|
| Giving birth and raising children also feels riskier as
| individuals don't have a community to rely on and absorb the
| added burden of child rearing.
| kache_ wrote:
| It's just access to birth control
| BobbyJo wrote:
| I doubt it is one thing. That is probably the single
| largest factor, but I wonder how large a role other factors
| play: the internet as social vehicle, male fertility,
| female fertility, social safety nets, average educational
| attainment, cultural factors, etc.
|
| A 0.2% difference in birthrate makes a massive difference
| on the timescale of civilization, so it is a very
| interesting question to me.
| wppick wrote:
| On the flip side I have thought about getting into reverse
| osmosis as a side business. Afaik reverse osmosis does remove
| microplastics and most other harmful things from tap water. And
| on top of that it makes better tasting tea and coffee imo.
|
| On top of that, reverse osmosis can get drinking water from sea
| water. It seems that the feasibility of reverse osmosis is
| directly related to available energy, but wouldn't that be a
| great use of excess produced electricity vs. storing in
| batteries?
|
| Of all the things humanity should be looking to make
| technological improvements in reverse osmosis, or even better
| solutions (electrolysis?, distilling?), should be pretty high
| up.
| pstuart wrote:
| I've been eagerly awaiting this to become commercially
| available: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slingshot_(water_vap
| or_distill...
|
| Not sure it'll ever happen, but it would be huge if it did.
| ClumsyPilot wrote:
| 'mass sterility will have huge economic implications'
|
| Yes, extinction of mankind might be. Bad for business, but not
| everyone agrees
| libraryatnight wrote:
| Short-term greed + "someone will figure it out"
| koksik202 wrote:
| this website has so many cancer ads hard to trust it...
| photochemsyn wrote:
| Here's a nice detailed research paper on the problems with
| microplastics:
|
| > "Today, it is an issue of increasing scientific concern because
| these microparticles due to their small size are easily
| accessible to a wide range of aquatic organisms and ultimately
| transferred along food web. The chronic biological effects in
| marine organisms results due to accumulation of microplastics in
| their cells and tissues. The potential hazardous effects on
| humans by alternate ingestion of microparticles can cause
| alteration in chromosomes which lead to infertility, obesity, and
| cancer. (2018)"
|
| You can get it at sci-hub_se just enter this title in the search
| box: "Microplastic pollution, a threat to marine ecosystem and
| human health: a short review"
|
| For a broader discussion on the continuing issue of environmental
| toxins accumulating in human beings, more pop-sci:
|
| https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/chemicals...
|
| > "Yet even though many health statistics have been improving
| over the past few decades, a few illnesses are rising
| mysteriously. From the early 1980s through the late 1990s, autism
| increased tenfold; from the early 1970s through the mid-1990s,
| one type of leukemia was up 62 percent, male birth defects
| doubled, and childhood brain cancer was up 40 percent. Some
| experts suspect a link to the man-made chemicals that pervade our
| food, water, and air. There's little firm evidence. But over the
| years, one chemical after another that was thought to be harmless
| turned out otherwise once the facts were in."
|
| Note however that US academic institutions basically cut all
| research into these subjects due to political and industrial
| pressure. It started with Republican attacks on USGS funding for
| environmental pollution research in the early 1990s, and
| continued with NIH cutting funding for environmental carcinogen
| research in favor of inheritied genetic explanations for cancer.
| Hence, 'little firm evidence'.
| tomrod wrote:
| > Note however that US academic institutions basically cut all
| research into these subjects due to political and industrial
| pressure. It started with Republican attacks on USGS funding
| for environmental pollution research in the early 1990s, and
| continued with NIH cutting funding for environmental carcinogen
| research in favor of inheritied genetic explanations for
| cancer. Hence, 'little firm evidence'.
|
| Other nations aren't researching this?
| nosianu wrote:
| A few years ago, 2013, there was a study in Germany where a
| lab had tested various espresso machines and found lead.
|
| My memories are fuzzy and incomplete, but I remember that
| nothing ever happened because there was a big uproar from
| manufacturers. They demanded "proof" and threatened
| litigation. The problem with tests is that you can create a
| lot of questions about procedures, for example, did you test
| just after descaling? First shot in the morning after letting
| water rest in the pipes overnight? Then there's discussion
| about "this is so little water, just a tiny espresso, so the
| amounts are smaller than in drinking water which you drink by
| the liter so the thresholds don't really apply". Basically,
| the lab would have to fight the manufacturers in court, so
| the whole thing was dropped silently.
|
| I still have a 2012 Rancilio Sylvia entrance-level
| portafilter machine, almost unused, that I had tested by my
| Bavarian city's own water lab, with a sample taking procedure
| agreed upon with the leader of that lab (they did not have
| any procedures for a citizen who wanted something tested but
| did not want to turn me away, so the head of the lab himself
| took time to deal with my request). The lead values greatly
| exceeded the allowed limits. I don't think it would be any
| different with a current model. I ended up with a copper-
| based Vibiemme, and now I have a stainless steel based Ascaso
| Steel PID Uno that was designed with being environmentally
| flawless in mind.
|
| Most, or just many?, people don't care, however. I found
| plenty of people who wanted to take my Rancilio Silvia, but I
| refused because I don't want this lead-laden piece of junk in
| use by anyone, even if they take it willingly despite knowing
| of the problem.
|
| The 2013 report: https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/studie-teure-
| espressomaschine... (German article from 2013, website is
| from a public German state radio)
| photochemsyn wrote:
| My understanding is that most European regulators err on the
| side of caution with respect to banning chemicals. It's more
| of a "you have to prove this is safe" mentality, rather than
| "you have to prove this is dangerous" in terms of the
| scientific uncertainty. They're all looking at the same
| global set of available research data it seems:
|
| https://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/banned-
| europe...
|
| > "This principle, in the words of the European Commission,
| "aims at ensuring a higher level of environmental protection
| through preventative" decision-making. In other words, it
| says that when there is substantial, credible evidence of
| danger to human or environmental health, protective action
| should be taken despite continuing scientific uncertainty. In
| contrast, the U.S. federal government's approach to chemicals
| management sets a very high bar for the proof of harm that
| must be demonstrated before regulatory action is taken."
| saiya-jin wrote:
| US vs Europe approach difference was nicely visible right
| after brexit. US lobbyists for agro sector were trying to
| persuade UK government to ease EU-based laws on quality of
| food, farming etc.
| jerry1979 wrote:
| > Note however that US academic institutions basically cut all
| research into these subjects due to political and industrial
| pressure.
|
| Infuriating. Do you have any sources to back this?
| Palmik wrote:
| Other research related to the effects of plastics that might be
| of interest:
|
| [Decrease in anogenital distance among male infants with
| prenatal phthalate exposure]
| kossTKR wrote:
| Thank you for posting this. Those numbers scary?! Does anyone
| know if these have kept increasing?
|
| I wonder if some of the gender and queer issues in kids these
| days are actually because of this issue, same with other
| pathologies that sometimes require medication like ADHD/Autism.
|
| I'm saying that only from a place of love - as i've always
| always felt "wrong" in some aspects myself, and have always
| wondered if increased diagnosis is because of natural
| biological types getting recognised, because of industry
| pressure to sell more medication, or because of pollution or
| lifestyle.
|
| Very different scenarios.
| manmal wrote:
| There's other stuff to pick from, too - lead, mercury, and
| other metals come to mind for example. Lyme disease, which is
| now suspected to be transmitted sexually and maybe across the
| placenta (speculative though that is). Pesticides and
| herbicides. Radical particulates emitted by cars and industry
| (have been shown to lower IQ, and who knows what else).
| Nutrient-depleted soil (eg magnesium and copper), resulting
| in deficiencies. Iodine deficiency, which is endemic in many
| western countries. Rampant sugar (even worse: HFCS)
| consumption, obviously. Increase in food lectins via GMO,
| endangering gut mucosal barrier function.
|
| The list goes on.
| kongolongo wrote:
| Yep that shear number of possible confounders is why it is
| so difficult to draw any sort of clear relationships
| between any particular pollutant and any particular health
| outcomes. It's not necessarily always conspiracy by
| corporations to thwart the research, it's genuinely
| difficult to study any affect because there's so many
| confounding pollutant exposures, metabolic pathways, and
| outcomes.
|
| An interesting question is that would the risk of these
| outcomes be worth the massive amount of savings and
| productivity that plastics have had on nearly every
| industry? Then there's also the use cases where plastics
| are nearly irreplaceable, or at least not easily
| replaceable without incurring a huge cost increase for
| example in medical applications (think packaging for
| syringes, vaccines, surgical tools, or anything that
| requires contamination control).
| stult wrote:
| I don't think any of the irreplaceable uses of plastics
| are really major contributors to the problem. eg if
| syringes were the only plastic item around, this would
| not be an issue simply because there aren't that many
| syringes and they aren't generally reused (and so don't
| shed plastics as much as water bottles with tops being
| screwed on and off frequently). It's the common, day-to-
| day plastic items like food containers and synthetic
| clothes. Those are hardly irreplaceable use cases,
| although obviously other solutions are going to be more
| expensive than plastics.
| sjg007 wrote:
| Another issue is that aluminum cans and food packaging is
| lined with a plastic residue.
|
| It's almost impossible to get away from it. Also plastic
| bags, clothes shed into the environment and get eaten by
| fish and animals.
|
| So maybe we all need to be vegetarian.
| stjohnswarts wrote:
| Hold up, what do you mean with "gender and queer issues" ? I
| don't consider those as "issues" but as "nature". Obviously
| (most) societies have estranged LGBQT people for centuries,
| so they had to go underground for most of that time.
| Obviously more people are coming out now that it's not nearly
| as dangerous for them.
| pmoriarty wrote:
| Framing it as _" gender and queer issues"_ is disturbingly
| reminiscent of the time when the DSM listed homosexuality
| as a mental illness.[1]
|
| [1] -
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_the_DSM
| 8note wrote:
| I'd generally understand "gender and queer issues" to mean
| problems with how society treats people who don't fit into
| norms.
|
| I'm not sure how plastics contribute to people becoming
| more accepting/norms changing over time
| md2020 wrote:
| I buy that as society becomes more accepting, the
| prevalence of non-heterosexual and trans people should be
| expected to increase, but this is a huge confounding
| variable in figuring out what the natural prevalence of
| these traits in society is. A Gallup poll this year [0]
| broke it down by generational cohort, and I was surprised
| at the increase in LGBT identification from Millennials
| (10.5%) to Gen Z (20.8%), and I am part of Gen Z. I don't
| know what explains an increase of that size, simply because
| while society in general has become more accepting, my
| feeling is that it hasn't become _that_ much more accepting
| between Millennials and Gen Z. But maybe it has and I'm
| just underestimating it.
|
| [0] https://news.gallup.com/poll/389792/lgbt-
| identification-tick...
| kossTKR wrote:
| I totally agree that living in the past was horrible for
| many people and i'm extremely lucky to be living right now
| - where i'm personally sceptical is when heavy medication
| or surgery is the answer, especially for youngsters - that
| to me is a sign of something very wrong with society if
| required to be broadened too much in scope.
|
| Personally i see the heavy use of SSRI's and Ritalin etc.
| for kids through the same lens where societal or
| psychological changes should be the focus, or a culprit
| found instead of patching up.
|
| The answer can't be that in the future out of a class room
| one half will require some dependency from a medico
| industrial complex, that's dystopian to me.
| sjg007 wrote:
| Highly unlikely. You'd expect higher prevalence if
| environmental causes are to blame.
| rackjack wrote:
| The cynic/conspiracy theorist in me says "Imagine blaming
| kids for acting weird when they're literally infested with
| plastic."
| thathndude wrote:
| I'm not speaking to the veracity of any of this, but Dr.
| Shanna Swan has researched this pretty extensively (and
| written papers).
|
| What we're seeing since the beginning of petrochemical use in
| the US (50's) are clear physiology changes (specifically in
| males) where we're seeing a reduction in physical traits
| associated with being a biological male of the species.
| humaniania wrote:
| Please use caution when exploring far right rabbit holes
| based on dubious correlations.
| jjulius wrote:
| I'm approaching this subject from a place of ignorance. A
| cursory Google of Shanna Swan, and a glance through her
| Wiki page, don't suggest a relationship to "far-right
| rabbit holes", just a lot of coverage of her work on
| left-leaning sites such as GQ, The Guardian, NYTimes,
| etc.. I also tend to observe that many (especially older)
| far-right folk are very pro-petrochemical, whereas she
| appears to be strongly the opposite.
|
| I guess I'm just having trouble squaring your comment
| away; can you elaborate/clarify your caution as it
| applies to Swan?
| whimsicalism wrote:
| Theories about "decline of maleness", great replacement
| theory, "decline of western civilization", are all very
| linked to this sort of stuff. Granted, that is very
| possibly not a goal of Swan's work, but these are the
| type of people who often cite it.
|
| Swan's work is dubious on other scientific grounds,
| however. [0]
|
| [0]: https://www.science20.com/gregory_bond/just_a_dud_sw
| an_book_...
| jjulius wrote:
| Ah, yeah, I'd forgot about those areas having strong
| right-wing links. Appreciate the link and the
| perspective, thank you. :)
|
| Edit: I don't care about my comment score, but what about
| thanking someone for their response and providing
| perspective is worth downvoting? Asking in the interest
| of continuing to foster discussion.
| alex_sf wrote:
| Is it actually incorrect or just associated with things
| that are incorrect?
| whimsicalism wrote:
| Hence the point of my second comment - not incorrect per
| se, but not really any evidence suggesting that it is
| correct, on a number of different fronts.
|
| The point of the first part of my comment was to answer
| the question posed.
| sarma912 wrote:
| Is there a pop sci accessible version of the work that
| details the physiological changes?
| IncRnd wrote:
| "But a new study says that even if they don't contain BPA,
| most plastic products release estrogenic chemicals. Most
| plastic products, from sippy cups to food wraps, can
| release chemicals that act like the sex hormone estrogen,
| according to a study in Environmental Health Perspectives."
| [1]
|
| [1] https://www.npr.org/2011/03/02/134196209/study-most-
| plastics...
| shadowofneptune wrote:
| Well, let's think about this. If estrogens or
| xenoestrogens were at levels in food and drink that they
| were changing the bodies of young men, what you would see
| is distress as their body shifts _away_ from their
| assigned gender. I do not see what about that would lead
| them to think they are transgender.
|
| Far from distress, the rate of dissatisfaction trans
| people after hormonal transition is very low and is most
| often driven by external factors.
| https://www.gendergp.com/detransition-facts/
|
| I do not see how plastics are a convincing explanation
| for current social trends.
| verisimi wrote:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JRLCBb7qK8
|
| gay frogs
| ruined wrote:
| "they turned the frickin' frogs gay, and me too" - l cuboniks
| blktiger wrote:
| I think at least some of the rise in ADHD/Autism is from been
| getting better at diagnosing these conditions and general
| awareness. Same with queer issues, they've been around
| forever but until recently it has been pushed out of the
| social consciousness so it was a lot more hidden.
| sarma912 wrote:
| Given we might not have data from the past about the
| prevalence of ADHD, is it safe to assume we'll never know
| if mircoparticles and other things we introduce into the
| environment are the cause of these issues?
| djokkataja wrote:
| Arguably ADHD could have benefits for people in hunter-
| gatherer lifestyles: https://faculty.washington.edu/dtae/
| manuscripts/eisenberg%20...
| BolexNOLA wrote:
| I knew I had untapped potential!
| tmoertel wrote:
| We could always find a causal mechanism mediated by
| microparticals.
| antattack wrote:
| Also it's worth noting that 3D printing with ABS produces
| microparticles that can embed in your lungs.
| xyst wrote:
| By 2050, humans will consist mostly of micro plastic vs organic
| material
| dharma1 wrote:
| The rate at which microplastics saturation in the environment
| (and consequently our bodies) keeps increasing without any sign
| of slowing down is the worrying bit
| dharma1 wrote:
| The rate at which microplastics accumulation in the environment
| (and consequently in our bodies) keeps increasing without any
| sign of slowing down is the worrying bit
| dang wrote:
| Related:
|
| _Microplastics detected in human blood in new study_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30852273 - March 2022 (129
| comments)
|
| _Scientists find microplastics in blood for first time_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30810626 - March 2022 (119
| comments)
|
| _Babies are full of microplastics, new research shows_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28726832 - Oct 2021 (61
| comments)
|
| _Microplastics found in the placentas of human fetuses_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25505108 - Dec 2020 (126
| comments)
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-04-07 23:00 UTC)