People have sometimes accused me of ginning up undue hysteria around plastics where it’s not warranted, but I’ve never felt more confident about any prediction than this. History will vindicate my and others’ repeated warnings.
Microplastics in the body — certainly not carbon dioxide poisoning or gender dysphoria or whatever The Science™ is prioritizing today — will turn out to be the biggest public health disaster in the 21st century, and maybe in all of recorded history.
Related: Diverse Fat Activist Gets Paid to Lie to Children About Nutrition for Corporate Profit
For starters, for some perspective and context, the plastic revolution is extremely new in the grand scheme of human civilization.
Via Science History Institute (emphasis added):
In 1907 Leo Baekeland invented Bakelite, the first fully synthetic plastic, meaning it contained no molecules found in nature. Baekeland had been searching for a synthetic substitute for shellac, a natural electrical insulator, to meet the needs of the rapidly electrifying United States. Bakelite was not only a good insulator; it was also durable, heat resistant, and, unlike celluloid, ideally suited for mechanical mass production. Marketed as “the material of a thousand uses,” Bakelite could be shaped or molded into almost anything, providing endless possibilities…
World War II necessitated a great expansion of the plastics industry in the United States, as industrial might proved as important to victory as military success. The need to preserve scarce natural resources made the production of synthetic alternatives a priority. Plastics provided those substitutes. Nylon, invented by Wallace Carothers in 1935 as a synthetic silk, was used during the war for parachutes, ropes, body armor, helmet liners, and more. Plexiglas provided an alternative to glass for aircraft windows. A Time magazine article noted that because of the war, “plastics have been turned to new uses and the adaptability of plastics demonstrated all over again.” During World War II plastic production in the United States increased by 300%.
Since the conclusion of World War II, plastic production has increased exponentially — “Plastics production expanded explosively after the war, with a growth curve that was steeper than even the fast-rising [gross national products],” according to Scientific American — although its potential long-term health effects are still relatively obscure.
Not only does the emission of microplastics increase with industrial output, but plastic particles too large to qualify as microplastics fragment into smaller pieces, thereby creating new microplastics.
Via Science.org (emphasis added):
Emissions of microplastics to the environment are estimated to be between 10 and 40 million tonnes per year, and under business-as-usual scenarios, this amount could double by 2040. Even if it were possible to immediately halt emissions, quantities would continue to increase because of the fragmentation of legacy items.
These materials, without exaggeration, exist almost everywhere they are looked for.
Related: ‘Lab-Grown’ Meat Increases Blood Pressure, Inflammation, Depression: Study
Here are just a few of the unexpected harbors of microplastics and nanoplastics.
Microplastics in seafood
Japanese researchers, in 2021, estimated the presence of 24.4 trillion microplastic particles in the “upper ocean,” extending from the ocean surface to 200 meters deep.
Via Microplastics and Nanoplastics (emphasis added):
A total of 8218 pelagic microplastic samples from the world’s oceans were synthesized to create a dataset composed of raw, calibrated, processed, and gridded data which are made available to the public. The raw microplastic abundance data were obtained by different research projects using surface net tows or continuous seawater intake. Fibrous microplastics were removed from the calibrated dataset. Microplastic abundance which fluctuates due to vertical mixing under different oceanic conditions was standardized. An optimum interpolation method was used to create the gridded data; in total, there were 24.4 trillion pieces (8.2 × 104 ~ 57.8 × 104 tons) of microplastics in the world’s upper oceans.
In one study examining “anthropogenic particles” in seafood, researchers found them in 180 out of 182 samples.
For definitional clarification: “Anthropogenically modified substances refer to materials of anthropogenic origin or those that are heavily processed, like dyed cellulose textiles or poly-blends.”
Via Frontiers in Toxicology (emphasis added):
Edible tissue was digested and analyzed under a microscope, and a subset of suspected [anthropogenic particles] APs was identified using spectroscopy (μFTIR). Anthropogenic particles were found in 180 of 182 individuals…
Pathways include microfibers (MFs) shed from laundering clothing, MP [microplastic] beads from personal care products, and tire wear particles resulting from tire degradation. APs can be transported aerially by wind, into freshwater sources via wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) and urban runoff, and into the ocean via rivers, WWTP effluent, and degradation of plastic litter.
Microplastics in chewing gum
In an admittedly small study (n=1), researchers found that commercial gum, regardless of whether natural or synthetic, released an average of 100 microplastics per gram after twenty minutes of chewing.
Via American Chemical Society (emphasis added):
The researchers tested five brands of synthetic gum and five brands of natural gum, all of which are commercially available. Mohanty says they wanted to reduce the human factor of varied chewing patterns and saliva, so they had seven pieces from each brand all chewed by one person.
In the lab, the person chewed the piece of gum for 4 minutes, producing samples of saliva every 30 seconds, then a final mouth rinse with clean water, all of which got combined into a single sample. In another experiment, saliva samples were collected periodically over 20 minutes to look at the release rate of microplastics from each piece of gum. Then, the researchers measured the number of microplastics present in each saliva sample. Plastic particles were either stained red and counted under a microscope or analyzed by Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy, which also provided the polymer composition.
Lowe measured an average of 100 microplastics released per gram of gum, though some individual gum pieces released as many as 600 microplastics per gram. A typical piece of gum weighs between 2 and 6 grams, meaning a large piece of gum could release up to 3,000 plastic particles. If the average person chews 160 to 180 small sticks of gum per year, the researchers estimated that could result in the ingestion of around 30,000 microplastics. If the average person consumes tens of thousands of microplastics per year, gum chewing could greatly increase the ingested amount.
Microplastics in beer, tea, and mineral water
Those gas station beverages — even ones housed in glass containers — almost universally contain microplastics “without exception,” according to one study of beer, tea, and mineral water.
Via Analyst (emphasis added):
Daily drinks produced worldwide, including beer, mineral water and tea, are all polluted with microplastics without exception. The number of microplastics investigated in this work lies in the range of 20–80 mL−1 for the beers, 10 mL−1 for the bottled mineral water, and 200–500 g−1 for the tea leaves. Quasi-spherical particles and irregular fragments dominate the shape of microplastics in beer and mineral water, whereas tea leaves carry numerous microplastic fibers. By identification through Raman spectroscopy, we observed the presence of polystyrene (PS) and polypropylene (PP) microplastics in beers, PP in bottled mineral water, and polyethylene (PE) and polyethylene terephthalate (PET) in tea leaves. Possible contamination sources include raw materials, atmosphere, and tools and containers that release microplastics.
Microplastics in teabags
Regarding that morning cup of matcha, the tea itself might contain microplastics, but so likely does the teabag it comes in.
Via Chemosphere (emphasis added):
This study investigates the release of [micro/nanoplastics] MNPLs from three commercially available teabags. By simulating tea preparation, MNPL samples were extracted and characterized using a range of analytical techniques: scanning electron microscopy (SEM), transmission electron microscopy (TEM), attenuated total reflectance/Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (ATR-FTIR), dynamic light scattering (DLS), laser Doppler velocimetry (LDV), and nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA). The results confirmed that the teabags were made of nylon-6 (NY6), polypropylene (PP), and cellulose (CL) and that microfibers and nano-range particles (NPLs) were present in the leachates…
NTA data revealed that the number of released NPLs was 1.20 × 109/mL (PP; 136.7 nm), 1.35 × 108/mL (CL; 244 nm), and 8.18 × 106/mL (NY6; 138.4). The leachate particles were then stained with iDye Poly-Pink and used to expose three human intestine-derived cell types (Caco-2, HT29, and HT29-MTX) to assess their biointeractions and the role of the mucosubstances in vitro. The results demonstrated that after 24 h of exposure to 100 μg/mL NPLs, there was significant uptake of PP-NPLs in HT29-MTX cells, as a model of cells segregating high amount of mucus.
In an upcoming article, I’ll explore some of the potential health ramifications of these ubiquitous particles, as well as potential strategies to reduce exposure and purge them from the body.
