5 ms·
Microplastics found in human stools for the first time (2018)
- tracker1 8y agoIt's looking like a very large problem... It's definitely in the seafood. Garbage should NEVER have been just dumped into the waters... There's plenty of land for managed landfills that work much better. I'm not against plastics, but some decisions are just plain stupid.
- paganel 8y agoMany “managed landfills” are not that particularly well-managed and said plastics infiltrate the ground-water, which then make their way into rivers, which then make their way into the sea/ocean.
- mistrial9 8y agoI suspect this varies highly with the jurisdiction, and the ownership's management of the site.
- DanBC 8y agoHow do you wash your clothing? That releases thousands of microplastics every wash. These aren't caught by filters in the home, and most aren't caught by filters at the water company.
- sametmax 8y agoIf you wear synthetic.
- pureliquidhw 8y agoWhich I'm willing to bet almost everyone in the US does. You would have to go WAY out of the way to only wear natural fibers with no synthetic component.
- DanBC 8y agoIt's pretty hard to find clothing that has zero synthetic content, and across 7bn people it all adds up.
- tshannon 8y agoPlastics break down into smaller microplastics in the sun. On land they collect more sun then when partially or totally submerged in the ocean. Rain then washes these microplastics from landfills into ground water. Plastic in the ocean is a huge problem, but it's not the only source of microplastics, and it might not even be the largest.
- theandrewbailey 8y agoEasier said than done. Most plastic (and other garbage) floating in the ocean comes from developing economies that can't afford or will not build landfills or proper garbage infrastructure.
- perfunctory 8y ago> “more than 50% of the world population might have microplastics in their stools” > “The smallest microplastic particles are capable of entering the bloodstream, the lymphatic system, and may even reach the liver,” Sometimes I wonder what will kill us first - climate change or toxins.
- doctorcroc 8y agoNo need for dichotomy here. Both types of pollution (heat trapping molecules and plastics) are waste from a consumption culture that doesn't think long term about material life cycles. When we make progress as a species, we will realize that all environmental impact is interrelated and needs to be assessed well before we "move fast and break things"
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- WorldMaker 8y agoRight, the likely answer is both will kill us, and many of these things seem to be correlated in so many ugly ways. Let's not forget also that Plastics are "cheap" to consume precisely because they originate as by-products/waste-products of fossil fuel consumption. One consumption problem indirectly produces the other.
- linuxftw 8y agoToxins. Climate change is relatively all hype.
- chupa-chups 8y agoI can't believe this (the "first time" part), since microplastics are used in many cosmetic products for years, including tooth paste: https://www.mcsuk.org/downloads/pollution/positionpaper-microplastics-august2012.pdf https://www.mcsuk.org/downloads/pollution/positionpaper-micr...
- kevin_b_er 8y agoIn this we will need regulation to prevent the lazy from destroying the environment and possibly poisoning all of us. These microplastics are becoming an increasing problem. It stems from lack of responsibility in the preserving the commons.
- koosnel 8y agoQuestion. Is there any researh that show negative health effects on humans with micro plastics in their stool?
- koosnel 8y agoI didn't have time to read the article.
- AstralStorm 8y agoCongratulations, you've found something. Now, show us any convincing analysis that it is a problem. Preferably an RCT or similar analysis with control group. This will be extremely tricky to test, you'd need essentially people isolated from modern world.