14 ms·

So what? This is a legitimate question, not a dismissive hand-wave. So what? What does this mean? Is this bad? Why? Surely all that plastic doesn’t stick arou

So what? This is a legitimate question, not a dismissive hand-wave. So what? What does this mean? Is this bad? Why? Surely all that plastic doesn’t stick around forever—I’m fairly certain I don’t have any PVC pipes in my gut, though it’s been a while since I’ve checked. What are the consequences of eating this much plastic? They certainly aren’t obvious. I don’t want an article that just throws a bunch of analogies in my face with pictures of various comparably-sized plastic objects. Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate the artistic touch, but I’m much more interested in understanding what this means. Where’s the research to go along with this? I expect journalists to dig deeper. Interview some experts; summarize studies of the consequences. Don’t just tell me I eat a lot of plastic—on its own, that’s useless information.

anotheryou 6y ago
I'd be interested on how much dust, pollen and sand I eat in comparison.
- userbinator 6y ago
  ...and insects.
headmelted 6y ago
So you’re correct in saying you’d need more information to draw conclusions, but the big concern at this point in time is that we really have no idea what impact this has. This is potentially much worse than eating a bunch of plastic one time that you’ll ultimately pass right on through (given that these are microscopic particulates in the digestive tract). In essence the big concern here is cancer. We know that particulates at or around 0.3 microns (the Most Penetrating Particle Size) have been linked to a variety of abdominal cancers in humans throughout the last hundred years. Critically, these types of cancers can take up to 50 years to form and cause serious enough problems to be detected (and seldom less than a couple of decades), so although billions of people have consumed micro-plastics, we still have no way of knowing what impact that will have on their health in later years. This is exactly what happened in the case of asbestos - it took so long for the consequences to show up after exposure that it seemed far-fetched to draw a correlation between asbestos and the cancers it caused. When coupled with cover-ups of the evidence by mining companies, the common use of asbestos skyrocketed long after it was known how deadly it was in private - but before public awareness had sounded alarm bells. The worry is that accumulated micro-plastics could be deadly in later life, but that we don’t find that out until hundreds of millions of people have become terminally ill.
- littlestymaar 6y ago
  The example of asbestos is interesting, because it was actually know since the roman empire that it was toxic. Juvenal wrote about the disease suffered by asbestos miners in the beginning of the 2nd century! As you mentioned, the problem is never knowledge: it's the political fact between wealthy corporations and people's interest. Companies try to cover their mess up for as long as they can, by every possible mean. They know it won't last forever, but it doesn't really matter since they banked up their profits in the meantime and people in charge almost never suffer legal consequences for their actions…
- tutfbhuf 6y ago
  > The worry is that accumulated micro-plastics could be deadly in later life, but that we don’t find that out until hundreds of millions of people have become terminally ill. But even if this scenario were to happen, is there anything we can do about it? Maybe it is already too late and we can only analyze what we could have made better, not what we can.
  - germinalphrase 6y ago
    It is certainly establishes an obligation to be good ancestors.
    - scoot_718 6y ago
      Already fucked up there.
      - germinalphrase 6y ago
        The time is always now.
      - nemacol 6y ago
        A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they shall never sit in.
- 6y ago
omarhaneef 6y ago
https://ecologycenter.org/factsheets/adverse-health-effects-of-plastics/ https://ecologycenter.org/factsheets/adverse-health-effects-...
4gotunameagain 6y ago
The first problem reported with plasticizers was endocrine disruption [1]. This has been linked to the reduction of fetal anogenital distance, a key marker in determining the sex of a fetus [2]. This causes various reproductive disorders [3]. I am convinced that this contributes to the apparent feminization of human societies, a topic that apparently cannot be brought up for discussion in the US due to the ludicrous contemporary political climate. 1: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016648014004225 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001664801... 2: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16079079/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16079079/ 3: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00204-018-2350-5 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00204-018-2350-5
- cassepipe 6y ago
  >the apparent feminization of human societies Wow, could you elaborate or backup this claim? Do you mean that it explains that there are more female born than male? Probably not since you say it can't be talked about so you're hinting at a more ideological and thus controversial claim : That masculine values are on the down or something of that kind. If that's your opinion, well it is a classic overheard reactionary argument about the pacification of social relationships and how war forge "real" men and you just disappointed me.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - bumby 6y ago
    I don’t know, but they may be referring to studies that postulate environmental (as well as other) factors contributing to the general lowering of testosterone and fertility in men over the past few decades. https://uk.reuters.com/article/health-testosterone-levels-dc-idUKKIM16976320061101 https://uk.reuters.com/article/health-testosterone-levels-dc...
  - yarcob 6y ago
    > could you elaborate or backup this claim I'm pretty sure they can't. The preceding paragraph contains 3 links to references, which is a pretty transparent attempt to make it seem like the incendiary sentence that follows isn't completely made up hogwash.
seanalltogether 6y ago
I'm equally curious. Lets say for the sake of argument that I eat as much plastic per year as I do clay and sand. How would that affect me in ways that those other minerals don't.
kylnew 6y ago
One thing that scares me is that this amount of plastic consumption is only increasing as we dump more and more plastic. I’m not sure when it will reach that point that it’s clearly too much even if the amount we consume isn’t harmful for now. Many of these plastics take thousands of years to break down completely.
thatcat 6y ago
>So what? Many plasticizers mimic the function of hormones like estrogen. Would you like to dose yourself with unregulated amounts of hormone analogs and hope it all works out?
elicash 6y ago
If you'd prefer to read one of a million articles that lay out what you suggest (most say we need more data), then I suggest you google the topic. I'd imagine more people will do just that, thanks to this piece! I personally have done that reading and so was already familiar with micro plastics. However, I had never had a good sense of the quantity until these photos visualized it. I hope this "In Pictures" article introduces more people to this subject because most people aren't aware of this being a potential issue. (The person down thread who noted this piece uses upper limits without noting it has a valid critique.)
goodcanadian 6y ago
My lay understanding is that we don't know about the plastics themselves as other commenters have said. However, apparently, other toxic chemicals in the environment bond readily to the plastics and that becomes a mechanism by which those chemicals get into our bodies.
cptskippy 6y ago
> Don’t just tell me I eat a lot of plastic—on its own, that’s useless information. Is it though? I don't think I've read an article that quantifies how much plastic we ingest in relatable terms or quantities. Most people may even be unaware that we ingest any appreciable amount. Many people remember the BPA bottle recalls and know what/why everything says BPA free on it these days. And I think this article would inspire people to start asking themselves if that's a problem. Not everyone gets upset and dismissive when something they read isn't a one stop shop for any and all information on a subject. They do occasionally seek additional information.
badconvincer 6y ago
Plastics such as parabens are endocrine disrupters and weak estrogen mimics. Sounds hellish to me.

anotheryou 6y ago

I'd be interested on how much dust, pollen and sand I eat in comparison.

userbinator 6y ago
...and insects.

headmelted 6y ago

So you’re correct in saying you’d need more information to draw conclusions, but the big concern at this point in time is that we really have no idea what impact this has. This is potentially much worse than eating a bunch of plastic one time that you’ll ultimately pass right on through (given that these are microscopic particulates in the digestive tract). In essence the big concern here is cancer. We know that particulates at or around 0.3 microns (the Most Penetrating Particle Size) have been linked to a variety of abdominal cancers in humans throughout the last hundred years. Critically, these types of cancers can take up to 50 years to form and cause serious enough problems to be detected (and seldom less than a couple of decades), so although billions of people have consumed micro-plastics, we still have no way of knowing what impact that will have on their health in later years. This is exactly what happened in the case of asbestos - it took so long for the consequences to show up after exposure that it seemed far-fetched to draw a correlation between asbestos and the cancers it caused. When coupled with cover-ups of the evidence by mining companies, the common use of asbestos skyrocketed long after it was known how deadly it was in private - but before public awareness had sounded alarm bells. The worry is that accumulated micro-plastics could be deadly in later life, but that we don’t find that out until hundreds of millions of people have become terminally ill.

littlestymaar 6y ago
The example of asbestos is interesting, because it was actually know since the roman empire that it was toxic. Juvenal wrote about the disease suffered by asbestos miners in the beginning of the 2nd century! As you mentioned, the problem is never knowledge: it's the political fact between wealthy corporations and people's interest. Companies try to cover their mess up for as long as they can, by every possible mean. They know it won't last forever, but it doesn't really matter since they banked up their profits in the meantime and people in charge almost never suffer legal consequences for their actions…
tutfbhuf 6y ago
> The worry is that accumulated micro-plastics could be deadly in later life, but that we don’t find that out until hundreds of millions of people have become terminally ill. But even if this scenario were to happen, is there anything we can do about it? Maybe it is already too late and we can only analyze what we could have made better, not what we can.
- germinalphrase 6y ago
  It is certainly establishes an obligation to be good ancestors.
  - scoot_718 6y ago
    Already fucked up there.
    - germinalphrase 6y ago
      The time is always now.
    - nemacol 6y ago
      A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they shall never sit in.
6y ago

omarhaneef 6y ago

https://ecologycenter.org/factsheets/adverse-health-effects-of-plastics/ https://ecologycenter.org/factsheets/adverse-health-effects-...

4gotunameagain 6y ago

The first problem reported with plasticizers was endocrine disruption [1]. This has been linked to the reduction of fetal anogenital distance, a key marker in determining the sex of a fetus [2]. This causes various reproductive disorders [3]. I am convinced that this contributes to the apparent feminization of human societies, a topic that apparently cannot be brought up for discussion in the US due to the ludicrous contemporary political climate. 1: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016648014004225 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001664801... 2: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16079079/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16079079/ 3: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00204-018-2350-5 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00204-018-2350-5

cassepipe 6y ago
>the apparent feminization of human societies Wow, could you elaborate or backup this claim? Do you mean that it explains that there are more female born than male? Probably not since you say it can't be talked about so you're hinting at a more ideological and thus controversial claim : That masculine values are on the down or something of that kind. If that's your opinion, well it is a classic overheard reactionary argument about the pacification of social relationships and how war forge "real" men and you just disappointed me.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- bumby 6y ago
  I don’t know, but they may be referring to studies that postulate environmental (as well as other) factors contributing to the general lowering of testosterone and fertility in men over the past few decades. https://uk.reuters.com/article/health-testosterone-levels-dc-idUKKIM16976320061101 https://uk.reuters.com/article/health-testosterone-levels-dc...
- yarcob 6y ago
  > could you elaborate or backup this claim I'm pretty sure they can't. The preceding paragraph contains 3 links to references, which is a pretty transparent attempt to make it seem like the incendiary sentence that follows isn't completely made up hogwash.

seanalltogether 6y ago

I'm equally curious. Lets say for the sake of argument that I eat as much plastic per year as I do clay and sand. How would that affect me in ways that those other minerals don't.

kylnew 6y ago

One thing that scares me is that this amount of plastic consumption is only increasing as we dump more and more plastic. I’m not sure when it will reach that point that it’s clearly too much even if the amount we consume isn’t harmful for now. Many of these plastics take thousands of years to break down completely.

thatcat 6y ago

>So what? Many plasticizers mimic the function of hormones like estrogen. Would you like to dose yourself with unregulated amounts of hormone analogs and hope it all works out?

elicash 6y ago

If you'd prefer to read one of a million articles that lay out what you suggest (most say we need more data), then I suggest you google the topic. I'd imagine more people will do just that, thanks to this piece! I personally have done that reading and so was already familiar with micro plastics. However, I had never had a good sense of the quantity until these photos visualized it. I hope this "In Pictures" article introduces more people to this subject because most people aren't aware of this being a potential issue. (The person down thread who noted this piece uses upper limits without noting it has a valid critique.)

goodcanadian 6y ago

My lay understanding is that we don't know about the plastics themselves as other commenters have said. However, apparently, other toxic chemicals in the environment bond readily to the plastics and that becomes a mechanism by which those chemicals get into our bodies.

cptskippy 6y ago

> Don’t just tell me I eat a lot of plastic—on its own, that’s useless information. Is it though? I don't think I've read an article that quantifies how much plastic we ingest in relatable terms or quantities. Most people may even be unaware that we ingest any appreciable amount. Many people remember the BPA bottle recalls and know what/why everything says BPA free on it these days. And I think this article would inspire people to start asking themselves if that's a problem. Not everyone gets upset and dismissive when something they read isn't a one stop shop for any and all information on a subject. They do occasionally seek additional information.

badconvincer 6y ago

Plastics such as parabens are endocrine disrupters and weak estrogen mimics. Sounds hellish to me.