5 ms·

This is the third time this week I've seen a study related to microplastics. Should I be alarmed? If so, what can I even do? If I'm understanding these studies

by m_a_g 3y ago

This is the third time this week I've seen a study related to microplastics. Should I be alarmed? If so, what can I even do? If I'm understanding these studies correctly, these microplastics are everywhere. In our bodies, in our water supplies, in our food. And we can't even get rid of them.

literalAardvark 3y ago
We can reduce the ingested quantity. That's about all.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- wendyshu 3y ago
  Does most of the microplastic we ingest come from household plastics or from the environment?
nonethewiser 3y ago
These are great questions. I think it's impossible to say for sure. It is at once a real problem (because they exist and cause problems) and a boogeyman because you never really know where they are and how much is going to be a problem for you. So be completely apathetic. Or always be afraid of everything and perform some purity rituals that give you some peace of mind despite not really knowing anything. Like drinking bottled water only despite that maybe having more, or installing expensive filtration systems without testing before or after for the existence of microplastics or effectiveness of the filter. Or telling your kid not to drink certain water because its not safe, despite having no actual knowledge of any risk. Obviously we should continue to gather more information and remediate what we can but I think there is also a problem with fear-based behavior that just spreads anxiety baselessly.
- Semaphor 3y ago
  I mean, some things will reduce your plastic exposure without requiring measurements. Glass containers, metal bowls, no non-stick pans. That still leaves open if that results in different health outcomes, but it’s still something you can do without having high-tech measurement devices.
  - gniv 3y ago
    I'm not sure that helps. I suspect -- but I would really like to know -- that the sources of microplastics are non-obvious. I've heard of cosmetics, textiles, tea bags, foams as the most likely culprits, rather than plastic containers at room temperature, which I think are pretty stable.
    - Semaphor 3y ago
      > plastic containers at room temperature Part of the issue, though. They often take food that’s above room temperature, bowls might get scratched by utensils, containers might be used in the microwave.
  - nonethewiser 3y ago
    Well I'm talking about water specifically. In theory I agree that we can avoid things we know are harming us. But there is a balance to be struck between avoiding things out of an abundance of precaution and paranoia. Let's not forget that mental health issues including anxiety have skyrocketed the past few decades. At some point it has to be measured or else we wouldn't know its harmful. With microplastics and water, you need to know what comes out of your faucet (or whatever you are drinking). You can't just rely on some study analogous to those finding issues with eating teflon or using it on very high heat. And not drinking out of plastic cups seems firmly in baseless anxiety territory.
- yakcyll 3y ago
  I agree with the perspective that it's impossible to tell exactly, with confidence, how harmful they are and what each of us should do. The topic may not be fresh, but the awareness of the dangers is. If you aren't willing to go with the intuition that having non-degradable artificial compounds in your body sounds 'bad', then I'd personally go for what seems to be a reasonable middle ground, likely what most of us are already doing, which is - stay on the look out. Assimilate trustworthy data (on the question of what constitutes trustworthy data - that which comes from sources striving for integrity and rigor and not from anecdotes), be ready to adjust, steel yourself for possibly drastic changes in the future. Personally, I find the argument that the data we currently have is not enough to force us to make such changes absolutely understandable - but at the same time, I find this kind of inertia unwarranted in the age where the world looked almost unrecognisable just a decade ago.
tmountain 3y ago
I’m personally exhausted from hearing about all the terrible stuff that’s happening that I have very little to no control over. I have seen countless articles about micro plastics, forever chemicals, fresh water supplies decreasing at alarming levels, Gulf Stream collapse, etc. It’s enough to make you feel nihilistic. A big part of me feels like these are government problems, as the average person is preoccupied with paying the bills, feeding their kids, and all the other trivialities that we deal with on a daily basis. That said, most governments are mired in bureaucracy at best, or downright dysfunctional (or anti environmental) at the worst. So… what’s a guy to do besides “chop wood, carry water” while trying to enjoy life as best I can?
- fsflover 3y ago
  Try to affect the political decisions? Donate to Greenpeace or similar organizations?
  - yakcyll 3y ago
    No need for question marks. I think we really need to square off with the idea that, while we will personally not cause or contribute highly to major shifts in how the world operates, there are ways to contribute - even a simple e-mail to your representatives - that should be undertaken in earnest by each and every one of us, even if we don't feel that they will make an impact. Most people don't - and that's why the impact is negligible. We really should assertively encourage each other to participate, even to the smallest degree. I think I and a lot of people around me got used to the relative comfort in life. To the sceptics this may sounds like just more scaremongering, but let's face it, it _has_ been getting worse in many more ways than we wanted or expected over the last decade. The least we can do to try to revert this trend is to attend a march, send an e-mail or try to spare some time to vote. Nobody can ignore the fact, that it will not reverse itself on its own.
  - bluefirebrand 3y ago
    Donating to organizations that are anti-nuclear power seems counter productive to me.
safety1st 3y ago
My $0.02: no. A) The research is still very much in its infancy. We don't know how big of a deal microplastics are to human health yet. In a couple years we'll have a better idea. B) There's not much you can do about them. This is compounded by A). Maybe certain types, sizes, forms of exposure etc. are more significant? We don't know any of this yet. C) You have a limited capacity for anxiety without going crazy, allocate it wisely. If we want to be anxious about our health, for most people being anxious about diet and exercise habits will yield better returns than just about anything else...!
- dwaltrip 3y ago
  C is so important.
- bamboozled 3y ago
  You already kind of know that it would be better if our bodies weren't infiltrated with microplastics though don't you?
  - DrThunder 3y ago
    Yes, so offer an alternative. How will you keep everyone from dying from food-borne illnesses? What about all the items we manufacture that REQUIRE plastics? We're not using them just because it's fun and we like loading people with plastic bits. It would be better if disease magically didn't exist too but that's a useless thing to say.
lasermike026 3y ago
Stop buying single use plastics. Stop using them. Spread the word and lobby you representatives. Find a group, make a friend, and work, work, work.
ekianjo 3y ago
> This is the third time this week I've seen a study related to microplastics Most of Science is utter junk, driven by the willingness or desperate effort to publish anything to make a career in academia or funded by special interests. What matters is what can be consistently replicated, observed and explained.
- gremlinsinc 3y ago
  what special interest benefits from showing negative impacts to mps? you've got to think who has the most to lose our gain. This is a more trustworthy study because usually showing negatives about huge entrenched products is fought by the special interests like plastic/oil companies, or DuPont in the case of Teflon aka forever chemicals. Though I think worrying about it is fruitless as we're more likely to solve global warming than get all the Chemicals and plastic out of our blood globally, and that's worth the worry because there are at least things we can do to mitigate things(assuming political will ever signs)
  - throwaway92837 3y ago
    It’s not trustworthy until dozens of independent labs across several countries can validate it.
tikkun 3y ago
See here for some notes on ranking possible concerns plus notes on what I've done about them: 1) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36226432 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36226432 2) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34642916 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34642916 3) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31549343 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31549343
spicyusername 3y ago
Seems to me you can either: - Pick a "Big Cause" and go find a job supporting it - Accept the things you cannot change, kick back, relax, and live the life you got, whatever happens You don't really want to be in the middle, where you stress about all the bad things, but don't actually do anything about it.
yuumei 3y ago
One thing you can do personally to reduce the amount in your body is to donate blood
- bamboozled 3y ago
  Don't you just make someone else more poisoned then ? Seems shit...
  - bluefirebrand 3y ago
    Presumably, alive and full of microplastics is still better than just being dead, which is usually what happens when you don't get blood transfusions when you need them.
    - bamboozled 3y ago
      Not all transfusions are used in emergency situations.
  - sva_ 3y ago
    The recipient could donate blood themselves later and produce 'clean' blood on their own. It is not zero-sum.
- sva_ 3y ago
  I think you mean PFAS, not microplastics
  - yuumei 3y ago
    You’re right I was thinking of PFAS chemicals, I wouldn’t be surprised if there are micro plastics in blood now however
DrThunder 3y ago
You can't do anything about it. Personally, I think it's probably being a bit overblown. It's definitely not good but some of these articles make it sound like you'll drop dead in a few days. Plastics have enabled us to keep food fresh and have done a lot of things to keep humans living longer and healthier than they ever could in the past. Our modern food preservation couldn't exist without them. So, yeah we need to be better but I think people should be looking at the overall picture. I don't see an alternative for plastic right now.
KillerRAK 3y ago
Someone hired a PR firm and launched a campaign. That is all -- continue living your life.
nazgulnarsil 3y ago
I've started donating blood and eating cabbage regularly on the story that those things are good at getting crap out of the system and good for me otherwise anyway.

by m_a_g 3y ago

literalAardvark 3y ago

We can reduce the ingested quantity. That's about all.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
wendyshu 3y ago
Does most of the microplastic we ingest come from household plastics or from the environment?

nonethewiser 3y ago

These are great questions. I think it's impossible to say for sure. It is at once a real problem (because they exist and cause problems) and a boogeyman because you never really know where they are and how much is going to be a problem for you. So be completely apathetic. Or always be afraid of everything and perform some purity rituals that give you some peace of mind despite not really knowing anything. Like drinking bottled water only despite that maybe having more, or installing expensive filtration systems without testing before or after for the existence of microplastics or effectiveness of the filter. Or telling your kid not to drink certain water because its not safe, despite having no actual knowledge of any risk. Obviously we should continue to gather more information and remediate what we can but I think there is also a problem with fear-based behavior that just spreads anxiety baselessly.

Semaphor 3y ago
I mean, some things will reduce your plastic exposure without requiring measurements. Glass containers, metal bowls, no non-stick pans. That still leaves open if that results in different health outcomes, but it’s still something you can do without having high-tech measurement devices.
- gniv 3y ago
  I'm not sure that helps. I suspect -- but I would really like to know -- that the sources of microplastics are non-obvious. I've heard of cosmetics, textiles, tea bags, foams as the most likely culprits, rather than plastic containers at room temperature, which I think are pretty stable.
  - Semaphor 3y ago
    > plastic containers at room temperature Part of the issue, though. They often take food that’s above room temperature, bowls might get scratched by utensils, containers might be used in the microwave.
- nonethewiser 3y ago
  Well I'm talking about water specifically. In theory I agree that we can avoid things we know are harming us. But there is a balance to be struck between avoiding things out of an abundance of precaution and paranoia. Let's not forget that mental health issues including anxiety have skyrocketed the past few decades. At some point it has to be measured or else we wouldn't know its harmful. With microplastics and water, you need to know what comes out of your faucet (or whatever you are drinking). You can't just rely on some study analogous to those finding issues with eating teflon or using it on very high heat. And not drinking out of plastic cups seems firmly in baseless anxiety territory.
yakcyll 3y ago
I agree with the perspective that it's impossible to tell exactly, with confidence, how harmful they are and what each of us should do. The topic may not be fresh, but the awareness of the dangers is. If you aren't willing to go with the intuition that having non-degradable artificial compounds in your body sounds 'bad', then I'd personally go for what seems to be a reasonable middle ground, likely what most of us are already doing, which is - stay on the look out. Assimilate trustworthy data (on the question of what constitutes trustworthy data - that which comes from sources striving for integrity and rigor and not from anecdotes), be ready to adjust, steel yourself for possibly drastic changes in the future. Personally, I find the argument that the data we currently have is not enough to force us to make such changes absolutely understandable - but at the same time, I find this kind of inertia unwarranted in the age where the world looked almost unrecognisable just a decade ago.

tmountain 3y ago

I’m personally exhausted from hearing about all the terrible stuff that’s happening that I have very little to no control over. I have seen countless articles about micro plastics, forever chemicals, fresh water supplies decreasing at alarming levels, Gulf Stream collapse, etc. It’s enough to make you feel nihilistic. A big part of me feels like these are government problems, as the average person is preoccupied with paying the bills, feeding their kids, and all the other trivialities that we deal with on a daily basis. That said, most governments are mired in bureaucracy at best, or downright dysfunctional (or anti environmental) at the worst. So… what’s a guy to do besides “chop wood, carry water” while trying to enjoy life as best I can?

fsflover 3y ago
Try to affect the political decisions? Donate to Greenpeace or similar organizations?
- yakcyll 3y ago
  No need for question marks. I think we really need to square off with the idea that, while we will personally not cause or contribute highly to major shifts in how the world operates, there are ways to contribute - even a simple e-mail to your representatives - that should be undertaken in earnest by each and every one of us, even if we don't feel that they will make an impact. Most people don't - and that's why the impact is negligible. We really should assertively encourage each other to participate, even to the smallest degree. I think I and a lot of people around me got used to the relative comfort in life. To the sceptics this may sounds like just more scaremongering, but let's face it, it _has_ been getting worse in many more ways than we wanted or expected over the last decade. The least we can do to try to revert this trend is to attend a march, send an e-mail or try to spare some time to vote. Nobody can ignore the fact, that it will not reverse itself on its own.
- bluefirebrand 3y ago
  Donating to organizations that are anti-nuclear power seems counter productive to me.

safety1st 3y ago

My $0.02: no. A) The research is still very much in its infancy. We don't know how big of a deal microplastics are to human health yet. In a couple years we'll have a better idea. B) There's not much you can do about them. This is compounded by A). Maybe certain types, sizes, forms of exposure etc. are more significant? We don't know any of this yet. C) You have a limited capacity for anxiety without going crazy, allocate it wisely. If we want to be anxious about our health, for most people being anxious about diet and exercise habits will yield better returns than just about anything else...!

dwaltrip 3y ago
C is so important.
bamboozled 3y ago
You already kind of know that it would be better if our bodies weren't infiltrated with microplastics though don't you?
- DrThunder 3y ago
  Yes, so offer an alternative. How will you keep everyone from dying from food-borne illnesses? What about all the items we manufacture that REQUIRE plastics? We're not using them just because it's fun and we like loading people with plastic bits. It would be better if disease magically didn't exist too but that's a useless thing to say.

lasermike026 3y ago

Stop buying single use plastics. Stop using them. Spread the word and lobby you representatives. Find a group, make a friend, and work, work, work.

ekianjo 3y ago

> This is the third time this week I've seen a study related to microplastics Most of Science is utter junk, driven by the willingness or desperate effort to publish anything to make a career in academia or funded by special interests. What matters is what can be consistently replicated, observed and explained.

gremlinsinc 3y ago
what special interest benefits from showing negative impacts to mps? you've got to think who has the most to lose our gain. This is a more trustworthy study because usually showing negatives about huge entrenched products is fought by the special interests like plastic/oil companies, or DuPont in the case of Teflon aka forever chemicals. Though I think worrying about it is fruitless as we're more likely to solve global warming than get all the Chemicals and plastic out of our blood globally, and that's worth the worry because there are at least things we can do to mitigate things(assuming political will ever signs)
- throwaway92837 3y ago
  It’s not trustworthy until dozens of independent labs across several countries can validate it.

tikkun 3y ago

See here for some notes on ranking possible concerns plus notes on what I've done about them: 1) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36226432 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36226432 2) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34642916 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34642916 3) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31549343 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31549343

spicyusername 3y ago

Seems to me you can either: - Pick a "Big Cause" and go find a job supporting it - Accept the things you cannot change, kick back, relax, and live the life you got, whatever happens You don't really want to be in the middle, where you stress about all the bad things, but don't actually do anything about it.

yuumei 3y ago

One thing you can do personally to reduce the amount in your body is to donate blood

bamboozled 3y ago
Don't you just make someone else more poisoned then ? Seems shit...
- bluefirebrand 3y ago
  Presumably, alive and full of microplastics is still better than just being dead, which is usually what happens when you don't get blood transfusions when you need them.
  - bamboozled 3y ago
    Not all transfusions are used in emergency situations.
- sva_ 3y ago
  The recipient could donate blood themselves later and produce 'clean' blood on their own. It is not zero-sum.
sva_ 3y ago
I think you mean PFAS, not microplastics
- yuumei 3y ago
  You’re right I was thinking of PFAS chemicals, I wouldn’t be surprised if there are micro plastics in blood now however

DrThunder 3y ago

You can't do anything about it. Personally, I think it's probably being a bit overblown. It's definitely not good but some of these articles make it sound like you'll drop dead in a few days. Plastics have enabled us to keep food fresh and have done a lot of things to keep humans living longer and healthier than they ever could in the past. Our modern food preservation couldn't exist without them. So, yeah we need to be better but I think people should be looking at the overall picture. I don't see an alternative for plastic right now.

KillerRAK 3y ago

Someone hired a PR firm and launched a campaign. That is all -- continue living your life.

nazgulnarsil 3y ago

I've started donating blood and eating cabbage regularly on the story that those things are good at getting crap out of the system and good for me otherwise anyway.