3 ms·

I believe you are “technically” correct, but colloquially, “microplastic health effects” are believed to come from drinking water and food. Not industrial pollu

I believe you are “technically” correct, but colloquially, “microplastic health effects” are believed to come from drinking water and food. Not industrial pollution, which is apparently what Philips’ machine is microdosing their users with.

throwaway290 3y ago
Sounds like we just need to wait to accumulate a bit more of them?
- therealdrag0 3y ago
  The dose makes the poison.
  - throwaway290 3y ago
    Not really. For many things there is no "safe" level, eg. airborne PM2.5 pollution or lead. What you say is a bit of a common sense rule of thumb usually used for stuff we digest and poop out. So that may rule out microplastics, which was shown to cross into tissue (including lungs) which means it would accumulate. And definitely nanoplastic, as those enter even individual cells and screw up their mechanics. I wouldn't be surprised if in a few years we would consider no safe level of micro/nanoplastic exposure. Maybe we would already if not for the interests of manufacturers and oil industry.
  - throwaway290 3y ago
    I guess maybe you were agreeing with me but I responded as if you weren't
NoPicklez 3y ago
Colloquially, but we’re not talking colloquially, we’re talking about the Phillips machine and the fact that people’s lungs were being forced air of which included plastics. I wasn't providing an answer I was presenting a question like what the other commenter was, which is could those health effects have come from microplastics emitted from the foam. I’ve just read the FDA response which says: The potential risks of particulate exposure if inhaling or swallowing pieces of PE-PUR foam include: Irritation to the skin, eyes, nose, and respiratory tract (airway), Inflammatory response, Headache, Asthma, Toxic or cancer-causing effects to organs, such as kidneys and liver. So it looks like it is the case

throwaway290 3y ago

Sounds like we just need to wait to accumulate a bit more of them?

therealdrag0 3y ago
The dose makes the poison.
- throwaway290 3y ago
  Not really. For many things there is no "safe" level, eg. airborne PM2.5 pollution or lead. What you say is a bit of a common sense rule of thumb usually used for stuff we digest and poop out. So that may rule out microplastics, which was shown to cross into tissue (including lungs) which means it would accumulate. And definitely nanoplastic, as those enter even individual cells and screw up their mechanics. I wouldn't be surprised if in a few years we would consider no safe level of micro/nanoplastic exposure. Maybe we would already if not for the interests of manufacturers and oil industry.
- throwaway290 3y ago
  I guess maybe you were agreeing with me but I responded as if you weren't

NoPicklez 3y ago

Colloquially, but we’re not talking colloquially, we’re talking about the Phillips machine and the fact that people’s lungs were being forced air of which included plastics. I wasn't providing an answer I was presenting a question like what the other commenter was, which is could those health effects have come from microplastics emitted from the foam. I’ve just read the FDA response which says: The potential risks of particulate exposure if inhaling or swallowing pieces of PE-PUR foam include: Irritation to the skin, eyes, nose, and respiratory tract (airway), Inflammatory response, Headache, Asthma, Toxic or cancer-causing effects to organs, such as kidneys and liver. So it looks like it is the case