7 ms·

I find it impossible to put this into any kind of meaningful context. First of all, what's with the focus on tea bags? How does that compare with microplastics

I find it impossible to put this into any kind of meaningful context. First of all, what's with the focus on tea bags? How does that compare with microplastics entering our food and drink from the plastic-lined paper cups we drink hot tea and coffee out of, from the cling wrap that covers our food as we heat it in the microwave, from the Tupperware and other plastic containers we heat our food up in, from the bottled water that sits inside plastic for months, from all of the plastic bowls and utensils we use in our kitchens, from the disposable serrated plastic knife we might use at an event to cut our chicken, and so forth? Why tea bags? Second, how do "microplastics" compare to micro-everything else? Surely if you brew tea in a wooden container, "microwood" particles are entering the drink. Surely when you scrape your stainless steel spatula against your stainless steel skillet making scrambled eggs, "microsteel" particles are embedded in your eggs. How does the body deal with micro-everything? Is there any reason to think plastic is more harmful? Is there any specific supposed health consequence, like a specific type of cancer or increased aging or something?

bowmessage 2y ago
I don’t do anything in that list you just mentioned, and I will probably stop drinking tea from a bag now. This is helpful research.
- 0-_-0 2y ago
  Where do you find plastic tea bags? I don't think I've ever seen one.
  - TeaBrain 2y ago
    Mesh tea bags, like are used at Starbucks, are plastic.
  - bluejekyll 2y ago
    “The tea bags used for the research were made from the polymers nylon-6, polypropylene and cellulose.” They aren’t pure plastic.
    - amanaplanacanal 2y ago
      Those were three different bags, not all in one.
  - gaoshan 2y ago
    Most tea bags that you purchase anywhere use some level of plastics in their component materials and/or binding (especially this latter). The only safe options are metal strainers that you filter the tea with (and that hopefully don't have coatings on them that are harmful... boiling a new one would not be a bad idea before first use) or just loose leaf.
  - Suppafly 2y ago
    bourgie brands of tea come in little nylon pyramids instead of the normal paper/cloth bag.
- bagels 2y ago
  How do you cook food?
  - stevenwoo 2y ago
    It's not hard to cut out the exposure listed in the comment with a little effort and time, except for the steel thing which is a bit over the top.
    - woleium 2y ago
      it’s actually needed, see lucky fish: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucky_iron_fish https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucky_iron_fish
      - selimthegrim 2y ago
        Debatable efficacy.
  - marliechiller 2y ago
    Cast iron pots and pans
    - bagels 2y ago
      Not concerned about the chromium and vanadium present in most cast iron?
      - fhackenberger 2y ago
        I'm not deeply into that topic, but the pan I use that's made of iron was 'burned-in' using linseed oil several times to create a non-sticky surface. Whatever that has as negative side-effects aside, that layer might trap the iron additives quite effectively.
      - mixmastamyk 2y ago
        Chromium is a nutrient. Unclear if it is necessary or not.
- brookst 2y ago
  But is it? How confident are you that this is your greatest exposure? Odds are there is something else in your life at least 100x as bad. And what does it mean that cellulose, a naturally occurring compound, releases 15x more microplastics than nylon? Or does iy? This study didn’t measure nanoplastics. That’s what a lack of context does. No harm in just avoiding anything any study has found to be potentially harmful (especially tea bags, which are a crime against good tea and easily replaced). But… it’s impossible to know if this is the equivalent of stopping smoking, or of brushing teeth three times a day instead of two.
  - JKCalhoun 2y ago
    I think we're simply responding to the list the OP gave — which many of us do not do.
  - woleium 2y ago
    how do we find the 100x as bad thing if we do not do research like this. The authors did not write this to provide you with a guide for life, they are instead trying to increase our collective knowledge. I wonder sometimes if folks understand how science works.
    - Suppafly 2y ago
      >they are instead trying to increase our collective knowledge I'm not sure that's even clear since they seem to be conflating cellulose with microplastics.
      - woleium 2y ago
        i believe the bags are made from a mix of cellulose and plastic
        brookst 2y ago
        That seems like something research could look at. The problem is context. Lack of it. Good research contextualizes its findings.
- Vegenoid 2y ago
  You never have food or drink that was stored or served via plastic containers? How? I ask seriously - how do you live your life to entirely avoid this, while also not living a life so separate from society that you are drinking tea made from tea bags?
  - bowmessage 2y ago
    I never eat or drink anything heated in plastic when I can control it. Sure it may have been stored in plastic at some point, but not heated.
    - Suppafly 2y ago
      >I never eat or drink anything heated in plastic when I can control it. Do you avoid restaurants and cafeterias completely?
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - mixmastamyk 2y ago
        Restaurants, etc use stainless steel for heating, not plastic. To-go containers often have plastic and should be avoided but should not get to their melting point.
  - dylan604 2y ago
    Many people drink tea not from tea bags to the point that "many" isn't really descriptive enough. If you're a tea aficionado, you definitely don't. Which means there's an entire market of people doing things like an aficionado even if they are not; see audiophiles. Only mass market large brands push the tea bag. Good tea comes packaged as loose leaf meant to be used in whatever strainer you have.
- __MatrixMan__ 2y ago
  Lose leaf tea is much better anyway. You can get multiple infusions out of it which is nice if you don't need the caffeine the second time around (it's quite water soluble and mostly all goes in the first infusion). A second infusion with bags always just ends up kinda watery and sad. Something about the leaves being smaller...
  - acjohnson55 2y ago
    Yep. I used to regularly drink high-grade ti guan yin (a.k.a. iron goddess), and I could often get 8 steeps and still have plenty of flavor. The trick was to use a lot of tea and steep it for only 30 seconds. One of the advantages was how quick it was to get my next cup.
    - skirmish 2y ago
      Look up "gongfu steeping", it is a well established method, e.g. "15 to 30 seconds for the first infusion, then add 10 seconds to each subsequent infusion. If it seems a bit weak, leave it for longer."
- nycdatasci 2y ago
  In the study, they put 300 nylon/plastic bags into 1L of near-boiling water. Many bags are paper derivatives and not plastic. No need to completely stop enjoying tea.
vasco 2y ago
I mean, why not? I get your point but before wide encompassing studies and meta studies, a lot of things will be looked at because we can look at them. It's like asking why investigate dolphin language instead of all animal communication.
brokegrammer 2y ago
[flagged]
- xandrius 2y ago
  Just for your information, the attitude in this comment makes it hard to actually engage it in a serious conversation. It does have "conspiracy uncle" vibes and so people might avoid replying. Maybe that's your goal all along but if not, try to reread your comments before posting them, as they might not reflect how you actually want to come across with others.
  - brokegrammer 2y ago
    What did you find offensive about my comment?
    - icanhelp 2y ago
      The fact that you believe conspiracies are real, of course. Duh. Every Smart Person knows that powerful people never conspire. Also the definition of 'conspiracy' given in Black's Law Dictionary is a fiction; there is no such thing as conspiracies. At all. /s
righthand 2y ago
If you microwave your consumables in plastic that is on you. Microwavable plastic is a marketing myth. Put your food on a plate or bowl and cover it with a wet paper towel.
- dboreham 2y ago
  Isn't the wet paper towel and EM reflector? I use wax paper fwiw.
  - almostnormal 2y ago
    I use a second plate, upside down.
  - righthand 2y ago
    It would reflect under the paper towel too then, therefor serving it’s purpose.
- hindsightbias 2y ago
  What makes you think there isn't BPA in your paper towels? https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21939283/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21939283/
  - righthand 2y ago
    Because I was skeptical of paper towels too and only buy ones without. It is also noteworthy that the paper towel doesn’t soak in the consumable when reheating like a tea bag does.
- imglorp 2y ago
  We have a set of reusable silicone lids. They can withstand high temperature on stove or microwave and just rinse off. Hopefully they aren't found to release anything. Instead of a paper towel, we throw food on a plate or bowl and drop a lid on it. This also works in the fridge; one less thing to wash and nothing disposed.
throwaway984393 2y ago
[dead]
sharpshadow 2y ago
One should avoid all the things which you mentioned and using a microwave at all. The context is a comparison between good old paper tea bags.
- yreg 2y ago
  > using a microwave at all Why?
- hindsightbias 2y ago
  > good old paper https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21939283/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21939283/
  - sharpshadow 2y ago
    This study does not specifically mention paper tee bags. It mentions food contact paper but that’s something different. In Germany paper tea bags are made out of natural fiber without glue. But I would really like to know if this paper tea bags also release hefty amounts of microplastics, if somebody has a study please link. That those plastic tea bags are microplastic hell should have been obvious from the start. The first time I saw them until forever I will avoid them.
mandmandam 2y ago
These are all questions that are pretty easy to answer these days; perfectly appropriate for asking to an LLM or search engine. Long story shot - yes, this is a major problem. Yes, you're getting it from bottled water and plastic utensils and plastic lined cups. No, it's not like microwood. This shit is being found in every organ of our bodies from our sex organs to our brains. It's found in most wild animal samples, it's found in rain, it's found on Everest's peak and in the Mariana Trench. And every indication is that it's getting rapidly worse, scaling up with our ever-increasing plastic production. And there are perfectly good alternatives for the vast majority of this use, but the costs are a bit higher (since they're not being externalized onto the planet and our organs as much).
- stevenAthompson 2y ago
  [flagged]
protonbob 2y ago
We do know that microplastics may be reducing male fertility. I know there are others but I haven't done a ton of research [1]. Wood and stainless steel are different because we have evolved with these materials in our surroundings or at least something close to them. Also, wood, and even metals, do not have the staying power of plastic. We already do know that heavy metals are bad if they stick around in your body, but we do need metals in our diets as nutrients as well. It should be assumed that anything that we have invented in the last 200 years should be guilty until proven innocent at this point imo. So many of the "modern marvels" have shown to have horrible health effects. [1] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9134445/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9134445/
- woleium 2y ago
  The dangers of sawdust (micro wood?) vary from species of tree to tree, but are generally well known and studied. in particular Manchineel and Yew are known to be dangerous. Wood in its natural state is not a safe substance. African Mahogany for example is highly toxic, causing dermatitis, respiratory issues, giddiness, vomiting, boils, asthma, headaches, and nosebleeds. Has also been linked to nasal cancer. https://www.mountainwoodworker.com/articles/toxic_woods.pdf https://www.mountainwoodworker.com/articles/toxic_woods.pdf
  - scns 2y ago
    Wenge and Oak too.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- dylan604 2y ago
  > We do know that microplastics may be reducing male fertility. If we "know" something, would we still be using the word "may"? Know seems pretty strong for such a wishywashy result of "may". There's definitely research in fertility rates lowering. Phtalates are receiving a lot of attention as well as an example.
lukeschlather 2y ago
"Microwood" is basically just cellulose, aka insoluble fiber, which naturally exists in our food. "Microsteel" is just elemental iron which is a necessary nutrient. Microplastics are novel hydrocarbons that don't exist in nature. They're similar to cellulose but no organisms exist that eat them. They're believed to be nonreactive and therefore harmless but they might bioaccumulate which could be bad, or they might react with things in our bodies in unknown circumstances. We have limited experience with these molecules so it is hard to say.
- Zaskoda 2y ago
  Elegant and pithy answer to a well asked question.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 2y ago
  And plastics are full of endocrine disruptors, which are pretty bad for human health too.
  - amanaplanacanal 2y ago
    My current theory is that long term plastic exposure is what is driving the obesity epidemic.
- dbingham 2y ago
  Missing from this answer is the early evidence that they may be _very_ harmful. Early evidence suggests they are not non-reactive. They disrupt many of the body's systems in ways we're only beginning to understand. > Various examples of damage caused by microplastics have been reported, such as microplastic accumulation in the bodies of marine and aquatic organisms (leading to malnutrition), inflammation, reduced fertility, and mortality. The threats that microplastics present to the human body have not yet been clearly identified. However, previous reports have shown that ultrafine microplastic absorption resulted in complex toxicity in zebrafish,2 and that microplastics under 100 nm in size can reach almost all organs after entering the human body.3 Therefore, concerns exist regarding the negative effects of continuous microplastic accumulation in the human body. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10151227/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10151227/ > Microplastics have been found in a variety of organisms and multiple parts of the human body. We emphasize the potential impact of microplastics on the early exposure of infants and the early development of embryos. At present, the toxicity research on microplastics show that the exposure will cause intestinal injury, liver infection, flora imbalance, lipid accumulation, and then lead to metabolic disorder. In addition, the microplastic exposure increases the expression of inflammatory factors, inhibits the activity of acetylcholinesterase, reduces the quality of germ cells, and affects embryo development. At last, we speculate that the exposure of microplastics may be related to the formation of various chronic diseases. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/envhealth.3c00052 https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/envhealth.3c00052
seabass-labrax 2y ago
I've no idea why they chose teabags to study - one has to start somewhere, presumably - but I can answer the second question. The distinctive feature of plastics is the synthetic polymers that they contain, which classically feature bonds between oxygen atoms. These are extremely difficult for any organic process to break apart. Wood, however, can even be digested in small quantities, so 'microwood' will just break down into its constituent parts in the human body. The body can cope with metals and indeed has evolved to require a small amount, for instance in hemoglobin. We aren't fully aware of the implications of microplastics on health, but the main cause for concern is that we have no easy way of getting them out (either naturally or medically) in the event that they are harmful.
- cogman10 2y ago
  > I've no idea why they chose teabags to study I think they are a pretty reasonable thing to study. Teabags are porous plastic subjected to high heat. So the question has to be "what happens when these plastic baggies get exposed to high levels of heat? Does that liberate some of the plastic into the drink?" Particularly worthy because tea is one of the most common beverages consumed.
jasonlotito 2y ago
From the study linked in the article: "Overall, our findings contribute to a growing body of evidence on the pervasive nature of plastic pollution and its potential implications for human health. As the usage of plastics in food packaging continues to rise, scientific research and policymaking must address the challenges posed by MNPL contamination to ensure food safety and consumer well-being." > I find it impossible to put this into any kind of meaningful context. So? Your inability to find meaningful context in something is not important. Who are you and why should this article or study cater to you? Are you in the business of doing research on this topic? Or are you just an HN commenter? Your ignorance is not a sign of anything other than you being ignorant, and your inability to do something is just that: lack of skill. > First of all, what's with the focus on tea bags? Because you can't just assume. You test. That's science. Just assuming (your suggestion) is anti-science. And something we should NOT base our science off of. > Second, how do "microplastics" compare to micro-everything else? That's not what this study is trying to determine. It set out to determine how much microplastics came from tea bags. Why increase the scope. Other people are studying that. You really don't seem like someone who understands how this works. You don't put the puzzle together all at once, you put it together one piece at a time.
- wyxz 2y ago
  I find it quite ironic how many people on HN have a superiority complex to sites like Reddit, yet suffer the same pitfalls. Not reading the source material and going off of headlines or snippets. Asking for “context” and “why did they study this” is quite interesting, considering the scientific study whose entire purpose is to introduce this context is directly linked within the article.
- therealcamino 2y ago
  Exactly. This is a study about the exposure and absorption parts of the equation. The science is ongoing. People who can't deal with anything less than total certainty don't understand the process.
JKCalhoun 2y ago
> How does that compare with ... plastic-lined paper cups .. cling wrap that covers our food as we heat ... the Tupperware and other plastic containers we heat our food up in ... bottled water that sits inside plastic for months ... plastic bowls and utensils we use in our kitchens ... disposable serrated plastic knife... For myself, I don't do any of the above (with the possible exception of the last one once in a while). I thought everyone knew those were a bad idea. I do drink tea using tea bags though — and had no reason to believe there was plastic involved.
- xattt 2y ago
  This discussion is complicated by the loose (ha!) definition of tea bags. There’s about a million different tea bags. Some use denser paper, some are thin. Some are stapled, some are pressed. Some are stringed and some are not. Some are single-use cotton (which I learned about when a local tea brand stopped using them due to cost). Lipton makes a premium brand that uses a tetrahedral shaped micro-perforated plastic bag that very much could be shedding microplastics. It’s hard to have a discussion without a clear definition and terminology.
  - therealcamino 2y ago
    The paper describes the three kinds of tea bags tested, and how the results differ between them.
- cogman10 2y ago
  Just FYI, you can buy stainless steel loose leaf tea infusers. They don't cost a lot ($6->$15) and loose leaf tea is shockingly cheap. Just get a nice airtight container and some moister absorbing packets and you'll have great tea for a while. I bought like 1lbs ~2 years ago for about $20 and still haven't worked all the way through it :D.
  - prophesi 2y ago
    I will also say that loose leaf is an order of magnitude better tasting than bagged tea. The crush-tear-curl process of bagged tea will elicit a bitter brew from anything that isn't black tea, and lose a lot of its flavor. Not to mention they're likely using the leftover chaff from loose leaf production. I like to show friends a properly brewed Dragonwell green tea and a bug-bitten oolong to convert them to the loose leaf way.
__MatrixMan__ 2y ago
I think it's pretty reasonable to expect a bag made of a fine mesh of plastic to yield more tiny broken off pieces than something like plastic container. Also once you put your mind to it it's actually pretty easy to avoid most of the things you mentioned. There are glass or metal alternatives to pretty much everything plastic. Maybe not for creating an airtight seal over something like leftovers, but I think it's reasonable to expect that the food can sit in glass and have a plastic roof and still be relatively free of microplastics. More research is needed it seems pretty plausible that plastics, like asbestos, are only a hazard when friable.
- crazygringo 2y ago
  > I think it's pretty reasonable to expect a bag made of a fine mesh of plastic to yield more tiny broken off pieces than something like plastic container. Is it? The mesh bag goes through basically zero abrasion at less than 100°C. It just sits there in the mostly still water. Meanwhile, the plastic container might be in contact with fatty food way over 100°C. It gets scraped by pointy utensils. It gets abraded by a cleaning pad. It gets scratched and cloudy. It gets used hundreds of times. I'd be guessing the plastic container sheds orders of magnitude more microplastics.
  - __MatrixMan__ 2y ago
    I'd be interested in seeing this measured. Probably it depends on how much abuse the plastic container receives. I don't think mine ever come in contact with something > 50°C, and the dish scraper I use isn't very pointy, but ymmv. The reason I'm sticking with the tea-bag as the greater contributor is that I expect that the likelihood of a given region of plastic detaching and being washed into food/drink is related to: - how closely the overall piece resembles a sphere and how large that sphere is (e.g. whiskers are likely to be knocked off, whereas the center of a sphere is unlikely to be dug out - whether it has ever gone through this kind of treatment before Sort of like how when eating a donut covered in powered sugar 95% of the mess happens within the first second of handling it.
glenstein 2y ago
I absolutely agree that meaningful context would be helpful, but I don't see that as disqualifying. I appreciate that research is opportunistic, as often oriented toward discovery of new things not yet understood, as much about building up our factual understanding as interpretation. So sure, I want context, but I think this kind of exasperation is a bit misplaced, as I don't think the article or the research itself was intended to be a comprehensive account of the broader contexts you are looking for. If it was masquerading as such a thing, I would be in full agreement. So I think it's a fair point in general, but the way you are saying it here sounds an awful lot like you're holding up a stop sign and saying "don't do any more research!"
14 2y ago
If one had to study the entirety of a subject it would be impossible to do so in many cases. It is entirely reasonable for a researcher to pick one piece of the puzzle and study that. No it does not give the entire picture but it may help us understand the greater picture. Lastly if this was anywhere else besides HN there is a microwood entering you joke to be made.
wyxz 2y ago
> First of all, what’s with the focus on tea bags? Well, lucky for you, there's an entire scientific study detailing why they chose to study it and the methodologies they used. You know, the one linked in the article. It states: > Among the different food containers releasing MNPLs, teabags stand out. Recent investigations have elucidated that teabags significantly contribute to the release of millions of MNPLs, adding to their daily ingestion by humans. And this is just a snippet! Much more detail and context available within! The wonders of original sources.
JoeAltmaier 2y ago
There is no evidence of harm. Your body continually rids itself of them. This is a lot of passion and angst over what may be nothing.
lkbm 2y ago
>First of all, what's with the focus on tea bags? According to the paper[0]: > Among the different food containers releasing MNPLs, teabags stand out. Recent investigations have elucidated that teabags significantly contribute to the release of millions of MNPLs, adding to their daily ingestion by humans (Banaei et al., 2023). The cited Banaei et al., 2023[1] says "At this point, special attention should be paid to the release of MNPLs from the herbal/teabags, since during the soaking and steering processes, some MNPLs inevitably detach and migrate to the water solution", citing [2]...which is retracted with this explanation: "2 of the reviews for this manuscript were fictitious. 2 reviews were submitted under the name of known scientists without their knowledge." So, yeah. Sometimes it's interesting to follow citation chains a few steps. [0] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0045653524026377?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004565352... [1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304389423011822?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030438942... [2] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969722029308?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004896972...
Reason077 2y ago
> ”from the cling wrap that covers our food as we heat it in the microwave, from the Tupperware and other plastic containers we heat our food up in” You shouldn’t really be doing either of those things. Plastic tupperware will get damaged from heat if you use it in the microwave frequently, potentially contaminating your food. It’s best to transfer food to a heat-safe container (glass or ceramic) before microwaving. And definitely don’t use cling film in the microwave!
tonygiorgio 2y ago
Agreed. While some people are nit picking the comment here as “well don’t do any of those things,” it still doesn’t quantify the danger. Recently read from “Made to Stick”: “Don’t just say popcorn has 40g of trans fats. Everyone knows trans fats are bad, but how bad is bad? Say popcorn has more trans fats in one serving than a whole day of greasy junk food”
jklinger410 2y ago
Tea drinkers in shambles
evrenesat 2y ago
I eat processed, ready-to-eat stuff at home, heavily use microwave for heating, but I don't do/use any of the things you mentioned. I generally prefer loose leaf tea, but sometimes tea bags are easier, so I only buy brands that use natural tea bags. It's possible to reduce exposure to pollutants if you're willing to sacrifice some convenience.
stevebmark 2y ago
It is well established that heating plastic in a culinary context distributes significantly more microplastic into your food. Microplastics are also well established endocrine disrupters. Microplastics cross the blood brain barrier and may also permanently stay in your body. To what extent are these harmful? In what dose, over how much time? I don’t think that’s established. You could be cautionary, or wait for more science about how long it takes to reduce your fertility. It may also be inescapable, plastic is likely a permanent earth pollutant now, in your clothes, dust in the air, food, water, and most things in your home, including ones you abrasives use inside your body, like toothbrushes. Maybe only very high doses (like drinking tea from teabags once a day) have a detrimental health effect. Many compounds are lethal in high doses, and healthy, benign, or required for survival in low doses.
ugh123 2y ago
>First of all, what's with the focus on tea bags? >Second, how do "microplastics" compare to micro-everything else? Not sure I understand your criticism. I think choosing tea bags and microplastics in particular is a way to 'ground' a study and experiments into something practical, rather than something too broad, abstract, and/or un-relatable to consumers.

bowmessage 2y ago

I don’t do anything in that list you just mentioned, and I will probably stop drinking tea from a bag now. This is helpful research.

0-_-0 2y ago
Where do you find plastic tea bags? I don't think I've ever seen one.
- TeaBrain 2y ago
  Mesh tea bags, like are used at Starbucks, are plastic.
- bluejekyll 2y ago
  “The tea bags used for the research were made from the polymers nylon-6, polypropylene and cellulose.” They aren’t pure plastic.
  - amanaplanacanal 2y ago
    Those were three different bags, not all in one.
- gaoshan 2y ago
  Most tea bags that you purchase anywhere use some level of plastics in their component materials and/or binding (especially this latter). The only safe options are metal strainers that you filter the tea with (and that hopefully don't have coatings on them that are harmful... boiling a new one would not be a bad idea before first use) or just loose leaf.
- Suppafly 2y ago
  bourgie brands of tea come in little nylon pyramids instead of the normal paper/cloth bag.
bagels 2y ago
How do you cook food?
- stevenwoo 2y ago
  It's not hard to cut out the exposure listed in the comment with a little effort and time, except for the steel thing which is a bit over the top.
  - woleium 2y ago
    it’s actually needed, see lucky fish: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucky_iron_fish https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucky_iron_fish
    - selimthegrim 2y ago
      Debatable efficacy.
- marliechiller 2y ago
  Cast iron pots and pans
  - bagels 2y ago
    Not concerned about the chromium and vanadium present in most cast iron?
    - fhackenberger 2y ago
      I'm not deeply into that topic, but the pan I use that's made of iron was 'burned-in' using linseed oil several times to create a non-sticky surface. Whatever that has as negative side-effects aside, that layer might trap the iron additives quite effectively.
    - mixmastamyk 2y ago
      Chromium is a nutrient. Unclear if it is necessary or not.
brookst 2y ago
But is it? How confident are you that this is your greatest exposure? Odds are there is something else in your life at least 100x as bad. And what does it mean that cellulose, a naturally occurring compound, releases 15x more microplastics than nylon? Or does iy? This study didn’t measure nanoplastics. That’s what a lack of context does. No harm in just avoiding anything any study has found to be potentially harmful (especially tea bags, which are a crime against good tea and easily replaced). But… it’s impossible to know if this is the equivalent of stopping smoking, or of brushing teeth three times a day instead of two.
- JKCalhoun 2y ago
  I think we're simply responding to the list the OP gave — which many of us do not do.
- woleium 2y ago
  how do we find the 100x as bad thing if we do not do research like this. The authors did not write this to provide you with a guide for life, they are instead trying to increase our collective knowledge. I wonder sometimes if folks understand how science works.
  - Suppafly 2y ago
    >they are instead trying to increase our collective knowledge I'm not sure that's even clear since they seem to be conflating cellulose with microplastics.
    - woleium 2y ago
      i believe the bags are made from a mix of cellulose and plastic
      - brookst 2y ago
        That seems like something research could look at. The problem is context. Lack of it. Good research contextualizes its findings.
Vegenoid 2y ago
You never have food or drink that was stored or served via plastic containers? How? I ask seriously - how do you live your life to entirely avoid this, while also not living a life so separate from society that you are drinking tea made from tea bags?
- bowmessage 2y ago
  I never eat or drink anything heated in plastic when I can control it. Sure it may have been stored in plastic at some point, but not heated.
  - Suppafly 2y ago
    >I never eat or drink anything heated in plastic when I can control it. Do you avoid restaurants and cafeterias completely?
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - mixmastamyk 2y ago
      Restaurants, etc use stainless steel for heating, not plastic. To-go containers often have plastic and should be avoided but should not get to their melting point.
- dylan604 2y ago
  Many people drink tea not from tea bags to the point that "many" isn't really descriptive enough. If you're a tea aficionado, you definitely don't. Which means there's an entire market of people doing things like an aficionado even if they are not; see audiophiles. Only mass market large brands push the tea bag. Good tea comes packaged as loose leaf meant to be used in whatever strainer you have.
__MatrixMan__ 2y ago
Lose leaf tea is much better anyway. You can get multiple infusions out of it which is nice if you don't need the caffeine the second time around (it's quite water soluble and mostly all goes in the first infusion). A second infusion with bags always just ends up kinda watery and sad. Something about the leaves being smaller...
- acjohnson55 2y ago
  Yep. I used to regularly drink high-grade ti guan yin (a.k.a. iron goddess), and I could often get 8 steeps and still have plenty of flavor. The trick was to use a lot of tea and steep it for only 30 seconds. One of the advantages was how quick it was to get my next cup.
  - skirmish 2y ago
    Look up "gongfu steeping", it is a well established method, e.g. "15 to 30 seconds for the first infusion, then add 10 seconds to each subsequent infusion. If it seems a bit weak, leave it for longer."
nycdatasci 2y ago
In the study, they put 300 nylon/plastic bags into 1L of near-boiling water. Many bags are paper derivatives and not plastic. No need to completely stop enjoying tea.

vasco 2y ago

I mean, why not? I get your point but before wide encompassing studies and meta studies, a lot of things will be looked at because we can look at them. It's like asking why investigate dolphin language instead of all animal communication.

brokegrammer 2y ago

[flagged]

xandrius 2y ago
Just for your information, the attitude in this comment makes it hard to actually engage it in a serious conversation. It does have "conspiracy uncle" vibes and so people might avoid replying. Maybe that's your goal all along but if not, try to reread your comments before posting them, as they might not reflect how you actually want to come across with others.
- brokegrammer 2y ago
  What did you find offensive about my comment?
  - icanhelp 2y ago
    The fact that you believe conspiracies are real, of course. Duh. Every Smart Person knows that powerful people never conspire. Also the definition of 'conspiracy' given in Black's Law Dictionary is a fiction; there is no such thing as conspiracies. At all. /s

righthand 2y ago

If you microwave your consumables in plastic that is on you. Microwavable plastic is a marketing myth. Put your food on a plate or bowl and cover it with a wet paper towel.

dboreham 2y ago
Isn't the wet paper towel and EM reflector? I use wax paper fwiw.
- almostnormal 2y ago
  I use a second plate, upside down.
- righthand 2y ago
  It would reflect under the paper towel too then, therefor serving it’s purpose.
hindsightbias 2y ago
What makes you think there isn't BPA in your paper towels? https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21939283/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21939283/
- righthand 2y ago
  Because I was skeptical of paper towels too and only buy ones without. It is also noteworthy that the paper towel doesn’t soak in the consumable when reheating like a tea bag does.
imglorp 2y ago
We have a set of reusable silicone lids. They can withstand high temperature on stove or microwave and just rinse off. Hopefully they aren't found to release anything. Instead of a paper towel, we throw food on a plate or bowl and drop a lid on it. This also works in the fridge; one less thing to wash and nothing disposed.

throwaway984393 2y ago

[dead]

sharpshadow 2y ago

One should avoid all the things which you mentioned and using a microwave at all. The context is a comparison between good old paper tea bags.

yreg 2y ago
> using a microwave at all Why?
hindsightbias 2y ago
> good old paper https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21939283/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21939283/
- sharpshadow 2y ago
  This study does not specifically mention paper tee bags. It mentions food contact paper but that’s something different. In Germany paper tea bags are made out of natural fiber without glue. But I would really like to know if this paper tea bags also release hefty amounts of microplastics, if somebody has a study please link. That those plastic tea bags are microplastic hell should have been obvious from the start. The first time I saw them until forever I will avoid them.

mandmandam 2y ago

These are all questions that are pretty easy to answer these days; perfectly appropriate for asking to an LLM or search engine. Long story shot - yes, this is a major problem. Yes, you're getting it from bottled water and plastic utensils and plastic lined cups. No, it's not like microwood. This shit is being found in every organ of our bodies from our sex organs to our brains. It's found in most wild animal samples, it's found in rain, it's found on Everest's peak and in the Mariana Trench. And every indication is that it's getting rapidly worse, scaling up with our ever-increasing plastic production. And there are perfectly good alternatives for the vast majority of this use, but the costs are a bit higher (since they're not being externalized onto the planet and our organs as much).

stevenAthompson 2y ago
[flagged]

protonbob 2y ago

We do know that microplastics may be reducing male fertility. I know there are others but I haven't done a ton of research [1]. Wood and stainless steel are different because we have evolved with these materials in our surroundings or at least something close to them. Also, wood, and even metals, do not have the staying power of plastic. We already do know that heavy metals are bad if they stick around in your body, but we do need metals in our diets as nutrients as well. It should be assumed that anything that we have invented in the last 200 years should be guilty until proven innocent at this point imo. So many of the "modern marvels" have shown to have horrible health effects. [1] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9134445/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9134445/

woleium 2y ago
The dangers of sawdust (micro wood?) vary from species of tree to tree, but are generally well known and studied. in particular Manchineel and Yew are known to be dangerous. Wood in its natural state is not a safe substance. African Mahogany for example is highly toxic, causing dermatitis, respiratory issues, giddiness, vomiting, boils, asthma, headaches, and nosebleeds. Has also been linked to nasal cancer. https://www.mountainwoodworker.com/articles/toxic_woods.pdf https://www.mountainwoodworker.com/articles/toxic_woods.pdf
- scns 2y ago
  Wenge and Oak too.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
dylan604 2y ago
> We do know that microplastics may be reducing male fertility. If we "know" something, would we still be using the word "may"? Know seems pretty strong for such a wishywashy result of "may". There's definitely research in fertility rates lowering. Phtalates are receiving a lot of attention as well as an example.

lukeschlather 2y ago

"Microwood" is basically just cellulose, aka insoluble fiber, which naturally exists in our food. "Microsteel" is just elemental iron which is a necessary nutrient. Microplastics are novel hydrocarbons that don't exist in nature. They're similar to cellulose but no organisms exist that eat them. They're believed to be nonreactive and therefore harmless but they might bioaccumulate which could be bad, or they might react with things in our bodies in unknown circumstances. We have limited experience with these molecules so it is hard to say.

Zaskoda 2y ago
Elegant and pithy answer to a well asked question.
rcMgD2BwE72F 2y ago
And plastics are full of endocrine disruptors, which are pretty bad for human health too.
- amanaplanacanal 2y ago
  My current theory is that long term plastic exposure is what is driving the obesity epidemic.
dbingham 2y ago
Missing from this answer is the early evidence that they may be _very_ harmful. Early evidence suggests they are not non-reactive. They disrupt many of the body's systems in ways we're only beginning to understand. > Various examples of damage caused by microplastics have been reported, such as microplastic accumulation in the bodies of marine and aquatic organisms (leading to malnutrition), inflammation, reduced fertility, and mortality. The threats that microplastics present to the human body have not yet been clearly identified. However, previous reports have shown that ultrafine microplastic absorption resulted in complex toxicity in zebrafish,2 and that microplastics under 100 nm in size can reach almost all organs after entering the human body.3 Therefore, concerns exist regarding the negative effects of continuous microplastic accumulation in the human body. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10151227/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10151227/ > Microplastics have been found in a variety of organisms and multiple parts of the human body. We emphasize the potential impact of microplastics on the early exposure of infants and the early development of embryos. At present, the toxicity research on microplastics show that the exposure will cause intestinal injury, liver infection, flora imbalance, lipid accumulation, and then lead to metabolic disorder. In addition, the microplastic exposure increases the expression of inflammatory factors, inhibits the activity of acetylcholinesterase, reduces the quality of germ cells, and affects embryo development. At last, we speculate that the exposure of microplastics may be related to the formation of various chronic diseases. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/envhealth.3c00052 https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/envhealth.3c00052

seabass-labrax 2y ago

I've no idea why they chose teabags to study - one has to start somewhere, presumably - but I can answer the second question. The distinctive feature of plastics is the synthetic polymers that they contain, which classically feature bonds between oxygen atoms. These are extremely difficult for any organic process to break apart. Wood, however, can even be digested in small quantities, so 'microwood' will just break down into its constituent parts in the human body. The body can cope with metals and indeed has evolved to require a small amount, for instance in hemoglobin. We aren't fully aware of the implications of microplastics on health, but the main cause for concern is that we have no easy way of getting them out (either naturally or medically) in the event that they are harmful.

cogman10 2y ago
> I've no idea why they chose teabags to study I think they are a pretty reasonable thing to study. Teabags are porous plastic subjected to high heat. So the question has to be "what happens when these plastic baggies get exposed to high levels of heat? Does that liberate some of the plastic into the drink?" Particularly worthy because tea is one of the most common beverages consumed.

jasonlotito 2y ago

From the study linked in the article: "Overall, our findings contribute to a growing body of evidence on the pervasive nature of plastic pollution and its potential implications for human health. As the usage of plastics in food packaging continues to rise, scientific research and policymaking must address the challenges posed by MNPL contamination to ensure food safety and consumer well-being." > I find it impossible to put this into any kind of meaningful context. So? Your inability to find meaningful context in something is not important. Who are you and why should this article or study cater to you? Are you in the business of doing research on this topic? Or are you just an HN commenter? Your ignorance is not a sign of anything other than you being ignorant, and your inability to do something is just that: lack of skill. > First of all, what's with the focus on tea bags? Because you can't just assume. You test. That's science. Just assuming (your suggestion) is anti-science. And something we should NOT base our science off of. > Second, how do "microplastics" compare to micro-everything else? That's not what this study is trying to determine. It set out to determine how much microplastics came from tea bags. Why increase the scope. Other people are studying that. You really don't seem like someone who understands how this works. You don't put the puzzle together all at once, you put it together one piece at a time.

wyxz 2y ago
I find it quite ironic how many people on HN have a superiority complex to sites like Reddit, yet suffer the same pitfalls. Not reading the source material and going off of headlines or snippets. Asking for “context” and “why did they study this” is quite interesting, considering the scientific study whose entire purpose is to introduce this context is directly linked within the article.
therealcamino 2y ago
Exactly. This is a study about the exposure and absorption parts of the equation. The science is ongoing. People who can't deal with anything less than total certainty don't understand the process.

JKCalhoun 2y ago

> How does that compare with ... plastic-lined paper cups .. cling wrap that covers our food as we heat ... the Tupperware and other plastic containers we heat our food up in ... bottled water that sits inside plastic for months ... plastic bowls and utensils we use in our kitchens ... disposable serrated plastic knife... For myself, I don't do any of the above (with the possible exception of the last one once in a while). I thought everyone knew those were a bad idea. I do drink tea using tea bags though — and had no reason to believe there was plastic involved.

xattt 2y ago
This discussion is complicated by the loose (ha!) definition of tea bags. There’s about a million different tea bags. Some use denser paper, some are thin. Some are stapled, some are pressed. Some are stringed and some are not. Some are single-use cotton (which I learned about when a local tea brand stopped using them due to cost). Lipton makes a premium brand that uses a tetrahedral shaped micro-perforated plastic bag that very much could be shedding microplastics. It’s hard to have a discussion without a clear definition and terminology.
- therealcamino 2y ago
  The paper describes the three kinds of tea bags tested, and how the results differ between them.
cogman10 2y ago
Just FYI, you can buy stainless steel loose leaf tea infusers. They don't cost a lot ($6->$15) and loose leaf tea is shockingly cheap. Just get a nice airtight container and some moister absorbing packets and you'll have great tea for a while. I bought like 1lbs ~2 years ago for about $20 and still haven't worked all the way through it :D.
- prophesi 2y ago
  I will also say that loose leaf is an order of magnitude better tasting than bagged tea. The crush-tear-curl process of bagged tea will elicit a bitter brew from anything that isn't black tea, and lose a lot of its flavor. Not to mention they're likely using the leftover chaff from loose leaf production. I like to show friends a properly brewed Dragonwell green tea and a bug-bitten oolong to convert them to the loose leaf way.

__MatrixMan__ 2y ago

I think it's pretty reasonable to expect a bag made of a fine mesh of plastic to yield more tiny broken off pieces than something like plastic container. Also once you put your mind to it it's actually pretty easy to avoid most of the things you mentioned. There are glass or metal alternatives to pretty much everything plastic. Maybe not for creating an airtight seal over something like leftovers, but I think it's reasonable to expect that the food can sit in glass and have a plastic roof and still be relatively free of microplastics. More research is needed it seems pretty plausible that plastics, like asbestos, are only a hazard when friable.

crazygringo 2y ago
> I think it's pretty reasonable to expect a bag made of a fine mesh of plastic to yield more tiny broken off pieces than something like plastic container. Is it? The mesh bag goes through basically zero abrasion at less than 100°C. It just sits there in the mostly still water. Meanwhile, the plastic container might be in contact with fatty food way over 100°C. It gets scraped by pointy utensils. It gets abraded by a cleaning pad. It gets scratched and cloudy. It gets used hundreds of times. I'd be guessing the plastic container sheds orders of magnitude more microplastics.
- __MatrixMan__ 2y ago
  I'd be interested in seeing this measured. Probably it depends on how much abuse the plastic container receives. I don't think mine ever come in contact with something > 50°C, and the dish scraper I use isn't very pointy, but ymmv. The reason I'm sticking with the tea-bag as the greater contributor is that I expect that the likelihood of a given region of plastic detaching and being washed into food/drink is related to: - how closely the overall piece resembles a sphere and how large that sphere is (e.g. whiskers are likely to be knocked off, whereas the center of a sphere is unlikely to be dug out - whether it has ever gone through this kind of treatment before Sort of like how when eating a donut covered in powered sugar 95% of the mess happens within the first second of handling it.

glenstein 2y ago

I absolutely agree that meaningful context would be helpful, but I don't see that as disqualifying. I appreciate that research is opportunistic, as often oriented toward discovery of new things not yet understood, as much about building up our factual understanding as interpretation. So sure, I want context, but I think this kind of exasperation is a bit misplaced, as I don't think the article or the research itself was intended to be a comprehensive account of the broader contexts you are looking for. If it was masquerading as such a thing, I would be in full agreement. So I think it's a fair point in general, but the way you are saying it here sounds an awful lot like you're holding up a stop sign and saying "don't do any more research!"

14 2y ago

If one had to study the entirety of a subject it would be impossible to do so in many cases. It is entirely reasonable for a researcher to pick one piece of the puzzle and study that. No it does not give the entire picture but it may help us understand the greater picture. Lastly if this was anywhere else besides HN there is a microwood entering you joke to be made.

wyxz 2y ago

> First of all, what’s with the focus on tea bags? Well, lucky for you, there's an entire scientific study detailing why they chose to study it and the methodologies they used. You know, the one linked in the article. It states: > Among the different food containers releasing MNPLs, teabags stand out. Recent investigations have elucidated that teabags significantly contribute to the release of millions of MNPLs, adding to their daily ingestion by humans. And this is just a snippet! Much more detail and context available within! The wonders of original sources.

JoeAltmaier 2y ago

There is no evidence of harm. Your body continually rids itself of them. This is a lot of passion and angst over what may be nothing.

lkbm 2y ago

>First of all, what's with the focus on tea bags? According to the paper[0]: > Among the different food containers releasing MNPLs, teabags stand out. Recent investigations have elucidated that teabags significantly contribute to the release of millions of MNPLs, adding to their daily ingestion by humans (Banaei et al., 2023). The cited Banaei et al., 2023[1] says "At this point, special attention should be paid to the release of MNPLs from the herbal/teabags, since during the soaking and steering processes, some MNPLs inevitably detach and migrate to the water solution", citing [2]...which is retracted with this explanation: "2 of the reviews for this manuscript were fictitious. 2 reviews were submitted under the name of known scientists without their knowledge." So, yeah. Sometimes it's interesting to follow citation chains a few steps. [0] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0045653524026377?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004565352... [1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304389423011822?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030438942... [2] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969722029308?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004896972...

Reason077 2y ago

> ”from the cling wrap that covers our food as we heat it in the microwave, from the Tupperware and other plastic containers we heat our food up in” You shouldn’t really be doing either of those things. Plastic tupperware will get damaged from heat if you use it in the microwave frequently, potentially contaminating your food. It’s best to transfer food to a heat-safe container (glass or ceramic) before microwaving. And definitely don’t use cling film in the microwave!

tonygiorgio 2y ago

Agreed. While some people are nit picking the comment here as “well don’t do any of those things,” it still doesn’t quantify the danger. Recently read from “Made to Stick”: “Don’t just say popcorn has 40g of trans fats. Everyone knows trans fats are bad, but how bad is bad? Say popcorn has more trans fats in one serving than a whole day of greasy junk food”

jklinger410 2y ago

Tea drinkers in shambles

evrenesat 2y ago

I eat processed, ready-to-eat stuff at home, heavily use microwave for heating, but I don't do/use any of the things you mentioned. I generally prefer loose leaf tea, but sometimes tea bags are easier, so I only buy brands that use natural tea bags. It's possible to reduce exposure to pollutants if you're willing to sacrifice some convenience.

stevebmark 2y ago

It is well established that heating plastic in a culinary context distributes significantly more microplastic into your food. Microplastics are also well established endocrine disrupters. Microplastics cross the blood brain barrier and may also permanently stay in your body. To what extent are these harmful? In what dose, over how much time? I don’t think that’s established. You could be cautionary, or wait for more science about how long it takes to reduce your fertility. It may also be inescapable, plastic is likely a permanent earth pollutant now, in your clothes, dust in the air, food, water, and most things in your home, including ones you abrasives use inside your body, like toothbrushes. Maybe only very high doses (like drinking tea from teabags once a day) have a detrimental health effect. Many compounds are lethal in high doses, and healthy, benign, or required for survival in low doses.

ugh123 2y ago

>First of all, what's with the focus on tea bags? >Second, how do "microplastics" compare to micro-everything else? Not sure I understand your criticism. I think choosing tea bags and microplastics in particular is a way to 'ground' a study and experiments into something practical, rather than something too broad, abstract, and/or un-relatable to consumers.