Live data from Hacker News

Microplastics found in 93% of bottled water tested in global study

cbc.ca

31–40 of 383 posts

Re: Microplastics found in 93% of bottled water tested in global study

#31
post #3

The actual breakdown by brand: https://dpy68rfhp0glq.cloudfront.net/styles/large/s3/2017_Mi...

I wonder if pelligino is very low because it's bottled mineral water

None of these brands are known to me but I believe I've seen San Pelegrino in the south of Europe, the balkans.

Iirc their bottle is a thick stiff bottle type, of the same type that my favorite bottled mineral water Ramlösa uses.

Maybe someone could confirm this.

Whenever I see bottled water in american TV it's always that cheap wrinkly bottle. That type is always cheaper here in Sweden.

Depending on where you get it, the difference between a cheap wrinkly soft plastic bottle and a thick stiff plastic bottle of water can be 100%. From 10kr to 20kr.

Re: Microplastics found in 93% of bottled water tested in global study

#32
post #17

Plastic found in water contained in a plastic bottle. Not really shocked.

>...plastic bottle I'm even confused by this point--given that some of the water (e.g. San Pellegrino) often comes in glass bottles, can we even assume all bottles measured were plastic? It seems like it should be obvious or else it would be a useless study, but I fail to find a single assertion that all bottled water tested were indeed plastic bottles. That and S. Pellegrino has such a low max count compared with ot…

Would you expect glass dust in a water sold in glass?

Re: Microplastics found in 93% of bottled water tested in global study

#33
I was curious if the micro-plastics could be coming from the bottles they are packaged in. The article says...

It's not clear how the plastic is getting into the bottled water — whether it's the water source itself or the air or the manufacturing and bottling process.

"Even the simple act of opening the cap could cause plastic to be chipping off the cap," Mason said.

I think it's easy to assume it's from the water source, & or a low quality filtration process, but it could very well be from the same bottle you are holding.

I suspect it's a combination of both. Is it possible some of the brands with higher counts use a lower quality plastic for the bottle & cap? This also makes sense to me since San Pellegrino has the lowest profile, and often comes in glass.

Re: Microplastics found in 93% of bottled water tested in global study

#35
post #34

Distilled water and glass bottles are the way to go. You can get a small distiller for your home relatively cheaply.

The distiller is cheap but the power is not. Its like running a microwave 24/7 to make enough water for two people. I want to try making a solar one.

Re: Microplastics found in 93% of bottled water tested in global study

#36
post #33

I was curious if the micro-plastics could be coming from the bottles they are packaged in. The article says... It's not clear how the plastic is getting into the bottled water — whether it's the water source itself or the air or the manufacturing and bottling process. "Even the simple act of opening the cap could cause plastic to be chipping off the cap," Mason said. I think it's easy to assume it's from the water so…

My suspicion would be that at least some of the plastic particles are coming from the bottles themselves. Plastic degrades over time, so this would not be too surprising.

Re: Microplastics found in 93% of bottled water tested in global study

#37
post #33

I was curious if the micro-plastics could be coming from the bottles they are packaged in. The article says... It's not clear how the plastic is getting into the bottled water — whether it's the water source itself or the air or the manufacturing and bottling process. "Even the simple act of opening the cap could cause plastic to be chipping off the cap," Mason said. I think it's easy to assume it's from the water so…

While less common, San Pellegrino does come in a plastic bottle. I’m curious why they didn’t include the packaging in the graphic of the brand breakdown linked elsewhere, seems like this is a super relevant variable.

Re: Microplastics found in 93% of bottled water tested in global study

#39
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s a lot of logical leaps your making hear. It might not be immediately deadly, but it could have lots of long term subtle effects. For example, it may contribute to cancer rates or obesity. Some people suspect it contributes to low sperm counts among men. All of these would be consistent with the current widespread consumption patterns.

>long term subtle effects The longer term, and subtler the effect is, the safer a substance is. My educated guess is that microplastics are going to cause a lot fewer human deaths and ingury than any of the following natural stuff: Bees, coffee (see acrylamide), peanuts, mosquitoes, arsenic, mushrooms, and bodies of water.

That is a good point, and I agree and would add cars, hammers, sodas, and bread mold. But acrylamide studies are all based on rat models to date. Human studies have not shown the same impact. We have been cooking food a long time and it would not surprise me if we have stumbled on and kept a mutation that makes it safe.

Re: Microplastics found in 93% of bottled water tested in global study

#40
post #33

I was curious if the micro-plastics could be coming from the bottles they are packaged in. The article says... It's not clear how the plastic is getting into the bottled water — whether it's the water source itself or the air or the manufacturing and bottling process. "Even the simple act of opening the cap could cause plastic to be chipping off the cap," Mason said. I think it's easy to assume it's from the water so…

Probably all of the above.

We know microplastics are in the air, we know they are in aquifers, we know any plastic material municipal water is going through could result in micro plastic contamination just from wear, potentially from the filters they are running the water through before bottling and any plastic fittings or piping on that fill the bottles. It's wholly plausible it's a contamination of any/all of them in any given sample.

Post reply on HN