Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Scientists find microplastics in blood for first time

phys.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 128 posts

Re: Scientists find microplastics in blood for first time

#21

Post by Yoric »

pibechorro wrote: post #16
psacawa wrote: post #2

I'm constantly worried that despite the increased understanding we have relative to past generations, the increasing scope of our technological interventions means that global catastrophes seem more likely to occur relative to the past. [0] Look at the convulsions we need to go through to address climate change politically, and realize that it is only one of maybe a thousand potential grave threats, each of which pit…

I would argue that doomer is a waste of time. Time to be a prepper and realign our relationship to the planet. We could go on and on about climate doom, etc, but the most productive thing we can do is expect change, not apocalypse, and adjust. Lead by example. Everyone reading this can go full wind and solar. Can stop driving or drastically cut it down (move closer, use public transport, work remote, etc). We can all…

I agree with most of your points.

Please research solar and wind before switching, though. Until we have solved the problem of energy storage, in many cases, solar and wind actually tend to increase pollution, because they both rely upon polluting raw materials for both themselves and their batteries and need backup power, which to this day means gas.

That is unless you find yourself with a good problem set in which e.g. you only need energy while the sun is out (AC in the summer, maybe, or perhaps warming up water for your early evening shower?) or while there is wind (no example from the top of my head, but I'm sure there are good ones).

Re: Scientists find microplastics in blood for first time

#23

Post by snek_case »

giantg2 wrote: post #5
psacawa wrote: post #2

I'm constantly worried that despite the increased understanding we have relative to past generations, the increasing scope of our technological interventions means that global catastrophes seem more likely to occur relative to the past. [0] Look at the convulsions we need to go through to address climate change politically, and realize that it is only one of maybe a thousand potential grave threats, each of which pit…

"which pits collective well-being against technological/monetary interests." Yeah tech/money interests are part of it. I think the bigger part is lifestyle change. Most of the things that we would need to change have no better alternatives that can also support the current lifestyle. People are resistant to changing their personal actions. Some of it is entirely unknown too. We can't switch to electric vehicles overn…

> EVs have environmental costs too. How do we solve that?

We incrementally get better at it. For one thing, it should be possible to power any mining, manufacturing or recycling process with electricity.

Re: Scientists find microplastics in blood for first time

#24

Post by SpodGaju »

pibechorro wrote: post #16
psacawa wrote: post #2

I'm constantly worried that despite the increased understanding we have relative to past generations, the increasing scope of our technological interventions means that global catastrophes seem more likely to occur relative to the past. [0] Look at the convulsions we need to go through to address climate change politically, and realize that it is only one of maybe a thousand potential grave threats, each of which pit…

I would argue that doomer is a waste of time. Time to be a prepper and realign our relationship to the planet. We could go on and on about climate doom, etc, but the most productive thing we can do is expect change, not apocalypse, and adjust. Lead by example. Everyone reading this can go full wind and solar. Can stop driving or drastically cut it down (move closer, use public transport, work remote, etc). We can all…

"Lead by example."

Yes. Can you tell me more about your set up and what you do to minimize your foot print and consumption?

I live in a minivan on $2600 per month and still manage to save money. But I still. feel like I am not doing enough. I would like to get rid of my van altogether one day and just have all my belongings in a modified push cart. Kinda of like this guy but without the goats.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U54HRmglYEA

EDIT: I see that people might be thinking that I said this all sarcastically because of the down votes. But what I said is all true. That is how I live right now. And yes, I feel like I am not doing enough because I appreciate the calamity that our actions are causing.

Re: Scientists find microplastics in blood for first time

#25

Post by giantg2 »

refurb wrote: post #13
giantg2 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope you're not breathing it in with any measureable amount. That can cause silicosis.

Ever go to the beach? You’re breathing in sand. The dose makes the poison.

That's why I said measurable. The type of sand at the beach generally has a composition that doesn't pose a risk because there isn't enough of the fine particles to be inhaled. There's no measurable amount as it's too low. If it were measurable, that would be a problem as silicosis damage is cumulative (mall doses over a lifetime).

Re: Scientists find microplastics in blood for first time

#27

Post by SpodGaju »

nonrandomstring wrote: post #10
psacawa wrote: post #2

I'm constantly worried that despite the increased understanding we have relative to past generations, the increasing scope of our technological interventions means that global catastrophes seem more likely to occur relative to the past. [0] Look at the convulsions we need to go through to address climate change politically, and realize that it is only one of maybe a thousand potential grave threats, each of which pit…

> I'm constantly worried That is itself the catastrophe. The enlightenment was supposed to chase away the shadows. But as the radius of the light of science and technology expands so does the circumference of the darkness beyond. We know more than ever how vulnerable we are. We know of many more horrible ways to die. We see ever more beautiful possible futures that may never be reached. It is the age old cost of know…

Wonderful to see my own sentiment reflected here.

Let me add, that to embrace the darkness, instead of pushing it away, is where we will find answers. I wish more people could see how frenetic knowledge makes them. I found forgetting helps me the most.

And I agree with your [2].

Re: Scientists find microplastics in blood for first time

#28

Post by scotty79 »

pibechorro wrote: post #16
psacawa wrote: post #2

I'm constantly worried that despite the increased understanding we have relative to past generations, the increasing scope of our technological interventions means that global catastrophes seem more likely to occur relative to the past. [0] Look at the convulsions we need to go through to address climate change politically, and realize that it is only one of maybe a thousand potential grave threats, each of which pit…

I would argue that doomer is a waste of time. Time to be a prepper and realign our relationship to the planet. We could go on and on about climate doom, etc, but the most productive thing we can do is expect change, not apocalypse, and adjust. Lead by example. Everyone reading this can go full wind and solar. Can stop driving or drastically cut it down (move closer, use public transport, work remote, etc). We can all…

Not sure if you want to go where honest approach to this takes you.

To make as little impact as possible you should use as little resources as possible, so you should always choose cheapest, most artificial, mass produced versions of everything, including food, never travel, work as little as possible and only remotely. Basically be poor or at least act poor in every aspect of your life. Wear cheapest clothes and don't buy a new pair until they literally fall apart to the point that parts of you are sticking out that are illegal to stick out.

You might say that it's not a healthy way to live. That's even better, the sooner you die, the less resources you'll use. Don't breed of course.

If you are afraid you might have trouble sticking to your resolutions, then donate all of your wealth to something environmental and just move out of US into some poor country. It will do the bulk of your impact saving for you.

Re: Scientists find microplastics in blood for first time

#29

Post by giantg2 »

snek_case wrote: post #23
giantg2 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"which pits collective well-being against technological/monetary interests." Yeah tech/money interests are part of it. I think the bigger part is lifestyle change. Most of the things that we would need to change have no better alternatives that can also support the current lifestyle. People are resistant to changing their personal actions. Some of it is entirely unknown too. We can't switch to electric vehicles overn…

> EVs have environmental costs too. How do we solve that? We incrementally get better at it. For one thing, it should be possible to power any mining, manufacturing or recycling process with electricity.

If we want tackle those, then we also have to look at trade policies. We've shipped most of the primary and secondary industries to developing nations, where these concerns are largely ignored. Some politicians talk a big environmental game, but they won't dare touch on this subject. It's a shell game.

Re: Scientists find microplastics in blood for first time

#30

Post by semi-extrinsic »

DoingIsLearning wrote: post #17
amelius wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They should test the blood of, say, Amish people for comparison.

I can't find the quote now but that is actually one of the issues with PFAS studies. They couldn't find people they could use as a control group. Literally everyone has it in their body, even in very remote regions.

Sure, why would we not? It is widely used in consumer products. We cook our food in Teflon.

But I'm very far from convinced that PFOA will turn out to be any health risk at all, at the levels the general population is exposed to.

Even for the mid-Ohio valley cohorts, where you have tens of thousands of people who had occupational exposure over decades at up to 1000x the dose any of us will receive, it has been very challenging to clearly demonstrate any adverse health effects.

In the end, we are talking about an extremely inert chemical substance. If it doesn't react with anything, it's hard to see how it should cause significant harm.

Post reply on HN