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

31–40 of 128 posts

Re: Scientists find microplastics in blood for first time

#31

Post by scotty79 »

giantg2 wrote: post #25
refurb wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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).

It is perfectly measurable. When you are approaching this with the precision that folks looking for micro-plastics do to get published.

I believe there are orders of magnitude between something like that being measurable and causing any symptoms that would make it worth considering from medical point of view.

Re: Scientists find microplastics in blood for first time

#32

Post by SpodGaju »

milansm wrote: post #18
pibechorro wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

This is exactly what I’ll try to change in next 5 years. Have a sustainable baseline: my own food (or at least 50% of it, other 50% locally grown within ~10km) and energy independent (for heating and cooking), and treat everything else as a luxury that can perish any time now. I don’t want to give up my remote work, car and (occasional) luxury vacation, but would love to be able to sustain myself without it. Current…

No post body was provided.

Re: Scientists find microplastics in blood for first time

#33

Post by dcsommer »

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…

What alternatives to Technological Humanism are not antidotes? It sounds like you consider the anxiety of the age a/the major problem (I agree), but is there really only one solution? It seems like there are other possibilities worth discussion.

Re: Scientists find microplastics in blood for first time

#34

Post by SpodGaju »

funstuff007 wrote: post #11
decasteve wrote: post #9

Clothing is mostly plastic fibre nowadays. Upholstery fibres too. Walls are painted with acrylic paint. Flooring is often made of various plastics. I assume the dust in our homes that we breathe in contains relatively a lot of plastic. Containers for food are almost entirely plastic. I’m interested in these sorts of studies on the topic.

> Clothing is mostly plastic fibre nowadays. I think that's true primarily for athleisure. That being said, it's a very large segment of the market. I was recently in Banana Republic and it was quite hard to find a pair of pants one would want to wear outside of the house. Some what related: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sU55auqDD28

"I think that's true primarily for athleisure."

It is not. Go into any Walmart (and I bring up Walmart because that is where most people shop who are just going about their daily lives) and try to find clothing with no petroleum based material in it.

And then try to look on Amazon. Most of the clothing sold there you cannot even find the material list for the product. It will say "cotton" but it is usually only the major material, not 100% cotton.

Here is a good example: https://www.amazon.com/Fruit-Loom-Cotton-100-Sleeve/dp/B001C...

100% cotton preshrunk jersey but...????? Ash is 98/2 cotton/poly Athletic Heather is 90/10 cotton/poly Black Heather, Neon Green, Neon Pink, Safety (Green, Orange) - 50/50 cotton/poly

And then it's Amazon, so you have shipping and every other climate destroying feature of that distribution system.

Re: Scientists find microplastics in blood for first time

#35

Post by TrispusAttucks »

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…

The taller they are the harder they fall. Our global society is so very tall.

Re: Scientists find microplastics in blood for first time

#37

Post by elil17 »

semi-extrinsic wrote: post #30
DoingIsLearning wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 c…

The EPA has put out a health advisory about PFOA and PFOS:

> EPA’s health advisories are based on the best available peer-reviewed studies of the effects of PFOA and PFOS on laboratory animals (rats and mice) and were also informed by epidemiological studies of human populations that have been exposed to perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs). These studies indicate that exposure to PFOA and PFOS over certain levels may result in adverse health effects, including developmental effects to fetuses during pregnancy or to breastfed infants (e.g., low birth weight, accelerated puberty, skeletal variations), cancer (e.g., testicular, kidney), liver effects (e.g., tissue damage), immune effects (e.g., antibody production and immunity), thyroid effects and other effects (e.g., cholesterol changes).

https://www.epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water/drinking...

I’m no chemist but this seems like there’s at least a good bit of scientific evidence that supports the idea that some PFAS are dangerous.

Re: Scientists find microplastics in blood for first time

#38

Post by drusenko »

scotty79 wrote: post #28
pibechorro wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

This might be accurate today, but it ignores our ability to make technological progress to make our current activities low or no impact.

Further, this line of thinking - that you need to sacrifice your lifestyle in order to save the planet - is IMO one of if not the major reason we haven’t made progress on addressing climate change to date. Plainly put, people tend to be short term selfish, even often at the expense of their own long term interests, and they tend to not want to change their behavior / habits.

We should instead focus on the technological progress that we need to make in order to be able to not only maintain our current lifestyles but possibly have them be better (eg a Tesla is a better car, a heat pump is more comfortable than a furnace, an induction stove boils water faster and has more precise control, etc). To be clear, most of this isn’t technological invention it’s implementation - a lot and a lot of implementation.

Re: Scientists find microplastics in blood for first time

#39

Post by svnt »

scotty79 wrote: post #28
pibechorro wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Your classism is a big part of the problem.

What you describe is called asceticism, it has a long and storied history with significant contributions to the long-term cultural stability of humankind, and American culture basically just hasn’t been around long enough to develop it yet.

Re: Scientists find microplastics in blood for first time

#40

Post by guilhas »

Why only now? Were the subjects covid vaccinated?

Doesn't mRNA vaccines contain polymers? https://www.nature.com/articles/s41565-021-01001-3

I think that is a relevant question now for many scientific studies now since a large part of the population has been vaccinated in some places and age groups

Direct reference, only a small vaccine reference https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016041202...

Post reply on HN