Live data from Hacker News

Nanoplastic Ingestion Causes Neurological Deficits

the-scientist.com

81–90 of 339 posts

Re: Nanoplastic Ingestion Causes Neurological Deficits

#81

So do seed oils and other PUFAs and a thousand other things and if anyone would just listen to a podcast once in a while (like Peter Attia's) they'd learn a thing or two.

> just listen to a podcast once in a while

Sorry, but this just sounds so silly. If only I would take a little bit of time out of my day to pick one of the 45 new podcasts created that morning and learn from its reliable, well sourced arguments!

Re: Nanoplastic Ingestion Causes Neurological Deficits

#82
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can, there are some great borosilicate glass containers out there. I use them for everything. The ones I have seal well enough that I can fill it with soup and stick it in a backpack, ride somewhere and it's fine on the other side. Thick enough to be basically unbreakable, microwavable, dishwasher-safe, etc. Don't need to worry about tomato staining either like on plastic. I've been thrilled with mine.

Aren’t the lids typically plastic though?

You can buy glass bowls with glass lids.

Re: Nanoplastic Ingestion Causes Neurological Deficits

#83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We threw away all our glass containers because they constantly chip. I'm more afraid of ingesting piece of sharp glass than nanoplastics. I don't know why that keeps happenning, I guess dishwasher's high heat damages the glass or they keep bumping into each other.

You would poop the glass though

well the pieces are about 5mm. For sure it will cut mouth, throat or something else.

Re: Nanoplastic Ingestion Causes Neurological Deficits

#84
post #4

My mum when I was a kid in the 90s: we don't store things in plastic, glass or ceramic only Me when I was a kid in the 90s: mum is a f'ing idiot wtf is wrong with plastic this hippy shit is dumb My mum 2020s: so plastic huh? Me 2020s: ugh.

We've got sets of Indian brass, Korean steel, and Japanese lacquered wood food containers that we use in addition to ceramics and glass. The glass chips, and once it does we tend to avoid using it for food. Because all of these things last or compound over a lifetime, it's only expensive to be healthful if you wait.

What is with putting superfluous place names in front of things? Are you trying to sound fancy? You have steel and wood food containers.

Re: Nanoplastic Ingestion Causes Neurological Deficits

#85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We threw away all our glass containers because they constantly chip. I'm more afraid of ingesting piece of sharp glass than nanoplastics. I don't know why that keeps happenning, I guess dishwasher's high heat damages the glass or they keep bumping into each other.

You would poop the glass though

In some cases, probably rare ones, it can lead to perforation of the intestine

Re: Nanoplastic Ingestion Causes Neurological Deficits

#86
post #30

Sorry people, but you can't stop it: 1. https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/04/11/how-much-plastic-d... 2. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/mar/24/micropla... 3. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/apr/15/winds-ca... Because humanity and capitalism's incentives are just wrong. Bottling companies like Coca Cola and Snapple have long switched to plastic bottles, and externalized the cost to the env…

I've read that the majority of microplastics come from tire wear (national geographic quoted 28% of the total), and because there's no good alternative to wheel tires, it's unlikely we'll see a decrease of pollution here. So even if we found an alternative to bottles, plastic bags, clothing, etc, it still won't make a dent in pollution unless we convince the world to use a form of public transit that doesn't make use…

> because there's no good alternative to wheel tires, it's unlikely we'll see a decrease of pollution here

Well, we could stop pretending that God gave cars dominion over the earth and build livable cities.

Re: Nanoplastic Ingestion Causes Neurological Deficits

#87
post #30

Sorry people, but you can't stop it: 1. https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/04/11/how-much-plastic-d... 2. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/mar/24/micropla... 3. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/apr/15/winds-ca... Because humanity and capitalism's incentives are just wrong. Bottling companies like Coca Cola and Snapple have long switched to plastic bottles, and externalized the cost to the env…

I've read that the majority of microplastics come from tire wear (national geographic quoted 28% of the total), and because there's no good alternative to wheel tires, it's unlikely we'll see a decrease of pollution here. So even if we found an alternative to bottles, plastic bags, clothing, etc, it still won't make a dent in pollution unless we convince the world to use a form of public transit that doesn't make use…

28% is not majority. Plus the hard part shouldn't prevent us from doing the easy part with much higher ROI.

Re: Nanoplastic Ingestion Causes Neurological Deficits

#88
post #30

Sorry people, but you can't stop it: 1. https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/04/11/how-much-plastic-d... 2. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/mar/24/micropla... 3. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/apr/15/winds-ca... Because humanity and capitalism's incentives are just wrong. Bottling companies like Coca Cola and Snapple have long switched to plastic bottles, and externalized the cost to the env…

> My recommendation would be to tax negative externalities and redistribute all of it as a UBI to the people of the country. Simple and effective

Wouldn't you want to resolve the externalities with those funds instead of spending it, likely increasing consumer consumption and making the problem worse?

> If we made it more costly for these companies

Why wouldn't the costs flow to consumers? Firms recently seem to be able to set prices at what the market will bear.

Re: Nanoplastic Ingestion Causes Neurological Deficits

#89
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

High child mortality is still a bad thing.

Not saying it's not, but the implication that everyone was dying at 30 isn't true.

That's not what's implied. Only thing that was said was that the average lifespan was 31. Could be any curve under that number, but it's bad however you cut it.
Post reply on HN