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

Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

news.unl.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 344 posts

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#131

Post by jxramos »

parentheses wrote: post #62
Aurornis wrote: post #35

> Rather than introduce just the number of particles released by one container, the researchers instead exposed the cells to particle concentrations that infants and toddlers might accumulate over days or from multiple sources. > After two days, just 23% of kidney cells exposed to the highest concentrations had managed to survive So they used concentrations that they believe toddlers might accumulate over two days an…

The article is only presenting that: 1. nano/microplastics kill kidney cells in a lab environment 2. nano/microplastics come from microwaving containers Regardless of whether you agree with the conclusion _you_ are drawing from reading the article, the article is saying those things. In order to make a real-world-ish experiment, we'd have to start experimenting on children. I feel that while you're expressing outrage…

yah so they have this HEK cells I'm guessing and they subject them to fluids that were cooked in a microwave in a plastic container which thereby released a bunch of these nanoparticles. That fluid was applied to the HEK cells in vitro and they basically died and stoped dividing and migrating and doing all they would do. I suppose the connection would be lots of blood passes through the kidneys being a blood filtering tissue and what not that should nanoparticles enter the bloodstream they could take a toll on the kidneys. So if we were to be intravenously injected with these things it wouldn't be surprising to see stuff die I suppose. But the real world scenario never just dumps chemicals on certain tissues, they have to first reach those tissues and cross barriers and survive past the liver etc etc, lots of obstacles. But these in lab conditions kind of give a toxicity clue for what the outcome may be if the substance comes in direct contact with the tissue of interest.

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#132

Post by asddubs »

Auracle wrote: post #57
Pxtl wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The worry with glass is that it's dangerous if it breaks. I find stainless steel Bento boxes are excellent if it's not something that needs a tight seal.

Of course, with steel there's always the slight chance of lead. It's been found in at least 2 different manufacturer's cups that were specifically made for children.

same with ceramics and plastics, too

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#133

Post by coldtea »

Aurornis wrote: post #35

> Rather than introduce just the number of particles released by one container, the researchers instead exposed the cells to particle concentrations that infants and toddlers might accumulate over days or from multiple sources. > After two days, just 23% of kidney cells exposed to the highest concentrations had managed to survive So they used concentrations that they believe toddlers might accumulate over two days an…

>Given that we’re not seeing toddlers around the world have kidney problems

We're not seeing them having severe kidney problems - easily detectable ones. They could still have damage or accululated crap on their kidneys.

In any case, the article doesn't say kids kidneys die in 2 days. It says lab kindey cells die when exposed to such microplastics, and microwave setups produce those microplastics.

Meaning: kids are exposed to kindney damaging microplastics through this mechanism. The extend of the damage, as the article also states, remains to be evaluated.

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#134

Post by calf »

productizeme93 wrote: post #23
SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First off, there are silicon sous vide bags. Second… if you are at the level that a bag with meat in it for 2 hours at 140 degrees is too risky… you had better get working on that cabin in the woods.

First off there weren't silicon Sous Vide bags back then and the general attitude was "stick it in a plastic bag" and it will be fine. Second, this is coming from someone that works in a research lab in plastics. So pretty well educated. Anything else you want to be condescending and dismissive about? I'm sure we'd all appreciate hearing more about how you know better than the rest of us and please - make sure you le…

I'll bite, your friend may be a professional scientist, but their response was simply "absolutely not". I had a biologist friend who had the same attitude toward eating raw eggs.

The fact is the science has not looked at risks of sous vide plastics. There's maybe no money for such research, unless like in this article the professor became a father and had to microwave food for his newborn baby. In their research, they showed that those particular nanoplastics cause kidney damage, but only in vitro (EDIT: Ah yes, a quick Google shows a horrifying 2023 study that says nanoplastics do get absorbed into the bloodstream...). That's like a doubly indirect argument for concerns about sous vide.

I think a more nuanced answer is that we just don't know, and so it is reasonable to invoke the precautionary principle. Other people, when made aware of the risks, might go ahead but that's their informed choice to do so.

So unless there's a series of studies that shows, "Sous vide produces X amount of polyethylene nanoplastics, and adult/child/rat consumption shows measurable harm", the best we have is precautionary principle and informed risk. It would be nice to have something definitive like "Cigarette smoking causes lung cancer", or more recently from WHO "Drinking alcohol causes breast and gastro/rectal cancer", but we don't have that scientific closure to an open question for sous vide yet.

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#135

Post by netsharc »

NovaDudely wrote: post #39
n8cpdx wrote: post #4

> then heated them at full power for three minutes in a 1,000-watt microwave This seems like unrealistic use of a microwave. The liquids are likely boiling for well over a minute. Are people really boiling liquids in the containers they’re serving their infant children? I’m not especially plastic-phobic but I also don’t think a reasonable person would think it is a good idea to boil liquids in their children’s bottle…

About 20 years ago I used to make boiled potatoes in the microwave - just had to boil in there for a good 10 minutes in a plastic container... yeah that wasn't so great.

I learnt a technique of poking holes in them and wrapping them in paper towels. Hopefully tiny pieces kitchen paper towels are safer to eat than nano plastic particles..

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#136

Post by XorNot »

teekert wrote: post #115
balaji1 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we’re not seeing toddlers around the world have kidney problems is it possible that then we don't fully understand the resilience of the human body? It is certainly possible, when the article can state that: > the health effects of consuming micro- and nanoplastics remain unclear

We are seeing a steady increase in childhood cancer [0] and our male population now has half the sperm count the same population had in 70s [1]. [0]: https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2020/212/3/incidence-childhoo... [1]: https://backreaction.blogspot.com/2022/11/why-are-male-testo...

Overweight and obese men are more likely to have lowered sperm counts[1] and obesity has tripled since 1970[2].

[1] https://www.healthymale.org.au/news/obesity-overweight-can-i...

[2] https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/obesity-and...

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#137

Post by tremon »

teekert wrote: post #115
balaji1 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we’re not seeing toddlers around the world have kidney problems is it possible that then we don't fully understand the resilience of the human body? It is certainly possible, when the article can state that: > the health effects of consuming micro- and nanoplastics remain unclear

We are seeing a steady increase in childhood cancer [0] and our male population now has half the sperm count the same population had in 70s [1]. [0]: https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2020/212/3/incidence-childhoo... [1]: https://backreaction.blogspot.com/2022/11/why-are-male-testo...

The OP was walking about kidney damage specifically. Have these cancers and sperm quality issues been linked to kidney function?

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#138

Post by DangerousPie »

Actual paper: https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.3c01942

The real question is whether the exposure you'd receive from occasional microwaving would be enough to ever cause any meaningful health problems. Unfortunately papers like these always like to talk about dramatic metrics like 'billions of nanoplastics' without putting that into any meaningful context.

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#139

Post by XorNot »

epolanski wrote: post #128
chrisco255 wrote: post #98

I'm one of the most skeptical people when it comes to these types of claims. I think the effects are being exaggerated. However, I've recently begun to replace all plastic containers and dishware from my kitchen with stainless steel and glass. Drinks taste better in glass anyways, and steel is a good non-fragile alternative. And I cook in cast iron. It's almost impossible to avoid plastic, and I'm not religious about…

> I think the effects are being exaggerated. Are they? The article points out that effects of nanoplastics on humans are still unclear.

Unclear means no one's got a plausible mechanism, which for the widespread existence of them being implied is a bit of a problem.

They're inert long chain polymers, and amongst other things you need to show bioavailability in the area t you propose would cause damage at sufficient concentrations.

In the current case: how efficiently do nanoplastics cross from the digestive system to the blood stream, how long do they persist before being filtered out by the kidneys, do they retain their structure in the blood stream unchanged, is their a lower limit on toxicity.

i.e. injecting someone with enough pure water will also damage their organs, exposing kidney cells to silica dust in solution in huge concentration would also kill them but there's no way for it to get there in vivo.

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#140

Post by andybak »

userbinator wrote: post #47
SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First off, there are silicon sous vide bags. Second… if you are at the level that a bag with meat in it for 2 hours at 140 degrees is too risky… you had better get working on that cabin in the woods.

you had better get working on that cabin in the woods. ...where you use a wood stove and inhale far more proven carcinogens instead?

I do like to bring up camp fires in any "the modern world is killing us" discussions.

In genernal there does seem to be little discussion of relative risks, trade-offs - plus a tendency towards romanticizing older tech as well as a big dose of the naturalistic fallacy.

However I think research into microplastics is important and I'm personally reducing plastic use when it's easy and low-effort.

I also rather enjoy a nice wood fire when I'm camping.

Post reply on HN