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

Microplastics in the human brain

smithsonianmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 219 posts

Re: Microplastics in the human brain

#111

Post by cosmic_cheese »

borski wrote: post #87
ethagnawl wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure why you're being down voted for suggesting a practical and fact based solution. The USA is, regrettably, not making a pivot towards public transportation anytime in the near future. So, lighter cars are one way to address this issue. You didn't expound upon your point about the unintended consequences of CAFE standards but they're very real. Instead of making smaller and more efficient sedans per the gui…

You’re right, but the thing that leads us to lighter EVs is solid state batteries.

Yeah, I’d expect EVs to get lighter over time as technology progresses. Car bloat is a much bigger problem. Totally insane that little practical city cars like the Honda Fit have gone practically extinct in the US in favor of bigger, heavier cars that don’t even necessarily bring improved cargo capacity for all that extra bulk.

Re: Microplastics in the human brain

#112

Post by rthomas6 »

timr wrote: post #26

This paper came up as a pre-print. You can't make the extrapolation that the headline is making - they're using gas chromatography to estimate quantities from 1-2mg samples, and then extrapolating to get to these scary sounding whole-organ estimates. If you look at the paper [1], you'll see that the microplastics in in situ samples are not discernible by light microscopy, and that there was a ~25% variation in within…

Well, it still tells us something. What are the upper and lower bounds of whole brain microplastic content, given that 25% variation?

Re: Microplastics in the human brain

#113

Post by twelvechairs »

hammock wrote: post #24
Kapura wrote: post #20

Remember that car tire degredation is a significant portion of microplastics in the environment. Investing in mass transit is as imperative as it was to move away from leaded gasoline.

And we need more lightweight cars , not heavier, since tire wear is proportional to vehicle weight to the fourth power. Ironically, CAFE regulations and EV incentives both did the opposite

Roads and road standards are a tragedy of the commons. People keep buying bigger cars and demanding more, wider lanes and parking spaces because they don't take any of the burden individually - it's the taxpayers as a whole that foot the bill.

Paradoxically most of the 'small government' types are often the biggest road users.

Re: Microplastics in the human brain

#115

Post by timr »

rthomas6 wrote: post #112
timr wrote: post #26

This paper came up as a pre-print. You can't make the extrapolation that the headline is making - they're using gas chromatography to estimate quantities from 1-2mg samples, and then extrapolating to get to these scary sounding whole-organ estimates. If you look at the paper [1], you'll see that the microplastics in in situ samples are not discernible by light microscopy, and that there was a ~25% variation in within…

Well, it still tells us something. What are the upper and lower bounds of whole brain microplastic content, given that 25% variation?

I couldn't begin to tell you [1]. It's not a 25% variation, once you've extrapolated from the samples by 10,000x (or whatever). The 25% inter-sample error was on a few replicas of teeny tiny measurements. The post-extrapolation error bars are so wide that they're meaningless.

The Smithsonian magazine article is garbage. Ignore it. The paper is saying that they see longitudinal trends in plastic bioaccumulation in various cadaver tissues, and this is plausible. But no, you don't have a plastic spoon in your head. That's just panic porn.

[1] Actually...I just asked Gemini and it reminded me that the expected variance of a draw from a distribution, scaled by factor C, should have a variance of the scaled sample distribution that grows with C^2. So, if we scale up the measurement by a factor of 10,000, we'd expect the variance of the scaled estimate to be proportional to 10,000^2.

Re: Microplastics in the human brain

#116

Post by guelo »

hammock wrote: post #24
Kapura wrote: post #20

Remember that car tire degredation is a significant portion of microplastics in the environment. Investing in mass transit is as imperative as it was to move away from leaded gasoline.

And we need more lightweight cars , not heavier, since tire wear is proportional to vehicle weight to the fourth power. Ironically, CAFE regulations and EV incentives both did the opposite

None of these things are going to happen. Voters keep voting with their votes and their wallets that they want bigger cars and don't care about climate change. Meanwhile reactionary billionaires have hijacked most of our mass media as we blow by the 1.5°C Paris agreement and Trump dismantles our science institutions.

Re: Microplastics in the human brain

#117

Post by nozzlegear »

dymk wrote: post #31
mythrwy wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Move away from big cities and high traffic areas in the meantime is my solution.

Hope you never have to drive to the grocery store

My grocery store is literally in another town 20 miles away. I have an EV but apparently those are even worse for microplastic generation. Am I screwed?

Re: Microplastics in the human brain

#118

Post by card_zero »

mythrwy wrote: post #62
shironandonon_ wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn’t work. It’s in the rainwater. No rainwater on earth is safe to drink. https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-62391069

Does osmosis remove? Is it in all groundwater? Because I have a well. A deep one. And an osmosis system.

I guess the polyamide filter in that system isn't putting microplastic particles in the water? Probably not.

Re: Microplastics in the human brain

#119

Post by drawkward »

timr wrote: post #115
rthomas6 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, it still tells us something. What are the upper and lower bounds of whole brain microplastic content, given that 25% variation?

I couldn't begin to tell you [1]. It's not a 25% variation, once you've extrapolated from the samples by 10,000x (or whatever). The 25% inter-sample error was on a few replicas of teeny tiny measurements. The post-extrapolation error bars are so wide that they're meaningless. The Smithsonian magazine article is garbage. Ignore it. The paper is saying that they see longitudinal trends in plastic bioaccumulation in var…

Why yes, i think i will believe the random internet commenter.

Re: Microplastics in the human brain

#120

Post by lmm »

linotype wrote: post #55
ethagnawl wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure why you're being down voted for suggesting a practical and fact based solution. The USA is, regrettably, not making a pivot towards public transportation anytime in the near future. So, lighter cars are one way to address this issue. You didn't expound upon your point about the unintended consequences of CAFE standards but they're very real. Instead of making smaller and more efficient sedans per the gui…

Los Angeles would be very difficult to transition at this point, it’s just too low density. It was better 100 years ago than it is now.

Los Angeles is one of few US cities that is managing to build at least some new transit lines. Increasing density in desirable cities is actually pretty easy, all you have to is make it legal (by-right zoning) and then the market will do the immensely productive and profitable thing.
Post reply on HN