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

271–280 of 344 posts

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#271

Post by rflrob »

peteradio wrote: post #241
WithinReason wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it seems that a concentration of microplastics that's 50 million times higher than a toddler would get still leaves 20% of cells alive? To me this implies that normal exposure levels to microplastics are likely completely harmless.

Sleeping next to abandoned nuclear batteries will give you radiation burns and kill you in a few weeks to months, exposure to high radon will give you cancer in decades. Unrealistically high dosages can hint at problems that might occur at low levels.

While the Linear, No Threshold model is relatively widely used by regulatory and safety bodies, evidence for it (or any other competing mode of low dose exposure) is quite weak.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_no-threshold_model

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#272

Post by polishdude20 »

DangerousPie wrote: post #141
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…

I don't have access to the paper, but just reading the abstract it gives these numbers: > Exposure modeling results suggested that the highest estimated daily intake was 20.3 ng/kg·day for infants drinking microwaved water and 22.1 ng/kg·day for toddlers consuming microwaved dairy products from polypropylene containers. > Furthermore, an in vitro study conducted to assess the cell viability showed that the extracted…

These studies also don't take into account the fact that humans have an immune system that helps protect and repair against cell damage.

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#273

Post by ryzvonusef »

malfist wrote: post #255
ryzvonusef wrote: post #254

I think studies/articles like these just cause fatigue rather than motivation. At this point I just don't give a damn, microplastic away.

I'm sorry you feel this way, but sticking your head in the sand doesn't make things better

It's not that i disagree with the science... it's just.... what do i do with this knowledge? I feel helpless in the fight against Microplastics.

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#274

Post by permo-w »

somenameforme wrote: post #112
pkdpic wrote: post #3

> Experiments have shown that microwaving plastic baby food containers available on the shelves of U.S. stores can release huge numbers of plastic particles — in some cases, more than 2 billion nanoplastics and 4 million microplastics for every square centimeter of container. > After two days, just 23% of kidney cells exposed to the highest concentrations had managed to survive — a much higher mortality rate than tha…

I think one of the biggest issues in society today is that so much is changing so quickly, on a species level scale, that it's phenomenally difficult to isolate cause and effect for any thing that requires more than a 6 month controlled trial to show up on. It's not like you can just do an observational study on families of children who were not exposed to microplastics vs those who were, because the former group doe…

I don't think we need exhaustive studies to know that using reactive chemicals that aren't found in nature for literally everything is a bad idea. if it's not been harvested with something with DNA, it's probably not a good idea by default

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#275

Post by sfn42 »

Lutger wrote: post #259
teekert wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW I think this is a good remark. It's just correlation until proven otherwise. I was just saying there are changes in society, one of which is the widespread use of plastics, and there are changes in population health roughly starting along the same time. But indeed, we also started to do sitting work massively, and started using wireless communications etc. Then again, we also reduced coal use in cities, we burn…

It really, really hard to prove causation beyond doubt. If you have a strong correlation and a reasonable concern that it might be causal relationship, and we are talking about health impacts, at some point it is rational to use the precautionary principle and take action even if you don't have definite proof. As an extreme example, we actually can't state with 100% confidence that exercise is good for your health, i…

> we actually can't state with 100% confidence that exercise is good for your health

Doubt. It depends what definition you use for "health" but we know for a fact that a sedentary lifestyle has negative effects and that an active lifestyle has positive effects. Those assertions are indisputable.

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#276

Post by s1artibartfast »

john-radio wrote: post #268
sfn42 wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Drinking a shitload of water can kill you, not drinking water will certainly kill you. In fact having a shitload of just about anything is likely to harm or kill you. Unrealistically high doses imply absolutely nothing about lower doses.

This comment is unhelpful; the person you're replying to clearly is not claiming that "absolutely everything that's harmful in large doses is harmful in small doses." > Unrealistically high doses imply absolutely nothing about lower doses. The example they give of nuclear radiation is a clear illustration of how a useful hint can be drawn from the high-level example of harm, a pattern which microplastics might very w…

Models can breakdown at huge scales because they introduce other non-representative factors or nonlinear responses.

Sending an astronaut to the center of the Sun and concluding their death is from radiation would be a pretty bad model.

Hitting a person with a car would be a pretty bad model for a fly landing on them.

The first model is bad because the sun is doing more than just exposing them to radiation.

The second model is bad because there's a nonlinear response to force applied to a human body.

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#277

Post by surge »

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…

My wife pointed out and I feel dumb for not realizing it because I know this myself, you never heat baby food much past 30 seconds, certainly not for 3 minutes at highest setting. Babies generally eat baby food at room temperature to body temperature, and anything outside that is considered extreme to a baby's sensitive nervous system, not to mention you wouldn't want to risk lava spots that might burn their mouths. That adds a rather unrealistic element to the study.

It's far more likely to effect people eating microwave dinners, reheating food/meals in plastic containers, and even then those are different tougher plastics, that said it might be reason enough to just invest in glass containers for food storage.

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#278

Post by surge »

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…

My wife pointed out that the 3 minutes at highest setting they used in this study is not something you'd ever do for baby food. The goal of microwaving it is to simply knock the chill off and get the food/milk up to room-body temp. You wouldn't go further cause baby's are sensitive and you don't want to risk hot spots or burns. This means the food is never heated for much more than 30 seconds at most.

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#279

Post by xapata »

cj wrote: post #195
aziaziazi wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not a parent, but curious: can’t you microwave glass booties ? I do microwave water in glass and don’t see problems. Is it the fragility of the glass ? In that case I guess any fabric protection can solve it ?

Not a parent, but guessing glass is bad because kids tend to throw things and glass is breakable.

So far, glass bottles have been fine for my kid.

I was guessing the commenter was referring to the expense of buying glass bottles, because they cost about double, and that "literal nightmare" was hyperbole.

Re: Study finds billions of nanoplastics released when microwaving containers

#280

Post by amluto »

DangerousPie wrote: post #141
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…

I don't have access to the paper, but just reading the abstract it gives these numbers: > Exposure modeling results suggested that the highest estimated daily intake was 20.3 ng/kg·day for infants drinking microwaved water and 22.1 ng/kg·day for toddlers consuming microwaved dairy products from polypropylene containers. > Furthermore, an in vitro study conducted to assess the cell viability showed that the extracted…

The concentration they used was 1000ppm or about 0.1%. Many things are toxic at that concentration. (This doesn’t cross the threshold of absurdity of “sodium chloride is toxic at that concentration,” but it would be preferable not to drink 0.1% salt water.)
Post reply on HN