and we're just soooo much smarter nowadays than we were 1000 years ago...
I mean the average lifespan in the year 1000 was about 31, so we’re doing at least a few things right.
Nanoplastic Ingestion Causes Neurological Deficits
31–40 of 339 posts
Re: Nanoplastic Ingestion Causes Neurological Deficits
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
Metal usually has a plastic coating though, doesn't it?
Coca-Cola cans, and probably many others, have plastic coating with BPA on the inside. But that doesn’t matter much in comparison, because PFAS (corrected) are in the product, allegedly: https://amp.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jan/19/simply-o...
Re: Nanoplastic Ingestion Causes Neurological Deficits
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't that average lifespan? There was a lot of death either in childbirth or during early childhood years. If you filter that data out a bit, adults lived a more comparable age. Still not as good as today, but not 31.
TBH I'm not sure the argument that only women and those under 5 were dying young in large numbers is a great rebuttal to the idea that we were better off in 1023.
Re: Nanoplastic Ingestion Causes Neurological Deficits
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean the average lifespan in the year 1000 was about 31, so we’re doing at least a few things right.
From what I've read, if you filter out children under 5 in that statistic people lived into their early 60's pretty regularly.
Re: Nanoplastic Ingestion Causes Neurological Deficits
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure it matters since there's plastic in all the food and drinking water anyway. There's no way to avoid ingesting plastic any more. You could maybe reduce it a bit, that's all.
So don’t try and minimize it altogether because you’re getting some elsewhere? This isn’t good logic.
Re: Nanoplastic Ingestion Causes Neurological Deficits
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure it matters since there's plastic in all the food and drinking water anyway. There's no way to avoid ingesting plastic any more. You could maybe reduce it a bit, that's all.
So don’t try and minimize it altogether because you’re getting some elsewhere? This isn’t good logic.
Re: Nanoplastic Ingestion Causes Neurological Deficits
#37My 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.
Nowadays though I have the extreme where if my food is in plastic I don't feel the food is contaminated (until recently, but for different reasons), but like the plastic is forever smelling of the food and filthy.
My gf uses plastic lunchboxes and even reuses plastic bottles and I swear I can smell the things around the appartment. It's gross.
Re: Nanoplastic Ingestion Causes Neurological Deficits
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure it matters since there's plastic in all the food and drinking water anyway. There's no way to avoid ingesting plastic any more. You could maybe reduce it a bit, that's all.
So don’t try and minimize it altogether because you’re getting some elsewhere? This isn’t good logic.
Re: Nanoplastic Ingestion Causes Neurological Deficits
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure it matters since there's plastic in all the food and drinking water anyway. There's no way to avoid ingesting plastic any more. You could maybe reduce it a bit, that's all.
So don’t try and minimize it altogether because you’re getting some elsewhere? This isn’t good logic.
But yes, my intuition says that whatever you might eliminate by not storing food in plastic and other types of avoidance is just gonna be a tiny drop in the constant dose of plastic you're getting from everything you ingest.
Re: Nanoplastic Ingestion Causes Neurological Deficits
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't that average lifespan? There was a lot of death either in childbirth or during early childhood years. If you filter that data out a bit, adults lived a more comparable age. Still not as good as today, but not 31.
TBH I'm not sure the argument that only women and those under 5 were dying young in large numbers is a great rebuttal to the idea that we were better off in 1023.