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

Study Finds Microplastics in Nearly 90% of Proteins Sampled

oceanconservancy.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 120 posts

Re: Study Finds Microplastics in Nearly 90% of Proteins Sampled

#71

Post by I_Am_Nous »

tppiotrowski wrote: post #25
epistasis wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stop driving? Most microplastic in water come from tires. I've been trying to make small moves away from car infrastructure in my town and the response is, well, less than positive. We already tacitly accept that cars are one of the biggest causes of death. Reducing car infrastructure to reduce microplastics, where we don't even really know the harm, seems far far more challenging.

I think of tires as being made of rubber. Where does the plastic come from?

>Tire factories start with bulk raw materials such as synthetic rubber (60% -70% of total rubber in the tire industry[2][3]), carbon black, and chemicals and produce numerous specialized components that are assembled and cured.

Looks like most of the rubber used these days is synthetic[1], usually made of styrene and butadiene which could easily degrade into base monomers or at least shorter chains.

1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tire_manufacturing

Re: Study Finds Microplastics in Nearly 90% of Proteins Sampled

#72

Post by gwbas1c »

ahazred8ta wrote: post #29
epistasis wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stop driving? Most microplastic in water come from tires. I've been trying to make small moves away from car infrastructure in my town and the response is, well, less than positive. We already tacitly accept that cars are one of the biggest causes of death. Reducing car infrastructure to reduce microplastics, where we don't even really know the harm, seems far far more challenging.

No. Most microplastic in water comes from washing machines. Synthetic fibers from clothes.

> No.

Water pollution from brake and tire dust, (and oil drippings,) is well proven. If you build infrastructure to handle runoff from roads, you need to mitigate pollution in that runoff too.

> Most microplastic in water comes from washing machines. Synthetic fibers from clothes.

I know less about that but from what I've skimmed it appears to be true too.

Re: Study Finds Microplastics in Nearly 90% of Proteins Sampled

#73

Post by polski-g »

charliebwrites wrote: post #59
polski-g wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you donate blood as soon as possible from your last blood donation (per federal regulations), you can remove 50% of your microplastic content per year. Some studies have also shown that going to saunas/sweat lodges also lower your microplastic content.

Interesting, so we’ve shown it’s possible to _sweat_ out micro plastics in a sauna?

That is what the literature suggests, though it was a small n of 20. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22253637/

Re: Study Finds Microplastics in Nearly 90% of Proteins Sampled

#74

Post by ethanbond »

thereddaikon wrote: post #62
ethanbond wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What upper bounds? One of the higher-confidence hypotheses of the effects of plastic contamination is reproductive disruption. Since these plastics bioaccumulate and pass from mother to child, there’s reason to worry about intergenerational accrual of reproductive damage. So as far as I can tell, the “upper bound” of harm is reproductive collapse of our species?

>What upper bounds? Well we know it isn't acutely toxic because people aren't just dropping dead inexplicably. And we know it isn't drastically raising cancer rates because, again those haven't inexplicably shot up.

> people aren't just dropping dead inexplicably

Another pretty decent hypothesis of plastic contamination's effects is obesity (it's been seen both in vitro and in non-human animals). People absolutely are dropping dead en masse of obesity and related complications, and while obesity is proximally explainable (calories), the explanation of why people are consuming so many more calories is contested, at best.

So I don't think we know enough to say confidently that people aren't just dropping dead inexplicably.

Re: Study Finds Microplastics in Nearly 90% of Proteins Sampled

#75

Post by HEmanZ »

somewhereoutth wrote: post #48
jwells89 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Avoiding synthetics in clothing is indeed difficult. I buy 100% natural fibers where I can, but sadly often the best one can do is ~90% natural ~10% synthetic.

100% cotton would seem to be widely available? Certainly for shirts, t-shirts, jumpers, trousers, socks. I don't wear anything other than cotton really for those items. For some reason they have started putting stretchy stuff into cotton jeans - maybe style, or maybe (my pet theory) that good quality cotton is no longer economic for jean production, and so they have to use rougher cotton, which needs the stretchy stu…

I think the jeans thing is just because most people want their jeans to feel and stretch like yoga pants and not jeans. The selvedge denim cult still is usually 100% cotton, and about the same price as stretchy designer jeans, but most people don’t want this.

Re: Study Finds Microplastics in Nearly 90% of Proteins Sampled

#76

Post by jay_kyburz »

QuarterReptile wrote: post #52
glial wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until the concentration is high enough it affects birth rates.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but birth rates are already pretty low, and, worse than failing to deal with the problem, some people think that is a good thing.

Falling birth rates _is_ a good thing and in my view its the only viable solution to global warming. Less people is less energy use and pollution.

Re: Study Finds Microplastics in Nearly 90% of Proteins Sampled

#77

Post by ericmcer »

dashundchen wrote: post #40
stcg wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think becoming vegetarian helps. From the article: > The study found evidence that food processing is a likely source of microplastic contamination, as highly processed protein products (like fish sticks, chicken nuggets, tofu, and plant-based burgers, among others) contained significantly more microplastics per gram than minimally processed products (items like packaged wild Alaska pollock, raw chicken breas…

If you look at the actual data, tofu had the third lowest concentration of microplastic particles per gram (0.03, vs 0.02 for pork loin chop and 0.01 for whole chicken breast). The press release does a disservice to the study by referring to the highly processed group as a whole and not excluding tofu. For reference, the breaded shrimp and fish sticks were measured to have 1.2 and 0.26 particles per gram. Table 3.7 h…

Did you account for calories? Beef has ~3-4X the calories per gram of tofu.

I would guess plants have more microplastics as they just pull things out of the soil and store them (why many plants have a ton of heavy metals). Animals at least have some systems for filtering and processing unwanted items.

Re: Study Finds Microplastics in Nearly 90% of Proteins Sampled

#78

Post by Solvency »

mandmandam wrote: post #46
Solvency wrote: post #20

If this has been happening for decades, why are lifespans still increasing, why are average heights of new generations increasing, etc? I know PFAS are hormonal disrupters in research but it seems like most people are doing... just fine?

> why are lifespans still increasing We are burning huge amounts of fossil fuels to run the economy. This economic boon leads to longer lifetimes, at a huge but externalized and delayed cost. > it seems like most people are doing... just fine? Where do you live? Outside of affluent areas, I think most people these days would laugh at such an absurd claim. We are not fine, physically or mentally. Our soil isn't fine.…

The age-standardized death rate from cancer has declined by 15% since 1990.

https://ourworldindata.org/cancer

Re: Study Finds Microplastics in Nearly 90% of Proteins Sampled

#79

Post by SoftTalker »

polski-g wrote: post #67
chrisamiller wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you claiming that declining fertility is due to plastic, rather than to increasing wealth, education of women, and access to contraception? If so, then I'm going to have to ask you for a) a source and b) a plausible mechanism.

Fertility is collapsing in North Korea and Iran. So no, its not about any of those things.

Could be pervasive malnutrition, generally poor-to-nonexistent health care, and generally polluted environment.

Re: Study Finds Microplastics in Nearly 90% of Proteins Sampled

#80

Post by thereddaikon »

haltist wrote: post #64
thereddaikon wrote: post #58

Have we been able to link any real harm to microplastics? I know it sounds bad intuitively. But can we draw a link to any diseases? What if this just amounts to fear mongering?

Children are now born with plastic in their veins so we'll know soon enough what happens to these children based on their health outcomes.

We've had mass use plastic for decades. Baby boomers were likely born with plastic in their veins. I certainly was.
Post reply on HN