Tag: plastic

Evidence Links Microplastics to Chronic Disease

You’re absorbing plastic through the air, food and water daily. These microscopic plastic particles are being detected inside living tissue — lodged deep within organs, absorbed through your gut and circulating through your bloodstream.

Emerging research has uncovered strong connections between this plastic exposure and conditions like high blood pressure, stroke, and metabolic dysfunction. Studies now link even low-level, everyday exposure to a higher risk of cardiovascular events. This is no longer just about reducing waste. It’s about protecting your heart, your brain and your long-term health.

Microplastics Rank Among Top Predictors of Chronic Disease

Research presented at the American College of Cardiology’s Annual Scientific Session evaluated the concentration of microplastics in seafloor sediment across 555 U.S. coastal and lakeside census tracts between 2015 and 2019.1 The goal was to compare plastic exposure levels with disease rates in those same communities.

Using data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, researchers examined the prevalence of high blood pressure, diabetes, stroke, and cancer and used machine learning to assess how microplastic pollution stacked up against 154 other environmental and socioeconomic factors.

Keep reading

Toxic Plastics Causing ‘Silent Epidemic Of Kids With Lower IQs,’ Pediatrician Tells RFK Jr.

Dr. Leo Trasande, one of the nation’s leading experts on environmental health and toxic exposures, warned this week that plastics pose “a multidimensional and urgent threat to human health,” with children facing some of the greatest risks.

Speaking on “The Secretary Kennedy Podcast,” Trasande — a pediatrician, professor at New York University and director of the NYU Grossman School of Medicine’s Division of Environmental Pediatrics — described mounting evidence linking chemicals in plastics to developmental, hormonal, metabolic, reproductive and neurological harm.

“The impacts run from cradle to grave and womb to tomb,” he said.

The discussion comes as the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) launches STOMP — Systematic Targeting Of MicroPlastics. The $144 million initiative aims to measure, study and eventually remove microplastics and nanoplastics from the human body.

The program will develop standardized testing methods, map how plastics accumulate in organs, rank plastics by biological harm and pursue future removal technologies.

Trasande said the growing concern extends beyond visible plastic waste to microscopic and chemical exposures embedded throughout modern life.

“We know that there are 16,000 chemicals — synthetic chemicals — that are in plastic,” Trasande said. “We don’t know anything about 10,000 of them.”

Among the chemicals with the strongest evidence of harm are bisphenols used in plastics, phthalates found in food packaging and personal care products, and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) — also known as “forever chemicals” — used in nonstick and stain-resistant products.

Trasande said the evidence is “extremely strong” that many of these chemicals disrupt hormones, which in turn regulate metabolism, reproduction, growth and brain development.

‘A silent epidemic of kids with lower IQs in the U.S.’

As a pediatrician, Trasande repeatedly emphasized that children are uniquely vulnerable.

“Pound for pound, they eat more food, drink more water, breathe more air, so they’re uniquely susceptible,” he said. “Their organ systems are also just being primed. And so if you disrupt that, there are lifelong and permanent consequences.”

He pointed to evidence linking phthalate exposure during pregnancy to roughly 50,000 premature births in the U.S. each year, along with impaired brain development and poorer educational outcomes.

Trasande warned that some of the most damaging effects may be subtle and population-wide, rather than immediately obvious in individual children. Even small disruptions to thyroid hormones during pregnancy are associated with cognitive deficits, autism and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), he said.

“What you see is a silent epidemic of kids with lower IQs in the U.S.,” Trasande said. “Just to put this in context for the audience, a kid loses an IQ point, mom doesn’t notice, pediatrician doesn’t notice.”

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. compared the issue to the impact of lead exposure on the national average IQ before leaded gasoline was phased out in the 1980s.

Keep reading

MAHA Leaders Demand EPA Protect Americans From Toxic Chemicals

Leaders, farmers and organizations aligned with the Make America Healthy Again, or MAHA, movement are calling on U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin to protect the health of the American public from pesticides, plastics and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, chemicals that are contributing to infertility, cancer and other chronic diseases.

The 36 MAHA organizations and leaders sent a letter urging the EPA to walk their talk in the forthcoming “Make America Healthy Again” agenda — which may be released any day — with concrete actions that will reduce Americans’ exposure to toxic chemicals, curb the influence of corporations over the agency and address rising rates of chronic disease.

“The American people were promised a Make America Healthy Again agenda that would finally confront the root causes of chronic disease in this country. That must include tackling the toxic chemicals Americans are exposed to every day through pesticides, PFAS, and plastics,” said Vani Hari, Author & Food Activist.

“We desperately need the EPA to put the health of families and children ahead of the interests of chemical companies.”

The letter demands, among other actions, that EPA initiate an emergency review of pesticides that are allowed in the U.S. but banned in the European Union — a policy supported by 87% of Americans.

The groups are also calling for tighter scrutiny of persistent, toxic PFAS “forever chemicals” and better monitoring of microplastics in drinking water.

The MAHA leaders point to industry influence at the EPA as the heart of the failure to protect the public from harmful chemicals.

They noted that revolving-door appointments, industry-funded science and regulatory loopholes have become the norm at the agency. EPA needs to chart a new course, they said, and that means prioritizing human health over the interests of chemical corporations.

“The EPA’s public support for glyphosate and pesticide liability protections in the face of growing evidence of scientific harm by independent scientists is a major betrayal of MAHA’s mission and President Trump’s campaign promise to RFK, Jr. [Robert F. Kennedy Jr.] to reign in toxic chemicals in our food system,” said David Murphy, the founder of United We Eat and a longtime advocate for food and agricultural reforms.

Keep reading

An Embarrassing Mistake May Have Skewed Microplastics Research All Along

Earth’s worrying pall of microplastics—recorded by scientists practically everywhere, across our planet’s oceans, aloft in clouds above Mount Fuji, burrowed into human brains, and even in the testicles of our poor damn dogs—might be modestly less apocalyptic than previously thought.

Researchers at the University of Michigan (U-M) have identified a surprising and arguably mildly embarrassing error that might be contributing to dramatic overestimates of microplastics content across multiple studies: flecks of debris shed by the standard latex and nitrile gloves that scientists typically use in the lab. Tiny soap-like salts, called stearates, coat these gloves as remnants of the manufacturing process, according to the new U-M study, where they can rub off, creating thousands of false positives per square millimeter (or about one-thousandth of a square inch).

The U-M team replicated a common test surface for microplastics work to evaluate how seven different types of disposable lab gloves could muddy the final microplastics count in each case.

“The type of contact we tried to mimic touches upon all varieties of microplastics research,” according to a statement from the study’s lead author Madeline Clough, a recent doctoral graduate at U-M. “If you are contacting a sample with a gloved hand,” Clough said, “you’re likely imparting these stearates that could overestimate your results.”

Keep reading

RFK Jr. Announces Investigation Into Removing Microplastics From the Human Body

The federal government will spend $144 million to investigate microplastics and figure out how to remove them from human bodies, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and other officials announced on April 2.

The program—Systematic Targeting Of MicroPlastics (STOMP)—is tasked with measuring, researching, and removing microplastics and nanoplastics from humans.

Tests reveal that microplastics, or small pieces of plastic, have been found in many people and have been associated with health problems. Ingestion can occur through consumption of food and water, as well as contact with the air.

“We are not dealing with a distant or theoretical risk,” Kennedy said during a news conference in Washington. “We are dealing with a measurable and growing presence inside the human body.”

However, officials said more data are needed, including ways to safely remove the microplastics.

“We cannot treat what we cannot measure,” Kennedy said. “We cannot regulate what we don’t understand.”

Keep reading

Dealing With the Microplastics Silent Invasion

We’re living in an era where we have never been so heavily subjected to toxicity, coming from so many different sources. The extent to which these toxicities are capable of assaulting our bodies and their ubiquitous nature means that we can never be completely free from their effects. 

However, there are ways in which we can protect ourself to minimize their effects. For a list of unprecedented health threats and how we can protect ourselves go here.

Another nasty to include in the list of toxicities is microplastics. 

They have been detected in the remotest areas of the world: The Arctic, Antarctic, deepest oceans and other isolated environments, such as, for example, in the glaciers, snow-covered mountainous areas, rivers making up the Gela Dandong Peak in China, untouched by humans.

Not that long ago research was done on the brains of deceased humans to look for plastic content. The research, conducted by Professor Matthew Campen, University of New Mexico, revealed that the plastic content of their brains was found to be 0.5% on average for each individual. -That’s the equivalent of a plastic spoon weighing 5g. Hence the above image showing a plastic spoon pasted on the brain.

The 0.5% result was a 50% increase on comparing average brain plastic content in 2016. 

-This disturbing evidence suggests that we are facing an inevitable, unstoppable generational increase in body plastic toxicity. Not just in our brains, but an invasion of microplastics in other areas of our bodies, including other vital organs such the liver, kidneys and heart…

So named the ’silent invasion’ because the microplastics, tiny shards the size of 200 nanometers (0.0002 millimeters) or even smaller, such as nano-plastics (1 billionth of a meter), are too small to be detected by the naked eye. These pollutants are present in the air, land and water.  

When ingested or inhaled, they enter our bodies bypassing natural immune defenses, unable to be broken down when in the body. 

Bisphenol-A or phthalates are examples of the toxic ingredients that accumulate, having the ability to affect body pH, and mimic or block hormones: The consequences of hormonal disruptions include infertility, pregnancy complications, cognitive impairment and oxidative stress (leading to cell damage) through  imbalances… 

Further, besides affecting the body’s organs they are able to clog up arteries and veins, leading to cardiovascular illnesses.

As microplastics are present in oceans, soil and reservoirs where our drinking water and food comes from, they have become hotbeds for antibiotic resistant superbugs. 

A Boston University study showed that E. Coli bacteria became 5 times more resistant to over several different antibiotics when in a microplastics environment. This disturbing link between microplastic toxicity and increasing antibiotic-resistant superbugs should sound alarm bells ringing. 

Consider the implications. For example, consider wastewater (effluent) treatment. This now has superbugs in a microplastic environment that poses a public health threat when released back into the environment if not treated properly. What about the areas where there are poor people and there is a lack of sanitation…?  

-In short, the microplastics silent invasion has become a world-wide health emergency threatening both humans and wildlife in the environment.

However, there are a number of necessary precautionary measures we can take to protect ourselves. 

Keep reading

‘Recycling’ Makes Plastic Pollution Worse

If you’re like many people, you’ve always thought a numbered-triangle symbol on the bottom of a plastic container tells you it’s recyclable—giving you peace of mind that when you toss it into a blue bin, it will be turned into something else.

That’s not true. Those symbols are Resin Identification Codes (RICs). Numbered 1 through 7, they only identify the kind of plastic an item is made of. Far from giving a sweeping assurance that RIC-stamped items are recyclable, the symbol frequently indicates a particular item absolutely cannot be recycled.

Reluctant to burden citizens with figuring out which plastics are recyclable—a chore that could dampen participation and cause confusion as recyclability of various plastics changes over time—many municipal recycling programs simply encourage people to toss all their RIC-stamped plastics in the bin and let the recyclers sort it out.

Which ones do recyclers actually want? The most-recycled plastic in America is stamped with a “1,” identifying the item as polyethylene terephthalate (PET). You’ll find it on beverage bottles, cooking oil containers, and many other liquid-containing bottles. A “2” tells you it’s high-density polyethylene (HDPE). Another generally recycling-suitable plastic, it’s used for milk jugs and laundry detergent jugs, and spray-cleaner bottles.

It’s all downhill from there. Chances are your bin has plenty of #5—polypropylene (PP)—which is frequently used for single-serve coffee-maker pods; yogurt, butter, prescription pill and soft tofu containers; and the lids on paperboard raisin cartons. Unfortunately, while there’s been a modest recent uptick in recyclers’ interest, polypropylene generally isn’t being recycled in the United States.

Keep reading

Microplastics Found In Human Brains Have Increased By 50% In The Last Eight Years

The plastic pollution crisis just got personal. A new study from the University of New Mexico reveals an unsettling truth: microscopic plastic particles are accumulating in human brains at significantly higher concentrations than in other organs – and these levels have surged 50% in just eight years.

Scientists examining postmortem brain tissue found microplastic concentrations were about 12 times higher than those in the liver or kidney. Even more concerning, brain samples from individuals with dementia contained up to ten times more plastic than those without the condition, though researchers emphasize it’s too early to determine if microplastics contribute to the disease.

“This really changes the landscape. It makes it so much more personal,” says lead researcher Matthew Campen, Distinguished and Regents’ Professor at UNM’s College of Pharmacy, in a statement.

Keep reading

How Much Of The World’s Plastic Waste Actually Gets Recycled?

The United States, the world’s largest plastic polluter, recycles a mere 5% of its household plastic waste.

Around the world, the situation is slightly better, but a staggering 91% of plastic waste is still incinerated, landfilled, or mismanaged (e.g. dumped into the ocean).

Keep reading

Microplastics Linked to Cancer and Harm to Human Reproductive, Digestive, and Respiratory Systems

Last week, the study titled Effects of Microplastic Exposure on Human Digestive, Reproductive, and Respiratory Health: A Rapid Systematic Review by Chartres et al was published in the journal Environmental Science and Technology:

Microplastics are ubiquitous environmental contaminants for which there are documented human exposures, but there is a paucity of research evaluating their impacts on human health. We conducted a rapid systematic review using the “Navigation Guide” systematic review method.

We searched four databases in July 2022 and April 2024 with no restriction on the date. We included studies using predefined eligibility criteria that quantitatively examined the association of microplastic exposure with any health outcomes. We amended the eligibility criteria after screening studies and prioritized digestive, reproductive, and respiratory outcomes for further evaluation.

We included three human observational studies examining reproductive (n= 2) and respiratory (n = 1) outcomes and 28 animal studies examining reproductive (n = 11), respiratory (n = 7), and digestive (n = 10) outcomes. For reproductive outcomes (sperm quality) and digestive outcomes (immunosuppresion) we rated overall body evidence as “high” quality and concluded microplastic exposure is “suspected” to adversely impact them. For reproductive outcomes (female follicles and reproductive hormones), digestive outcomes (gross or microanatomic colon/small intestine effects, alters cell proliferation and cell death, and chronic inflammation), and respiratory outcomes (pulmonary function, lung injury, chronic inflammation, and oxidative stress) we rated the overall body of evidence as “moderate” quality and concluded microplastic exposure is “suspected” to adversely impact them. We concluded that exposure to microplastics is “unclassifiable” for birth outcomes and gestational age in humans on the basis of the “low” and “very low” quality of the evidence.

We concluded that microplastics are “suspected” to harm human reproductive, digestive, and respiratory health, with a suggested link to colon and lung cancer. Future research on microplastics should investigate additional health outcomes impacted by microplastic exposure and identify strategies to reduce exposure.

Keep reading