this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2024
59 points (100.0% liked)
collapse of the old society
977 readers
53 users here now
to discuss news and stuff of the old world dying
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Looks like I misread your question.
My understanding is that the title defines plastic as toxic in general. In the article there is another link from EPA which
Right, but PFAS isn't even plastic, it's a chemical used as a coating to make things like take-out containers waterproof. PFAS is its own environmental catastrophe, but it doesn't relate to whether microplastics are toxic.
Plastic itself isn't toxic, in fact plastic is biochemically inert (not a source, but further reading on Wikipedia). Various additives to plastic have been shown to be toxic, but those are less relevant to discussions of accumulating microplastics in the body.
Some contexts would be more likely to have negative health impact from microplastics, like when there are larger particles of plastic in the air that factory workers get in their lungs, maybe those particles could cause mechanical damage to the lungs that lead to cancers or other conditions.
That is speculative, and it shows we need more studies to find ways that microplastics impact health, but the title is a little misleading characterizing plastics as toxic in the context of microplastics in arterial plaque, since that is not demonstrated to pose a health risk (even if we all agree it is concerning and may pose some kind of health risk we aren't yet aware of).