We have only begun to identify the adverse health effects." The number of these chemicals is staggering. "How these concentrations relate to exposure via these sources is not yet known." Nevertheless, Swan insisted that "there are 20 years of science (including mine), in animals and humans, documenting adverse health effects of metabolites of chemicals in plastic. "This research is underway, but measurement of actual plastic particles (micro and nano plastics) in human tissue is very new (and expensive)," Swan told Salon by email. "It is important to recognize these are predictions and do contain uncertainty, especially since so little is still known about the extent of microplastic exposure." Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon's weekly newsletter The Vulgar Scientist. This task is not impossible, but it has taken a lot of time. At the same time, Swan pointed out that it is extremely difficult to definitively prove that this global problem is caused by endocrine disruptors in plastics like phthalates and bisphenols. In her 2017 book " Count Down: How Our Modern World Is Threatening Sperm Counts, Altering Male and Female Reproductive Development, and Imperiling the Future of the Human Race," Swan documented plummeting human sperm counts and established a potential link to plastic pollution. Shanna Swan, a professor of environmental medicine and public health at Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York City, has at least a few clues about the ultimate health consequences of all this plastic consumption. We will need further development and application of methods that measure individual plastic exposure levels to evaluate these findings, which is one of the areas my laboratory is focused on."ĭr. "Further, these findings are only providing insight on consumption, and does not tell us about whether these particles are absorbed or have any health effects. "While these findings (and others) are an important first step in understanding microplastic exposure burden, it is important to recognize these are predictions and do contain uncertainty, especially since so little is still known about the extent of microplastic exposure," Walker told Salon. Yet beyond that, the problem of plastic consumption and its health consequences remains frustratingly enigmatic.
Some people may ingest less than five grams, others may find themselves consuming more. That doesn't equate to exactly five grams of polyvinyl chloride (the plastic credit cards are made of), but could be a whole assortment of different types and compositions of plastic and its byproducts.
In terms of how humans consume this plastic - most folks wouldn't ingest this stuff on purpose - Walker noted that it enters our bodies from every available source: food, water, even the air we breathe. We do not actually eat a credit card each week and this phrase was meant as a comparison to provide context on how much plastic this could equate to." "The original findings were for all plastics. "This comparison arose from findings suggesting humans ingest approximately 0.1 5g of plastic particles per week from a variety of exposure sources," Walker explained. Yet to what extent are humans actually consuming all of this plastic? And more importantly, what kind of risks are involved with eating these materials? To get to the bottom of these questions, Salon spoke by email with Dr. Douglas Walker, an Associate Professor of Environmental Health at Emory University Rollins School of Public Health.
How plastics are making us infertile - and could even lead to human extinction
0 kommentar(er)
