[ad_1]
Plastics are fundamental to modern civilization, but they are ravaging our ecosystems. About eight million tonnes annually fill the oceans – which adds to the 150 million tonnes already circulating around the Earth's waters – the non-biodegradable miracle material is a source of serious concern for the environment .
A new study suggests that the planet is not the only body to be contaminated with plastics. This week, researchers from the Vienna Medical University and the Environment Agency Austria announced that they found microplastics, plastic particles smaller than 5 millimeters, in stool samples from each of their test subjects . In other words, the plastic also enters our body.
Eight people from Finland, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Poland, Russia, the United Kingdom and Austria participated in the study. Each person kept a food diary the week before stool sampling, which showed the researchers that all participants were exposed to food packaged in plastic or that they drank in plastic bottles. Six of the eight fish also ate sea fish; none of them was vegetarian.
Since marine life consumes plastics and microplastics in the ocean, seafood consumption is a means by which humans can ingest microplastics. Stool samples have been tested at the Environment Agency in Austria for 10 types of plastics. The results concluded that there was an average of 20 microplastic particles per 10 g of stool. Polypropylene (PP) and polyethylene terephthalate (PET) were the most common types of plastic found in the samples, according to the press release related to the study.
"This is the first study of this type and confirms what we have long suspected, namely that plastics eventually reach the intestine," said in a statement the principal investigator, Dr. Philipp Schwabl . "What this means for us, and especially for patients suffering from gastrointestinal diseases, is of particular concern."
The results raise concerns about the adverse effects (or not) of ingestion of microplastics on human health. However, the experts who were not associated with the study claim to have no definitive answers due to the lack of field research. Associate Professor Laurence Macia, a Beckett member at the Faculty of Medical Sciences at the University of Sydney, told Salon that the researchers in the study had noted that the key was to see what components of these microplastics could cross the gastrointestinal barrier. She added that microplastics are often associated with organic water pollutants, such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and that their impact on human health should also be taken into account.
"If these microplastics just pass through the intestine and are rejected by the feces, they could have minimal effects, but they could also affect the function of the cells lining the intestine (called epithelial cells), which could have an impact on the integrity of the gut, "she told Salon an email. "From this study, we can not tell if the presence of plastic in the stool is bad or not."
Macia added that while some studies have shown that polystyrene nanoparticles could be transported into the epithelial cells of the intestine and "accumulate in the gastric cells" – suggesting that microplastics can bypass the gastrointestinal barrier – this has not been proven.
"There is a significant research deficit in this area," she said. "It is still unclear how microplastics can affect the intestines and immune function, but it is important to raise awareness of this issue because we have not evolved with such components and they could have adverse health effects. (to be determined)."
Martin Wagner, a biologist at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, said his main criticism about the study was that it did not provide a complete picture to researchers. For example, he said that it is possible that the plastic found in the stool samples comes from the lab itself.
"Everyone who works with microplastics knows they are everywhere, even in the cleanest laboratories," he told Salon in an email. "This is only another side [effect] of the age of the plastic in which we live. Therefore, you must perform a complete quality control to ensure that the microplastics you find come from the sample. Without details, we do not know what the Austrian researchers actually measured. "
The results, added Wagner, are not surprising considering "we are living in the age of plastic".
"We have known for a long time that most of us have plastic chemicals in our blood," he said. "Now, they are particles. Admittedly, this has a certain yuck effect, but in the best case, we would only excrete the particles (as we excreted other non-digestible materials).
Wagner said the jury was still undecided as to whether microplastics alone are inherently harmful to human health.
"We have a very limited knowledge of the toxicity of microplastics for humans," Wagner said. "As a result, it is premature to answer this question. That does not mean we should wait for science before trying to reduce our consumption of plastics. This will help the environment and we may be better protected now than regret it later. "
Source link
