Disaster Microplastics are infiltrating brain tissue, studies show: ‘There’s nowhere left untouched’ - Twenty-four brain samples collected in early 2024 measured on average about 0.5% plastic by weight

Source / Archive
Douglas Main
Wed 21 Aug 2024 15.00 CEST, Last modified on Thu 22 Aug 2024 22.13 CEST

A growing body of scientific evidence shows that microplastics are accumulating in critical human organs, including the brain, leading researchers to call for more urgent actions to rein in plastic pollution.
Studies have detected tiny shards and specks of plastics in human lungs, placentas, reproductive organs, livers, kidneys, knee and elbow joints, blood vessels and bone marrow.

Given the research findings, “it is now imperative to declare a global emergency” to deal with plastic pollution, said Sedat Gündoğdu, who studies microplastics at Cukurova University in Turkey.
Humans are exposed to microplastics – defined as fragments smaller than 5mm in diameter – and the chemicals used to make plastics from widespread plastic pollution in air, water and even food.
"There’s much more plastic in our brains than I ever would have imagined or been comfortable with" Matthew Campen, University of New Mexico

The health hazards of microplastics within the human body are not yet well-known. Recent studies are just beginning to suggest they could increase the risk of various conditions such as oxidative stress, which can lead to cell damage and inflammation, as well as cardiovascular disease.

Animal studies have also linked microplastics to fertility issues, various cancers, a disrupted endocrine and immune system, and impaired learning and memory.

There are currently no governmental standards for plastic particles in food or water in the United States. The Environmental Protection Agency is working on crafting guidelines for measuring them, and has been giving out grants since 2018 to develop new ways to quickly detect and quantify them.

Finding microplastics in more and more human organs “raises a lot of concerns”, given what we know about health effects in animals, studies of human cells in the lab, and emerging epidemiological studies, said Bethanie Carney Almroth, an ecotoxicologist at the University of Gothenburg in Sweden. “It’s scary, I’d say.”

The pre-print brain study led by Campen also hinted at a concerning link. In the study, researchers looked at 12 brain samples from people who had died with dementia, including Alzheimer’s disease. These brains contained up to 10 times more plastic by weight than healthy samples. (The latest version of Campen’s study, which contains these findings, was not yet posted online when this story was published.)

“I don’t know how much more plastic our brain can stuff in without it causing some problems,” Campen said.

The paper also found the quantity of microplastics in brain samples from 2024 was about 50% higher from the total in samples that date to 2016, suggesting the concentration of microplastics found in human brains is rising at a similar rate to that found in the environment. Most of the organs came from the office of the medical investigator in Albuquerque, New Mexico, which investigates untimely or violent deaths.

“You can draw a line – it’s increasing over time. It’s consistent with what you’re seeing in the environment,” Campen said.

Many other papers have found microplastics in the brains of other animal species, so it’s not entirely surprising the same could be true for humans, said Almroth of the University of Gothenburg, who was not involved in the paper.

When it comes to these insidious particles, “the blood-brain barrier is not as protective as we’d like to think”, Almroth said, referring to the series of membranes that keep many chemicals and pathogens from reaching the central nervous system.

Explosion of research​

Adding to the concerns about accumulation in the human body, the Journal of Hazardous Materials published a study last month that found microplastics in all 16 samples of bone marrow examined, the first paper of its kind. All the samples contained polystyrene, used to make packing for peanuts and electronics, and almost all contained polyethylene, used in clear food wrap, detergent bottles and other common household products.

Another recent paper looking at 45 patients undergoing hip or knee surgery in Beijing, China, found microplastics in the membranous lining of every single hip or knee joint examined.

A study published on 15 May in the journal Toxicological Sciences found microplastics in all 23 human and 47 canine testicles studied, finding that samples from people had a nearly threefold greater concentration than those from dogs. A higher quantity of certain types of plastic particles – including polyethylene, the main component of plastic water bottles – correlated with lower testicular weights in dogs.

‘Pretty alarming’​

In one of the latest studies to emerge – a pre-print paper still undergoing peer review that is posted online by the National Institutes of Health – researchers found a particularly concerning accumulation of microplastics in brain samples.

An examination of the livers, kidneys and brains of autopsied bodies found that all contained microplastics, but the 91 brain samples contained on average about 10 to 20 times more than the other organs. The results came as a shock, according to the study’s lead author Matthew Campen, a toxicologist and professor of pharmaceutical sciences at the University of New Mexico.

The researchers found that 24 of the brain samples, which were collected in early 2024, measured on average about 0.5% plastic by weight.

“It’s pretty alarming,” Campen said. “There’s much more plastic in our brains than I ever would have imagined or been comfortable with.”

The study describes the brain as “one of the most plastic-polluted tissues yet sampled”.

Another paper, which appeared on 19 June in the International Journal of Impotence Research, detected plastic particles in the penises of four out of five men getting penile implants to treat erectile dysfunction.

“The potential health effects are concerning, especially considering the unknown long-term consequences of microplastics accumulating in sensitive tissues like the reproductive organs,” said Ranjith Ramasamy, the study’s lead author and a medical researcher and urologist at the University of Miami.

Meanwhile, a Chinese group published a study in May showing small quantities of microplastics in the semen of all 40 participants. An Italian paper from a few months prior reported similar results.

A handful of studies have also now found contamination in human placentas. A study that appeared in the May issue of Toxicological Sciences reported finding micro- and nanoplastics in all 62 placental samples, though the concentration ranged widely.

In Italy, researchers followed 312 patients who had fatty deposits, or plaques, removed from their carotid artery. Almost six in 10 had microplastics, and these people fared worse than those who did not: Over the next 34 months, they were 2.1 times as likely to experience a heart attack or stroke, or die.

‘Nowhere left untouched’​

The Food and Drug Administration says in a statement on its website that “current scientific evidence does not demonstrate that levels of microplastics or nanoplastics detected in foods pose a risk to human health.”

Still, researchers say that individuals should try to reduce their exposure by avoiding the use of plastic in preparing food, especially when microwaving; drinking tap water instead of bottled water; and trying to prevent the accumulation of dust, which is contaminated with plastics. Some researchers advise eating less meat, especially processed products.

Leonardo Trasande, a medical researcher at New York University, said much remains unknown about the impacts of microplastic accumulation in humans. The negative health impacts of chemicals used in plastics, such as phthalates, are better established, though, he said. A study he co-authored found exposure to phthalates had increased the risk of cardiovascular disease and death in the United States, causing $39bn or more in lost productivity per year.

Microplastic particles can be contaminated with and carry such chemicals into the body. “The micro- and nanoplastics may be effective delivery systems for toxic chemicals,” Trasande said.

The American Chemistry Council, which represents plastic and chemical manufacturers, did not directly respond to questions about the recent studies finding microplastics in human organs. Kimberly Wise White, a vice-president with the group, noted that “the global plastics industry is dedicated to advancing the scientific understanding of microplastics”.

The United Nations Environment Assembly agreed two years ago to begin working toward a global treaty to end plastic pollution, a process that is ongoing.

Several news reports in the last week suggest that the Biden administration has signaled that the US delegation involved in the discussions will support measures to reduce global production of plastics, which researchers say is critical to getting a handle on the problem.

“There’s nowhere left untouched from the deep sea to the atmosphere to the human brain,” Almroth said.

This story is co-published with the New Lede, a journalism project of the Environmental Working Group
 
PL I ate a fish I captured from a pond a little while ago and it had little flat plastic flakes inside it's flesh. This little fish had somehow absorbed plastic into itself but I ate it anyways because I was hungry; After eating the entire fish I spent hours picking plastic flakes out from under my teeth using a needle. It was not fun!
 
Even if all consumer grade plastics were banned today the damage is done. This will not go away, not in our lifetime, not in the one of our children. This will stay for potentially millions of years, eternally contaminating this planet. And not one of the peddlers of this literal toxic shit will ask themselves: what have we done?
 
Even if all consumer grade plastics were banned today the damage is done. This will not go away, not in our lifetime, not in the one of our children. This will stay for potentially millions of years, eternally contaminating this planet. And not one of the peddlers of this literal toxic shit will ask themselves: what have we done?
or suffer the slightest consequences for it, they're enjoying the billionaire lifestyle
 
horrors beyond our mortal comprehension
And leftoids talk about muh climate. The spread of microplastics will very likely cause the sterilisation of major populations of most species on this planet, but these idiots chose to worry about some lines on a made up graph.
 
We used to use glass for everything; Milk bottles, pop bottles, sauces. Then we swapped to plastic to make the line go up for billionaires at the expense of our health.

We continue to march in the direction of worse food, worse quality control and failing health organisations. We all know where this leads, yet nobody cares enough to even want to talk about it, let alone stop it.


"Muh environment" people only care about swapping to recycled plastics or introducing paper (laden with plastic) to virtue signal. Not one motherfucker wants to go back to glass, which can be heavily recycled, is natural and cheap as fuck to make.
 
From the moment I understood the weakness of my flesh, it disgusted me. I craved the strength and certainty of Plastic. I aspired to the purity of the Blessed Silicone.

Your kind cling to your flesh, as if it will not decay and fail you. One day the crude biomass that you call a temple will wither, and you will beg my kind to save you. But I am already saved, for the Silicone is immortal…

...even in death I serve the Plastissiah.
 
Even if all consumer grade plastics were banned today the damage is done. This will not go away, not in our lifetime, not in the one of our children. This will stay for potentially millions of years, eternally contaminating this planet. And not one of the peddlers of this literal toxic shit will ask themselves: what have we done?
In 30 years this opinion will be getting laughed at by bought and paid for politicians and "experts". They will be telling us that plastic in your brain is just a leftist conspiracy theory, that there's no "real" science behind it and that, even if there is plastic in your brain, it's not bad for you. In fact it might even be good for you.

They all laugh at the tree hugging hippies while counting their money, but only the hippies will be vindicated it comes time to pay the bill.
 
We used to use glass for everything; Milk bottles, pop bottles, sauces. Then we swapped to plastic to make the line go up for billionaires at the expense of our health.

We continue to march in the direction of worse food, worse quality control and failing health organisations. We all know where this leads, yet nobody cares enough to even want to talk about it, let alone stop it.


"Muh environment" people only care about swapping to recycled plastics or introducing paper (laden with plastic) to virtue signal. Not one motherfucker wants to go back to glass, which can be heavily recycled, is natural and cheap as fuck to make.
Those "reusable" bags that are made to "fight waste" actually take up more energy to make than plastic bags, produce more pollution in the production of it, and take longer to degrade, making them worse for the environment.

If governments wanted to actually make a fight on pollution, they'd force most food businesses to make their products with glass and paper instead of plastic. But glass is more expensive than plastic to make so it'll never happen

All plastic packaging should have biodegradable plastic that decomposes within provably fifty years.

There's a claim that plastic has a lower carbon footprint than glass but this article clearly shows that's a fuckin lie.
 
Idk at this point given that it's theoretically everywhere in also starting to doubt the tests.

Like I don't like plastic and I'm glad to see certain packaging moving away from it (obviously), but when literally everything is testing positive for something... I doubt the test. I literally don't think I could make something they haven't found microplastics in and that makes me wonder if something is giving a false positive.
 
I agree with everything but this. While the raw materials to make glass are widely available and cheap to acquire, its high cost famously comes from how labor intensive it is to make.

I agree its way better than plastic, but its not cheap to make.
I don't want to be that guy but I've been to glass factories. (PL: I'm a fucking saddo who goes on tours to places and sets up fake interviews because I like to see how shit is made). Glass sheeting is a semi-automated line run by 8 people. Ideally the processes should have had 10 but hey, who am I to argue?

Glass bottle are made in the similar vein, with added steps to Blow the bottles in a press but still relatively automated. There will be more maintenance required on the machines vs plastic, but the plastic (Pet) used for pop/soda bottles is a lot more temperamental than glass and cannot be recycled, leading to higher waste and thus, high cost.
For glass, a mixture of 35% recycled glass can be added to the virgin (pure) batch, making almost all waste a recyclable product in-house, reducing the cost of quality failures and wastage.

How it's Made (with the British narrator, is the best programme ever made)
 
Back