Masking while handling plastic materials that involves your field of work. Aside from that, you're royally fucked. Unless you want to be an everyday, masking nut.

Have there been any proven serious negative effects of having microplastics in the body?

>>16385497
Nope. It's a conspiracy theory to scare people into wearing masks again.

>>16385387
TKD

>>16385578
Masks are by far the largest source of microplastics that get inside people's lungs.

>>16385497
>>16385578
Correct me of I'm wrong but isn't it basically imposible to definitively prove or disprove any negative effects of microplastics, since you can't find anyone without them. And even if you could, they'd be like pre-industrial tribal peoples so there'd be too many confounding variables.
Even though I have no proof of this, I'm going to follow my intuition and say they're definitely bad. No fucking way having plastic in your brain is going to do nothing.

>>16385387
Eat more microplastics so your body adapts faster

>>16385578
>we will see chuds deliberately eating microplastic particles just to own da joos

>>16385661
You can compare versus historical data of cancer rates and prevalence of other diseases to see if there are increases.
Other than that it's hard to do causal studies like in a clinical trial. It would be much harder to convince industry leaders of potential harm even as they themselves (and their children, and their grandchildren, and so on) are ingesting plastics like everyone else.

File: Capture.jpg (48 KB, 1849x211)

48 KB JPG

Donate blood (or practice phlebotomy) when you can. It reduces microplastics and PFAS.

>>16385578
> scare people into wearing masks again
the end goal of which is...?

>>16385989
To get you to take your meds

>>16385981
>losing 1.5 L of blood a month
there’s no way he’s serious

>>16385387
There was news recently that a bacteria was found in the oceans that has evolved to eat plastic damaged by UV.

>>16386113
>recently
nigga that "news" is 20 years old and somehow that plastic eating bacteria is still nowhere

>>16385387
>Realistically, How Can We Stop This?
we simply cant.
if we would stop with the plastic madness tomorrow, we still will suffer for another 1000 years.

>And what are the implications of microplastics going into our brains?
hardly foreseeable but the list of effects we know is more than just worrying.

>>16385387
Equally as important, microplastics are stored in the balls now.
>>16385497
I don't know about proven, but I'd assume that having an abundance of microplastics in your body gives you bitch tits, and makes you more inclined to act a little zesty.

>Worries about chemicals from "microplastics."
>Smokes pot.

>>16385387
It's too late
We won't make it through the filter

>>16385999
Meh I had to do a couple pints a month for hemochromatosis
I think 4 pints a month was the max they would do

>>16385387
The solution is trivial. Stop buying plastic.

>>16387764
I dont want to fight individual responsibility but I hate that while this is posted (at least sometime), nobody ever posts who is actually responsible for such changes.
lets be honest:
the legislator actually has this job, but is incapable due to lobbying. its literally the definition, since its the legislators responsibility that we have a sustainably and stable society.

of course it is a difficult act if you want to solve the problems of our time and it is even clearer that the resulting restrictions are unpleasant.
but that doesnt change the fact of who has to act here, and just because weve been shitting on it for almost 50 years doesnt mean we can leave it alone.

instead, we are told by the profiteers that citizens are responsible, which is a deliberate lie used to justify it.
this is by far the ugliest scam there is.

>>16385497
Yes (in animals at least)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasticosis

>>16385497
>>16385661
>>16385387
https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2309822
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18052392
https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2023.1330396
https://doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kfae060
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12989-020-00358-y
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms241512308
Here's just a few

>>16388296
thx for sharing.

>>16385497
We’re only just beginning to understand the implications and even the early findings are pretty worrying

>>16387764
>stop buying plastic
how am I supposed to eat for 10$ a week then?

>>16388423
Buy meat and vegetables that don't come wrapped in plastic.

>>16388472
>meat
>vegetables
>eating on $10 a week
no, 90% of your diet has to be grains.

>>16385387
Dont we have the blood-brain barrier to protect us from this?

>>16388423
>10$ a week
you can't survive off of that
maybe temporarily
but you will get cancer, metabolic syndrome and heart disease
honestly though, how fucking poor are you that you can only afford 1.4 USD for food for a full fucking day?

replace all publicly available plastics with bioplastics by way of hemp and hemp resins.

>>16385497
>Have there been any proven serious negative effects of having microplastics in the body?
yes. since it has increased over time you see it in zoomers and especially alphies.

>>16388474
Then buy grains sold in paper bags.

>>16385497
Ongoing campaigns of systematic suppression regarding this field of study.

They weren't fed so much goyslop back then.

>>16385999
>jab needle into my forehead
Ok I'm following....
>2-3 cups of blood
No way bro!

?

>>16390089
/thread

>>16388423
can you share your grocery spreadsheet with me?

>>16385578
That's some kino cognitive dissonance.

>>16392883
milk 2 gallons: $6
giant bag of cereal: $6
1 sliced bread: $2.75
large peanut butter: $6
dozen eggs: $3
four things of pasta: $4
box of ramen: $3.5
pound of rice: $1
total: $30.25
total calories: 28,892
days lasted: 2 weeks
price per week: $15.125

of these only the pasta doesn't come in cardboard

>>16393193
and yeah it costs more than I thought because I never actually calculated it before (or maybe I eat less calories than I think)... I guess I have to eat more rice and add beans or something

>>16393193
i'm telling you right now i will be auditing your post and cross referencing it with the local kroger.

>>16393204
ok but I shop at walmart

>>16393210
and you don't live in my neighborhood either.
i doubt it will make much of a difference.
truth be told, your total calories is already way too low for my lifestyle.

File: fact.png (15 KB, 908x171)

15 KB PNG

>>16393213
>>16393193
fact check: True
not good enough for me tho.
thanks for sharing.

>>16386904
Fuck

>>16391013
Proof? I see articles about microplastics and PFAS constantly.

>>16387764
How do I stop airborne microplastics?

>>16395169
Stop buying plastics.

>>16385497
Male fertility crisis

>>16388750
the reason why it's news is that it appears that microplastics can cross this barrier

>>16393255
65g prot / day for a man is not optimal. considering protein quality as well it's probably not ideal. "protein" being of course amino acids. and it's possible to meet protein needs but be deficient in specific amino acids.

this is a poverty diet but any strenuous activity will demand more.

accepted literature is 0.8 g/kg /day for maximum protein synthesis rates. we round up and say 1 g/kg /day.

considering the average american height and weight it should be something like 80 - 100 g prot per day.

this diet is horrendously lacking in micronutrients as well. you will need at minimum several doses of multivitamin per day. and to improve protein quality, i say add 1 whey shake per day.

with 99% certainty the world population is deficient in 1 or all 3:
vitamin D
magnesium
potassium

this diet lacking in nuts, legumes, and leafy greens most certainly is not meeting the latter 2.

>>16385661
A ubiquitous neurological toxin has a profound impact at both a personal and societal scale.
Look at lead poisoning in the late Roman empire, alcoholism in Soviet-era states, or opium addiction in 19th century China.
Understanding the pathological mechanism of micro-plastic and endocrine disruptors on human psychology and behavior is paramount to navigating our 21st century Western impasse.

>hey bro the micro plastics are trying to infest your brain
>just trust me

>>16385387
At least the leached molecules aren't co-incidentally close enough estrogen that it fits receptors and triggers female purity in 5yr old girls and de-masculinization of swamp gaters..
like that last time it happened.

mandate pyrolisys for all plastic waste
make plastic packaging illegal
nuke any country where they package single fruits in plastic

>>16397910
>purity
puberty

>>16385387
Nothing will be done because republicans exist and the U.S. is the most influential economy in the world. It’s making headlines that the Biden admin is trying to enforce anti trust laws that were ALREADY ON THE BOOKS. For decades the government hasn’t been enforcing hundred year old teddy roosevelt era laws because rich people didn’t want them too. Republicans will kill any attempt to solve this issue and the U.S. is the biggest polluter. Thank your boomer grandparents for your credit card shrapnel filled balls

File: 1701202973008447.jpg (146 KB, 1200x884)

146 KB JPG

>>16385387
You can't.

>>16398020
>blames the wrong country
>blames the wrong political party in the wrong country
classic

>>16395854
>jerk off to tranny porn 3 times a day
>muh male fertility crisis is due to microplastic.

>>16385410
It's in the water. If you haven't filtered your water all throughout the last decades, it's already in your brain.

>>16398238
reverse osmosis or distilled water is the only way if you want to be anal about it.

even then, consider the water supply to crops and livestock is not filtered and we are talking about unstoppable biological magnification.

at this point, we are at the recognition stage. harm reduction is through mitigation measures. we don't have global reduction strategies. humans seem to be doing a really good job of killing ourselves. who knows, it may create a species of plastic resistant homo ______ in the future.

>>16398298
>consider the water supply to crops and livestock
Most people get microplastics from fish because they bioaccumulate like other shit.

Just don't eat fish and you basically don't have to worry about this shit as long as the fish eaters are still breathing.

>>16385609
so worth it

https://odysee.com/@Realfake_Newsource:9/Face-Diaper-Death-Porn:d

>>16398341
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/microplastics-found-near-everests-peak-highest-ever-detected-world-perpetual-planet

avoiding fish won't do anything. this shit is literally everywhere. even if you started a homestead in a deeply rural area, microplastics are part of the water cycle. so unless we plan on either phasing out plastics almost entirely, this a legacy that going to last hundreds if not thousands of years.

>>16398414
i just realized this link is email blocked

similar article
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/09/microplastics-clouds-study-mount-fuji-mount-oyama

>>16398414
>avoiding fish won't do anything
Learn what bioaccumulation is, you fucking idiot. Mercury is everywhere too.

File: 005_figure-3_-mt_-everest(...).jpg (68 KB, 748x613)

68 KB JPG

>>16398414
Picrel are the microplastics found on everest. They're not falling from the clouds "as part of the water cycle" you mouthbreathing retard, they are fibres being she's from the gear and clothing of the tens of thousands of everest tourists that "climb" the mountain every year.

>>16398426
shut the fuck up retard. imagine thinking you're smart by bringing up biomag which everybody learns by grade 7. your knowledge is deprecated and you should humble yourself.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15563650.2017.1400555
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12011-015-0516-z#Sec11

>don't eat fish
>still get microplastics
>i wonder why
because the water cycle retard

and since fish are so bad neurologically, why japs have some of the highest IQs considering their prot intake is 90% fish. learn some new research before giving your retard opinion.

>>16398440
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/09/microplastics-clouds-study-mount-fuji-mount-oyama

guess you just don't bother reading 1 post down. love sci. attention span of amoebas.

>>16398418
>To collect airborne microplastics from the cloud water, a 1.0-μm pore size polytetrafluoroethylene hydrophilic membrane filter (H100A047A; Advantec, Co.) was installed in the filter holder of each collector for sampling.
>The polytetrafluoroethylene hydrophilic membrane filter from which airborne microplastics were extracted was placed in a 50-mL glass centrifuge tube using stainless-steel tweezers, sealed with a screw cap, wrapped in aluminum foil, placed in a zipper bag, and transported to the laboratory in a cooler box. After measuring the liquid volume, the collected cloud water was transported to the laboratory in a 100-mL polyethylene bottle.
They didn't do a control sample, ie run ultra pure distilled water through their collection apparatus, so how can we be sure that much of the "airborne microplastics" they detected were not contaminants from their own plastic equipment?

>>16398456

that's a good point. however this finding of microplastic accumulation in extremely remote areas has been replicated numerous times.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/nov/16/microplastic-pollution-changing-weather-climate
https://pureportal.strath.ac.uk/en/publications/atmospheric-transport-and-deposition-of-microplastics-in-a-remote
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aaz5819

> Observed microplastic particle sizes were between 4 and 188 μm and fiber sizes were between 20 μm and ~3 mm, with average widths and depths of 18 and 6 μm, respectively (fig. S2). Approximately 70% of the particles were within the size range for long-range and even global transport of dust (<25 μm)
>Because plastic density (0.65 to 1.8 g cm−3) is lower than that of soil particles (~2.65 g cm−3) (9), microplastics are more transportable. Fibers, in particular, have greater surface area–to–volume ratios, which increase drag forces and reduce settling velocity. This process may be similar to ballooning in spiders, where a combination of electrostatic forces and drag allows spiders attached to silk fibers to travel thousands of kilometers (10).

so we've got plastics being lifted in the the air. clouds nucleate around dust particles. but surely they won't nucleate around microplastics of similar size. yes. this makes sense. a to b. but a=z. but z cannot to b.

i don't even know why this is controversial to state. microplastic go even smaller. to the point where interactions with electrical charges determine dispersal. you look at the dates of the published studies. this all old news. this thread proving once again this board should be merged with /x/ given the average level of intelligence.

>>16398475
This study doesn't even state what methods or equipment were used to gather samples, and again no mention of any control procedure to try and rule out contamination.
Since when did skepticism and verification-seeking become /x/? I'm not denying microplastics are a problem, but if they are truly as ubiquitous in our society as much research claims, then it means it's going to be extremely difficult to prevent contamination in studies like this.

>>16398442
>don't eat fish
>still get mercury
>i wonder why
Shut up, bitch. I reiterate. Learn what bioaccumulation is.

>and since fish are so bad neurologically, why japs have some of the highest IQs considering their prot intake is 90% fish
Ah yes, Japan, a famously microplastic-free country.

>>16398524

https://e360.yale.edu/features/plastic-waste-atmosphere-climate-weather

there's not much more to say. you have real accumulation data, and then a model using the data to predict origination points. there's no "contamination" to worry about seeing as it truly is everywhere. the truly sub 10 micron plastic is the stuff we should worry about. that's why it's a problem that can't be resolved within anyone's current lifetime. we can study the endocrinological effect of the plastics but we also need better measuring tools as atmospheric detection fails under this level.

at this point i've linked articles with positive detection
japan
china
himalayas
US

so based on your line of thinking all these scientists have decided to commit willing fraud or poor methodology to gain publishing fame.

you say it can't be proved it through atmospheric dispersal. the language of the papers is very clear and well understood.

>dust thing light and small
>plastic thing lighter and smaller
>plastic thing can't move like dust thing in air

that's the line of your thinking. this a very logical progression to conclude that plastics disperse. this discussion is moot because society will not stop plastic production. there is now no control group of humans that have zero plastic in them. a red blood cell is about 7 micrometers. we have detected nanoplastic at 1 micrometer size in humans. whatever level of clean room you have in mind, will be "contaminated".

>>16398544
dude's biggest word he knows is bioaccumulation

>>16398548
>dude's biggest word he knows is bioaccumulation
Don't be stupid. The biggest word I know is HOLLYWOOD.

>>16398548
If microplastics are so ubiquitous in human environments, how could we possibly hope to test samples from remote areas without introducing contamination?

>>16398681
why don't you directly email the any the authors of studies linked? that's what i do when i have questions and they actually answer me.

since you seem to genuinely believe these people are either frauds or incompetent. engage in a discourse with them. most real scientists actually enjoy meeting other nerds. you're wasting your time debating me since you think you can do better. so talk to them and prove to them that they are shit scientists.

the only truly viable way to filter microplastics i can think off would be electrostatic plates located all over a lab. even current lab clean suits are made of plastic. "shed proof" to what standard? to 1 micrometer shed-proof?

>>16395862
>accepted literature is 0.8 g/kg /day for maximum protein synthesis rates
lol read more ya skinny fat