We don’t have enough studies to be 100% sure what exactly they do to us. Plastics are really different from each other and there are thousands of different types..

Good thing about microplastics is, that they are relatively strong and don’t react chemically that well…

They travel trough food chain to the top (us) and build up in us.

Microplastics are big enough to clog up important holes in lungs and other places.

So think about microplastics like “stuff that we can’t get rid of, that stays in our body and clogs up stuff”

We don’t know yet, but have evidence they may be tied to some immune diseases, hormone disorders, certain reproductive problems, inflammation, accelerated aging through oxidation, fat metabolism problems, problems with gut flora, and general neurotoxicity, including cognitive deficits and motor-skills gaps.

They’re pretty bad, but it’ll take us a hundred years to be able to say exactly how bad, because it’s damage done over time.

Any negative health effects from micro plastics pales in compared to the quality of life and medical improvements that have arisen since the invention of plastic.

Moving forward we’ll need to study the effects and how to mitigate those effects.

Not body know honestly. They might be totally harmless or they might be the greatest threat. Probably should assume the 2nd one just in case

Not body know honestly. They might be totally harmless or they might be the greatest threat. Probably should assume the 2nd one just in case

I would say not very dangerous as far as we know and the issue is largely overhyped as it makes a catchy fear based headline to say micro plastics have now been found in x organ of the body or x food source.

There is little evidence of harmful health effects from micro plastics in the body at the rate most people are exposed to going about their life. (See below SAPEA report)

There is some evidence for inflammation caused by very high exposure to certain sizes of micro plastics in animal models.

Still not a license to stop recycling or cutting down on plastic use and it’s important the research continues as not much is known and it is still early days and the average microplastic exposure for an individual may well increase in the future.

For ELI am a politician…

You have the [SAPEA report](https://scientificadvice.eu/advice/a-scientific-perspective-on-microplastics-in-nature-and-society/)

SAPEA is a scientific advisory body of the EU which has complied extensive reports on the current understanding to inform EU policy makers.

> The best available evidence suggests that microplastics and nanoplastics do not pose a widespread risk to humans or the environment, except in small pockets. But that evidence is limited, and the situation could change if pollution continues at the current rate.

And
> In controlled experiments, high concentrations of these particles have been shown to cause physical harm to the environment and living creatures, including inducing inflammation and stress.

And a recent [WHO report](https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240054608)

> Although the limited data provide little evidence that NMP [Nano and Micro Plastics] have adverse effects in humans, there is increasing public awareness and an overwhelming consensus among all stakeholders that plastics do not belong in the environment, and measures should be taken to mitigate exposure to NMP.

I would say not very dangerous as far as we know and the issue is largely overhyped as it makes a catchy fear based headline to say micro plastics have now been found in x organ of the body or x food source.

There is little evidence of harmful health effects from micro plastics in the body at the rate most people are exposed to going about their life. (See below SAPEA report)

There is some evidence for inflammation caused by very high exposure to certain sizes of micro plastics in animal models.

Still not a license to stop recycling or cutting down on plastic use and it’s important the research continues as not much is known and it is still early days and the average microplastic exposure for an individual may well increase in the future.

For ELI am a politician…

You have the [SAPEA report](https://scientificadvice.eu/advice/a-scientific-perspective-on-microplastics-in-nature-and-society/)

SAPEA is a scientific advisory body of the EU which has complied extensive reports on the current understanding to inform EU policy makers.

> The best available evidence suggests that microplastics and nanoplastics do not pose a widespread risk to humans or the environment, except in small pockets. But that evidence is limited, and the situation could change if pollution continues at the current rate.

And
> In controlled experiments, high concentrations of these particles have been shown to cause physical harm to the environment and living creatures, including inducing inflammation and stress.

And a recent [WHO report](https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240054608)

> Although the limited data provide little evidence that NMP [Nano and Micro Plastics] have adverse effects in humans, there is increasing public awareness and an overwhelming consensus among all stakeholders that plastics do not belong in the environment, and measures should be taken to mitigate exposure to NMP.

Go research asbestos. We apparently as a society didn’t know how bad it was until decades later. I fear microplastics are a similar hazard without mitigation. The hierarchy of control begins with elimination. This is where we essentially are.

Go research asbestos. We apparently as a society didn’t know how bad it was until decades later. I fear microplastics are a similar hazard without mitigation. The hierarchy of control begins with elimination. This is where we essentially are.

Honestly I think they’re going to be discovered to be linked to cognitive ailments. Studies are suggesting that the rates of ADHD are going up, and not just because we’re diagnosing better