[hx8]

Perfect is the enemy of good.

Plastic and Microplastics are an environmental hazard to animal life, with a specific threat to aquatic life. The plastic itself is a significant physical hazard for the life. The attached link has an incredible photo of a the scale of a small fish and various microplastics. It's important to note that currently there is no cost effective way for water treatment plants to filter for these.

https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/microplast...

[userbinator]

From your own link:

Scientists are still unsure whether consumed microplastics are harmful to human or animal health

Because plastics are inert. Beware those who distort the truth and exploit fear for their own gains.

[hx8]

"The number of published studies considering the effects of microplastic particles on aquatic organisms is considerable. In aquatic invertebrates, microplastics cause a decline in feeding behavior and fertility, slow down larval growth and development, increase oxygen consumption, and stimulate the production of reactive oxygen species. In fish, the microplastics may cause structural damage to the intestine, liver, gills, and brain, while affecting metabolic balance, behavior, and fertility; the degree of these harmful effects depends on the particle sizes and doses, as well as the exposure parameters."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9205308/

[userbinator]

The additives include inert or reinforcing fillers which endow the plastic with specific properties: plasticizers, antioxidants, UV stabilizers, lubricants, dyes, and flame retardants

Do they really think plasticizers are inert, or more so than the plastics themselves?

I'm sure you can find plenty of studies that say cellphone radiation is harmful too.

The LK-99 debacle is still recent; and it showed just how much the bulk of published "science" can't be farther from the truth when there are other motivations.