[chemicalnovae]

I didn't go and look up the others but this argument by similarity, at least when applied to asbestos says the exact opposite to the claim you're trying to make. It's generally considered that industry/government was aware of the issues relating to asbestos in the '30s (and _started_ doing things about it then) but it wasn't until the 70's/80's (depending on the country) that its use was mostly stopped (and in places like Australia it wasn't outright banned until 2003).

[ssnistfajen]

And? That span is within an individual's lifetime, which is not very long in the context of human history. As of now there's zero sign any entity with regulatory power is doing anything about microplastics.

Also, why are you trying to deliver a point without looking up most of the examples I've listed? Do you expect that to be a convincing argument?

[paulryanrogers]

Each of us only gets one life. If most of that time is spent being unnecessarily exposed to pollutants with adverse health effects, then we have good reason to be outraged.

Consider also that some pollutants accumulate in the food chain, impacting future generations, for an indefinite time. Such as mercury in seafood.

[ssnistfajen]

Good news is tuna is not the only form of seafood you can eat! Perhaps you can try channeling that outrage into real tangible activism, any minute now.

[paulryanrogers]

You cannot be serious?

Do you think the problem will go away over time? Are you OK with having fewer things that you can eat without poisoning yourself? Do you realize we only have so many reservoirs from which calories can come from?

Take care where your rice is grown.

[ssnistfajen]

Why do you accuse me of being against addressing these issues? I am merely pointing out these are not existential crises because there is currently no evidence supporting such claims. It may change in the future, but until then I'm not jumping on this ship.

Ultraprocessed foods are already poison and most of us, probably including you, are consuming them regularly. Are you OK with that? And what is this talk about caloric reservoirs? Humans 8000 years ago had far fewer options and they still survived long enough to pass cultural lineages down to us. Most of your "caloric reservoirs" did not exist before the 20th century because the science and industry that created them did not exist.

[mattdmrs]

Compared with the other examples you gave, I think one of the differences with micro- and nanoplastic and their growing bioaccumulation, is that if/when we discover that some level of concentration of it causes noticeable issues, it will be very hard to reverse, and it will be globally abundant (i.e. throughout the entire food chain). We'll be stuck with the problem for a very very long time.

It's not like we'll be able to just outlaw it and be done with the issue after a few years. So for this specific polluant, it feels right that we should be cautious and look for solutions as quickly as we can.

[paulryanrogers]

Humans 8000 years ago got their food from an environment that wasn't contaminated with ubiquitous, unnaturally occurring, forever chemicals.

Ultra processed foods are a problem and likely contributing to the plastic problem. I do what I can to reduce my reliance on both. Yet the solution won't be the few educated among us stopping ourselves. It must be regulated collectively or we'll remain in a prisoners dilemma as the pollutants accumulate.

[chemicalnovae]

> And? That span is within an individual's lifetime, which is not very long in the context of human history. As of now there's zero sign any entity with regulatory power is doing anything about microplastics.

Primarily, I _am_interested with health outcomes within my and my children's lifespan so that's the sort of time span I'm primarily concerned about. If the comparison to asbestos hold's true then we still have a _long_ time (long enough that any potential deleterious effects will be felt by all currently living and soon to be living members of my family) before any sort of regulatory action will be taken regardless of the health impacts.

> Also, why are you trying to deliver a point without looking up most of the examples I've listed? Do you expect that to be a convincing argument?

Because I'm _not_ your fact-checker. You're other examples may well follow a much quicker time-frame between discovery and strong regulatory action; I don't really care one way or the other, since at least one example shows a course of history which would play out poorly for those of us alive _now_ and exposed to increasing levels of environmental plastics.