[chemotaxis]

And where does it point toward? Other some untenable position such as "ban all plastics", which may very well produce more harm?

The discourse around microplastics is pretty wild. The sport is finding them in random places, often at parts-per-billion or parts-per-trillion levels that we don't really use to look for most other substances. And the implication is essentially "progress bad" or "consumerism bad". No clear evidence of human harm, no realistic policy prescriptions - so what do we expect to happen, exactly? This it not a case of corporate greed or deception.

Our bodies also contain a fair amount of sand. Probably at levels higher than parts-per-billion. Is it bad? Sometimes! Where does the precautionary principle lead us on that?

[atmavatar]

Make the plastic manufacturers own the external costs by requiring they fund proper disposal sites/messaging, if only to start making up for all the bullshit propaganda about recycling that's greatly exacerbated the problem.

[jagged-chisel]

While we're here, let's have them fund future treatment when we discover that illness has been caused by plastic.

[stinkbeetle]

> Make the plastic manufacturers own the external costs by requiring they fund proper disposal sites/messaging,

I think you fail to understand the reality of the problem.

In western countries, plastic "trash" is not really the problem. It's highly visible and it would always be nice to reduce it of course.

The majority of uncontained environmental microplastics comes from vehicle tires and clothing/textiles. Clothing and other textiles (e.g., carpets) being the biggest source, more than 1/3rd. After that it's probably building materials, paints, machinery and factory parts, etc.

Disposal sites and messaging will not do anything. You can be a perfectly compliant goodly consumer who dutifully puts their old clothes in the trash and pays the disposal fees for their old tires or rides busses. You'd still be contributing enormously to environmental microplastic load.

All natural fiber clothes, cycle everywhere, don't wear sneakers or other kind of plastic or synthetic rubber shoes, don't have synthetic carpets or drapes, don't paint your house, etc... now you're starting to get somewhere.

But the machinery required for you to stay alive, moving goods and services around, pumping your water, people going to work to keep your electricity on, package your food, etc... all still pumping out microplastics.

Disposal and messaging just won't cut it. And without a bunch of astounding and vanishingly unlikely breakthroughs, getting rid of microplastics from the top 4-5 sources will make net zero CO2 look like a walk in the park. Therefore we have to accept microplastics at enormous scale and work with that. Not to say we shouldn't attempt to reduce it where possible of course we should, but it won't be reduced to insignificant. So I think what needs to be done is well funded research into the effects of existing and new types of plastics, and into new materials and techniques for cleanup or containment. That way we have a chance to discover and limit or ban the worst of the worst before they can become too pervasive.

As far as reduction goes, possibly some small incentives to avoid plastics in consumer items (clothes, carpets, etc) might help. The messaging really can not be the same idiotic and counterproductive alarmism and blame and guilt campaigns led by wealthy private jet and mega yacht owning billionaires of the climate change debacle. Just gently make people aware they could look for natural fiber clothes, perhaps modest and commensurate added costs on plastics manufacturers to fund this research and containment, etc.

[GeekyBear]

Another source of microplastics in the human body is from food that was microwaved in a plastic container.

[stevula]

Why stop there? It’s in meat, water, mother’s milk, and newborns are even born with microplastics already in them.

[GeekyBear]

Why not start with the large sources that you can personally control?

> One 2023 study published in the journal Environmental Science & Technology found that microwaving plastic food containers releases more than 2 billion nanoplastics (smaller microplastics) and 4 million microplastics for every square centimeter of the container.

https://www.prevention.com/health/a65025549/can-you-microwav...

[chilmers]

"Ban all plastics" is a strawman that will not happen and no mainstream opinion is suggesting. But there is a wide spectrum of possibilities between "ban all plastics" and "do nothing".

A principal concern is ingestion of microplastics via food packaging, utensils, cookware, etc. There are non-plastic substitutions available for many of these items, and a precautionary approach would be to regulate to require them, where it is economically feasible, until such time as the effects of microplastic ingestion are better understood.

[HPsquared]

Synthetic fibers are another. They're absolutely everywhere.