Plastics Were Initially Welcomed As a Great Innovation. Will They Eventually Destroy Our Health?

By Wayne Persky

RSS Feed

Humans have used materials that are similar to plastics for many years. Before synthetic plastics, humans used natural materials with plastic-like properties, such as rubber, amber, and tortoiseshell. These materials could be molded or shaped when heated, serving early purposes similar to modern plastics

Celluloid was created in 1862.

Parkesine (later called celluloid) was developed by Alexander Parkes in 1862. Made from cellulose (a plant material), it was considered the first semi-synthetic plastic and was showcased at the 1862 Great International Exhibition in London.

Bakelite was developed in 1907.

Created by Leo Baekeland, a Belgian-American chemist, Bakelite was the first fully synthetic plastic. It was made from phenol and formaldehyde, and unlike natural or semi-synthetic plastics, it wasn’t derived from natural substances like cellulose. Bakelite’s properties of durability, heat resistance, and electrical insulation, made it ideal for a variety of applications, including electrical insulators, radio casings, and jewelry.

Modern plastics were quickly developed following the success of Bakelite.

1. Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) was discovered in the 1870s and developed for commercial use in the 1920s.
   
2. Polystyrene (PS) was invented in the early 20th century and commercialized by the 1930s.
   
3. Nylon was developed in 1935 by Wallace Carothers at DuPont. It was the first synthetic fiber, and it was used in products like stockings and parachutes.
   
4. ​Polyethylene (PE) was invented in 1933, polyethylene became one of the most widely used plastics, particularly in packaging.

After World War II, the production of plastics expanded rapidly.

New types like polypropylene (PP), polyethylene terephthalate (PET), and polycarbonate were developed, leading to the rise of plastics in everyday life. Today, plastics are integral to nearly every industry but have raised environmental concerns due to their persistence and contribution to pollution. The first synthetic plastics, initially celebrated for their innovation, have now prompted movements toward biodegradable and sustainable alternatives.

In recent years, ominous discoveries have been made.

Microplastics (MPs) have been found in various organs of the human body, and recently they have been discovered in human brain tissue, specifically in the olfactory bulb (Brauser, 2024, November 27).1 MPs were detected in 8 out of 15 brain samples analyzed in a case series study. 44% of the detected particles were polypropylene, commonly used in food packaging and water bottles. Other polymers such as polyamide (nylon) and polyethylene vinyl acetate, were also found.

In the study, 15 deceased individuals in São Paulo, Brazil, aged 33 to 100 years, underwent routine coroner autopsies. Tissues from the olfactory bulb were examined, excluding individuals with prior neurosurgical interventions. Microplastics were identified using micro-Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (µFTIR). A “plastic-free approach” was employed to avoid contamination, using aluminum-covered glassware and specialized filters.

The particles found ranged in length from 5.5 to 26 microns, with widths of 3 to 25 microns. Fiber dimensions averaged 21 microns in length and 4 microns in width. For comparison, a human hair is ~70 microns in diameter.

It's thought that microplastics may reach the brain through inhalation, crossing the nasal passages into the olfactory bulb. Other pathways, such as transport via the bloodstream, are also considered.

The neurological implications may be worrisome.

The study notes that microplastics in the brain could induce oxidative stress and neurotoxic effects. Similar exposures to particulate matter have been linked to conditions like dementia and neurodegenerative diseases, though this connection requires further investigation.

And there are broader health implications.

Microplastics have previously been found in other human tissues, such as the lungs, liver, blood, and placenta, raising concerns about their systemic impact. Key potential health effects include:
​

1. Cardiovascular Risks
2. Reproductive and Developmental Effects
3. Reduced male fertility and endocrine disruption
4. Cancer and Gut Health
5. Potential for accelerating cancer spread in the gut
6. Contribution to the development of food allergies
7. Antibiotic Resistance
8. Microplastics may facilitate bacterial resistance to antibiotics, compounding global health challenges

Are microplastics regulated?

Most U.S. states lack criteria or standards for microplastics, with minimal monitoring. Existing regulations, such as the Microbead-Free Waters Act of 2015, target specific types of plastic but do not address microplastics comprehensively. The United Nations Global Plastic Treaty aims to create legally binding international standards for plastic pollution but remains in negotiation.

Microplastics are everywhere.

Even teabags have been found to be associated with microplastics. Recent research published in Chemosphere showed that polymer-based tea bags release significant amounts of Micro/Nanoplastics (MNPLs) during typical use (Banaei et al., 2024).2 MNPLs are capable of interacting with and being internalized by human intestinal cells.

In the study, mucus-producing cells showed the highest uptake of MNPLs. MNPLs entered the cell nucleus, suggesting potential for genetic and cellular disruptions. Differential internalization was observed depending on the polymer type and cell line. Nylon-6 particles were internalized more in enterocyte-like cells (Caco-2). Polypropylene and cellulose were internalized more in mucus-producing cells.​

And that brings us to Keurig K cups.

Being naturally lazy, I love the convenience of Keurig K cups for my morning coffee. After breakfast I can get right to work because I don't lose any significant amount of time making coffee. But naturally, since the plastic shell of the K cup is usually made of polypropylene, and high temperatures (typically 190°F [88°C]) are involved in their use, they are a potential source of MNPLs. In addition, the aluminum foil lid that seals the pod may contribute to degradation of the plastic. The filter is usually made of synthetic fibers or plastics.
​
​While direct studies on K-Cups and MNPLs are limited, research has shown that prolonged exposure to hot liquids can cause plastics, including polypropylene, to release microplastics. And microplastics have been detected in beverages brewed with plastic-based filters and containers.

Possible workarounds include:

• Reusable coffee pods made of stainless steel or BPA-free plastic, which can be refilled with your own coffee grounds.
  
• Some brands offer fully compostable pods made from plant-based materials, reducing the risk of MNPL release.
  
• Check for K-Cups made from biodegradable or recyclable materials certified for safety under heat.
  

But rather than spending time searching for a suitable workaround, switching to a conventional coffee brewing method might be more practical.

MNPLs may increase the risk of IBD.

The implications of these findings suggest that chronic exposure to MNPLs could lead to cellular and DNA damage due to internalization in intestinal cells. Disruption of mucus layers, could potentially compromise the protective barrier of the intestine. The preliminary evidence links MNPL exposure to inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), as IBD patients exhibit higher concentrations of MNPLs in their stool. The possibility exists that individuals with preexisting gastrointestinal conditions (such as IBD) may face increased risks from MNPL exposure.​

Of course tea bags aren't the only significant source of MNPL contamination. Other sources, such as bottled water and plastic cookware, contribute similarly to MNPL ingestion.

Even some of our clothing is shedding MNPLs.

Wearing clothing made of natural fibers (such as cotton, linen, silk, wool, hemp, or cashmere, fort example), rather than synthetic fibers (such as polyester or nylon), should cut down our exposure to MNPLs. Washing synthetic fabrics less frequently, and in cold water, will help to minimize microplastic shedding. And using laundry bags or filters designed to capture microfibers should help.

What can we do to reduce the risks from MNPLs?

Obviously, one of the simplest precautions to take would be to use nonplastic teabags, or use loose tea. Minimizing the use of single-use plastics, such as straws, utensils, bottles, and bags should help. Replacing cooking utensils, especially, with reusable items made of glass, metal, or biodegradable materials will greatly reduce our exposure to MNPLs.

Home air purifiers can help to reduce exposure to MNPLs.

In homes, MNPLs are released from sources such as synthetic textiles, carpets, plastic packaging, and household items. Indoor activities like vacuuming, cooking, and walking on carpets can resuspend MNPLs into the air so that they become airborne particulates that can be inhaled.​

Although air purifiers can help to reduce the concentration of MNPLs in indoor air, their effectiveness depends on the type of filter, its specifications, and how it is used.

1. High-Efficiency Particulate Air (HEPA) filters are effective at capturing particles as small as 0.3 microns. Since most MNPLs range between 1 and 100 microns, HEPA filters can capture many microplastics and some smaller nanoplastics. HEPA filters are commonly found in consumer-grade air purifiers and are recommended for reducing airborne pollutants.
2. Activated carbon filters adsorb volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and odors but are less effective at capturing solid particles like MNPLs. Consequently, they are not a primary solution for microplastics but can complement HEPA filters.
3. Electrostatic precipitators use electric charges to trap airborne particles, including MNPLs. They can capture ultrafine particles, including some nanoplastics, but require regular cleaning to maintain efficiency.
4. Systems combining HEPA, activated carbon, and UV sterilization can address a wide range of indoor air pollutants, including MNPLs.

Higher-grade HEPA filters with efficiency ratings (such as H13 or H14) are better at capturing smaller particles, including MNPLs. The air purifier should be appropriately sized for the room to ensure sufficient air exchange. Insufficient airflow or an undersized unit may not reduce MNPL concentrations effectively. Regular replacement or cleaning of filters is crucial to maintaining effectiveness. Air purifiers should be positioned where MNPL sources are most active (for example, near synthetic fabrics, high-traffic areas). Maintaining indoor humidity levels between 30-50% helps to reduce particle resuspension.

While HEPA filters can capture many microplastics, they may be less effective for ultrafine nanoplastics (less than 0.3 microns). Small air purifiers only affect the air in a localized area, not the entire home. MNPLs can settle on surfaces and be resuspended, requiring additional measures like vacuuming with HEPA-equipped cleaners.

The bottom line:

Over the years, countless plastic products have brought great convenience into our lives, so that now, plastics are ubiquitous. And as most of us have learned in the school of hard knocks, nothing is perfect. Convenience comes at a cost, and the costs associated with the widespread use of plastics are coming into sharper focus.

Many of us are becoming concerned that one of the costs associated with plastics may be our most precious possession; namely, our health. Maybe it's time for us to begin taking precautions before the risks become so obvious that we are forced to take precautions and countermeasures.

References

1. Brauser, D. (2024, November 27). Microplastics Have Been Found in the Human Brain. Now What? Medscape, Retrieved from https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/microplastics-have-been-found-human-brain-now-what-2024a1000ln0

2. Banaei, G., Abass, D., Tavakolpournegari, A., Martín-Pérez, J., Gutiérrez, J., Peng, G., . . . García-Rodríguez, A. (2024). Teabag-derived micro/nanoplastics (true-to-life MNPLs) as a surrogate for real-life exposure scenarios. Chemosphere, 368(November 2024), 143736. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0045653524026377