But the need to refute such
misinformation shouldn’t obscure the seriousness of what we do know
about microplastics. Researchers like the Dutch scientist who co-authored one
of the recent studies are also stating
the obvious: “yes, we should be concerned,” ecotoxicology professor Dick
Vethaak told National Geographic last year. “Plastic should not be in our
blood.”
Those who make their living
hawking plastic toxins naturally seize upon scientific ambiguity to portray
concern over plastic particles as fearmongering. The trade association that
represents bottled water—one of the most unnecessary products on earth—gleefully
crowed this month that there was
“no scientific consensus” on the harms of plastics in drinking water, adding
that media reports on the topic “do nothing but scare consumers.”
But if you’re not the CEO
of a bottled water company, it should be clear that having tiny bits of plastic
in our bodies can’t be good. For one thing, their effect other living
creatures, including earthworms and fish is well-understood. A
government study last summer
found that plastic particles compromised the immune systems of fish, making
them more likely to die when exposed to viruses. A
large body of research has also found that
microplastics affect fish in a range of other ways: weakening their fertility,
disrupting their feeding habits, harming their livers and damaging their gills,
among other problems. They cause a range of similar ills in laboratory rats and
mice, including, alarmingly, “dysfunctions of the intestine, liver, excretory
and reproductive systems.”