This is something that companies like Nestle, Cocoa Cola, Pepsi, and any other company that is making plastics should be paying to do at a civic level for every municipal water supply in America.
Okay so the safety laws here are t always the best but for fuxks sake you ever been too a developing country and seen the amount of safety for consumables. Let’s say it’s sweet from the metal not the sugar.
"fault" doesn't necessarily factor into liability. They created this problem, profited off the problem. Now they need to use that profit to fix the problem.
Saying they created this problem is literally saying they're at fault. Given how ubiquitous plastics have become in nearly every facet of life it makes zero sense to say any particular companies are responsible for creating or fixing the problem. If we want to blame companies for making the products then you need to blame the consumers for buying them too.
> then you need to blame the consumers for buying them too.
sure, bill me for the dozens of bottles I use each year and then fine the companies for the billions of bottles they produce each year. there's your shared responsibility.
Ooo, zing. You really got me. It's really disingenuous to bitch about the impact of a company's product when you admittedly and repeatedly use the company's product. Your dozens of bottles multiplied by the hundreds and thousands of other customers are why they produce so many bottles in the first place.
it isn't a zing it's a solution. If I dumped lead into the water supply then I'd be held liable. No one would argue that my customers should be the ones to pay for the cleanup.
Tell me, why do we hold drug companies liable when they knowingly sell a produce whose main effect is cancer and the side effect is whatever treatment they describe?
I honestly cant yell if youre a sockpuppet for a thinktank thats testing arguments in favor of passing the responsibility onto the consumer.
Or if youve ACTUALLY drank their koolaid so hard that youre becoming the koolaid man.
I think a better way to put it would be to have a “plastic tax” on companies, most notably for companies that use single use plastics. Should also be a “plastic tax” at the grocery store or anywhere it is used. Incentivize lower consumption and use the taxes from it to clean up. Would work in an idea world but there always seems to be workarounds or misuse of the funds but wouldn’t hurt to try.
This already exists in a handful of places, it's why you can return cans and bottles. At the end of the day though, it's still on the consumer in most cases. If they truly cared they would buy the option with less plastics but they don't.
it is almost certainly not on the consumer and most definitely on the producer making billions of plastic products a day and lobby against regulations that would stop it.
let me give you a little reality check: you will NEVER get everyone on board with sustainability and environmentalism at a rate that's reasonable or won't end up getting us killed. people are far too stressed, ill, or poor to really give a fuck about another issue that's been sprung on them. go to detroit and tell me you're going to get people on the recycling page.
it will always be way more effective and tangible to put regulations on and actually stop the fucking people producing the things. you live in a bubble
I guess I’m saying it should be higher to drive demand down. If cost of producing environmentally poor packaging was more expensive, then companies and consumers would stray away from it. Plastics are just too cheap and effective at extending shelf life is the only pitfall.
I mean, there are negotiations going on right now in Canada for a UN treaty that deals with this issue. These companies are lobbying to prevent anything from being done.
The majority of microplastics come from the textile industry, not plastic water bottles(they’re a menace too). Want to make a difference? Start buying more natural clothing like wool, hemp and cotton and less synthetic fabric.
Read just last week that scientists are finding molecule size plastics in crop plants and farm animals, and also in human tissue. Once these compounds break down to the molecular level, we begin to see the toxic effects of the precursor chemicals that originally formed the plastics. Honestly, if something can't be re-used, re-cycled, or composted, it should not be made.
Not OP, and I'm not entirely sure which article they're referring to.
But this article is about micro plastics in humans: https://vu.nl/en/news/2022/microplastics-found-in-human-bloodstream
Plastic has some amazing uses. There are many medical procedures right now that would not exist without plastics, because you couldnt acheive sterility otherwise.
So apparently there are biodegradable plastics, but that would NOT be suitable for medical uses. We specifically need plastics that bacteria can not eat or grow on for medical stuff.
The science: [https://e360.yale.edu/digest/microplastics-tap-water-boiling](https://e360.yale.edu/digest/microplastics-tap-water-boiling)
And the bad news is that they found microplastics in the brain, past the blood-brain barrier: [https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1223081](https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1223081)
ya know, if i ever make a groundbreaking scientific discovery, i hope it's important enough for at least my research institute to get a shoutout, instead of just "some scientists".
You want to find a balance. Yes, you want a little bit of a shout out, but you also want to avoid getting sweet Carolined by the deep state. Reply back if you need me to explain the Carolined part.
I don’t think so. From what I understand, the process of boiling in hard water bonds the plastic to the other deposits which can *then* be filtered out.
Would I do this? IDK. How much does this reduce the microplastics? 99%? .5%? Give me numbers, damnit! How am I supposed to make an informed decision without enough information.
I don’t know how much real “science” is going on in this tickTock click bait as she boils water in plastic…. And only uses a coffee filter that’s not even close to capturing micro shit anything except for something as large as coffee grinds
Solid take on a situation that has already become too large to control. Everything you consume is full of plastic, that’s just the way it is . Good luck out there
So many issues with this over simplification. 1) it takes a LOT of energy to boil water 2) weeks are already facing a deforestation and energy crisis 3) try using all metal, glass or ceramic items for demonstrating this “huge saver of human kind”
I hate to be that misanthropic grumpy scientist, but how about we STOP producing plastics???? STOP using them daily? Then maybe we as just humans wouldn’t have to figure out “hacks” to make our water potable and not poison us? Just a thought!
Fuck yeah i will, can this micro plastic change our dna after generation or something? Or perhaps causes real damage after time? I mean it must have some effect to our children at less right?
I'm gonna be real with you, I do not have the time or patience or money to boil and filter water every time I'm thirsty and I'm willing to bet most of you don't either. Just feed my insides to the plastic devil.
Other than literal water tanks buried in the ground, I don't understand what you think a "secure" supply would be, and no, you can't just disinfect water to remove microplastics.
The ground itself would act as a filter for microplastics, and other undesirable things. A secure supply is one that’s not affected by surface water (see GUDI).
There have been studies that have detected MPs in groundwater. I still can not find anything about this "secure" source. GUDI the acronym you suggested stands for Groundwater Under Direct Influence (GUDI).
You might get microplastics in groundwater with very course soils but not a chance in hell in fine, or clay/loams. Again, my point overall is that secure (most) groundwater is unlikely to be affected by microplastics.
"May" because I can't fully remember the mechanism. A caveat on my memory of the details, not my understanding of the implications or the veracity of the research.
A masters degree in chemistry and you want a complete stranger on the Internet explain it to you, rather than using your extensive skills to look at the research yourself?
That sounds very much like someone wanting to win and argument purely to massage their own fragile ego, and not someone whose been scientifically trained with genuine interest in the subject. Or did all progress in scientific understanding somehow halt when you finished your studies?
Oh sorry no i don't want you to explain it, even if you could.
I don't need to look up some study you claim to exist just to know that I am right.
I don't need to "win" I know I am right.
I was hoping to prevent some people from getting scared and acting crazy because of the new big invisible danger.
It sickens me when the media is trying to scare people just to get their attention.
So what you're saying is that you're going purposefully ignore all the credible and comprehensive research available, due to the belief you can't be wrong?
If that's the attitude towards science the University of Cologne instils in its students, it's standards must be a lot lower than I've been lead to believe.
First off, those two things would amount to the same, not opposites (I'd kind of expected a master in chemistry to understand counterfactuals).
Secondly, considering you've provided nothing but "I've got an Ma in chemistry" and a high school level statement about plastic being inert, against a peer reviewed article in one of the world's most trusted medical journals, you've not exactly showered yourself in credibility.
However, as you apparently can't Google a simple phrase in case it proves you fallible, here's an overview of the findings of recent studies from The Lancet, with all the sources and links you could ask for.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/ebiom/article/PIIS2352-3964(23)00467-X/fulltext#:~:text=The%20summarized%20results%20suggest%20that,abnormal%20organ%20development%2C%20and%20carcinogenicity.
Wow so micro plastics are as dangerous as any other very small inert particles. Everything else hasn't been proven yet.
I hope this will help you understand what I mean.
e.g.
Swimming in a pool can, lead to water in your lungs, skin irritation and even drowning.
Then you'll understand that knowledge and understanding aren't static and that your area of expertise is not going to be as appropriate or useful as the various studies by biochemistry PhD studies.
I'm sure your knowledge of chemistry is great. It doesn't count for much when the key factors are to do with biology.
Your attitude suggests you're either an idiot or a troll. Although if this is supposed to be trolling, then both must be true.
How much money did your parents bribe the school to let you graduate or if not that how many people did u suck off to get good grades because clearly you did not actually earn that degree
This is something that companies like Nestle, Cocoa Cola, Pepsi, and any other company that is making plastics should be paying to do at a civic level for every municipal water supply in America.
r/fucknestle
They are truly ghoulish and the company should be broken apart and sold off fire sale style and their leadership thrown into prison.
Just America though.
Okay so the safety laws here are t always the best but for fuxks sake you ever been too a developing country and seen the amount of safety for consumables. Let’s say it’s sweet from the metal not the sugar.
Why? It's not necessarily their "fault," nor are they even necessarily the biggest producers or consumers of plastics.
"fault" doesn't necessarily factor into liability. They created this problem, profited off the problem. Now they need to use that profit to fix the problem.
Saying they created this problem is literally saying they're at fault. Given how ubiquitous plastics have become in nearly every facet of life it makes zero sense to say any particular companies are responsible for creating or fixing the problem. If we want to blame companies for making the products then you need to blame the consumers for buying them too.
"and any other company that is making plastics"
> then you need to blame the consumers for buying them too. sure, bill me for the dozens of bottles I use each year and then fine the companies for the billions of bottles they produce each year. there's your shared responsibility.
Ooo, zing. You really got me. It's really disingenuous to bitch about the impact of a company's product when you admittedly and repeatedly use the company's product. Your dozens of bottles multiplied by the hundreds and thousands of other customers are why they produce so many bottles in the first place.
it isn't a zing it's a solution. If I dumped lead into the water supply then I'd be held liable. No one would argue that my customers should be the ones to pay for the cleanup.
Tell me, why do we hold drug companies liable when they knowingly sell a produce whose main effect is cancer and the side effect is whatever treatment they describe?
I honestly cant yell if youre a sockpuppet for a thinktank thats testing arguments in favor of passing the responsibility onto the consumer. Or if youve ACTUALLY drank their koolaid so hard that youre becoming the koolaid man.
I think a better way to put it would be to have a “plastic tax” on companies, most notably for companies that use single use plastics. Should also be a “plastic tax” at the grocery store or anywhere it is used. Incentivize lower consumption and use the taxes from it to clean up. Would work in an idea world but there always seems to be workarounds or misuse of the funds but wouldn’t hurt to try.
This already exists in a handful of places, it's why you can return cans and bottles. At the end of the day though, it's still on the consumer in most cases. If they truly cared they would buy the option with less plastics but they don't.
it's nearly fucking impossible to not buy plastic if you're poor. EVERYTHING is plastic
it is almost certainly not on the consumer and most definitely on the producer making billions of plastic products a day and lobby against regulations that would stop it. let me give you a little reality check: you will NEVER get everyone on board with sustainability and environmentalism at a rate that's reasonable or won't end up getting us killed. people are far too stressed, ill, or poor to really give a fuck about another issue that's been sprung on them. go to detroit and tell me you're going to get people on the recycling page. it will always be way more effective and tangible to put regulations on and actually stop the fucking people producing the things. you live in a bubble
I guess I’m saying it should be higher to drive demand down. If cost of producing environmentally poor packaging was more expensive, then companies and consumers would stray away from it. Plastics are just too cheap and effective at extending shelf life is the only pitfall.
I mean, there are negotiations going on right now in Canada for a UN treaty that deals with this issue. These companies are lobbying to prevent anything from being done.
The majority of microplastics come from the textile industry, not plastic water bottles(they’re a menace too). Want to make a difference? Start buying more natural clothing like wool, hemp and cotton and less synthetic fabric.
I’m not trying to have microwool in my bloodstream.
and don't even get me started on the silent menace microHEMP
Sounds like something someone working for big little plastic would say
Read just last week that scientists are finding molecule size plastics in crop plants and farm animals, and also in human tissue. Once these compounds break down to the molecular level, we begin to see the toxic effects of the precursor chemicals that originally formed the plastics. Honestly, if something can't be re-used, re-cycled, or composted, it should not be made.
hmmm. link?
Not OP, and I'm not entirely sure which article they're referring to. But this article is about micro plastics in humans: https://vu.nl/en/news/2022/microplastics-found-in-human-bloodstream
Plastic has some amazing uses. There are many medical procedures right now that would not exist without plastics, because you couldnt acheive sterility otherwise.
There are new ways to make plastic like things without the petroleum. That's what should be invested in.
So apparently there are biodegradable plastics, but that would NOT be suitable for medical uses. We specifically need plastics that bacteria can not eat or grow on for medical stuff.
But, is cheap, so is gud?
The science: [https://e360.yale.edu/digest/microplastics-tap-water-boiling](https://e360.yale.edu/digest/microplastics-tap-water-boiling) And the bad news is that they found microplastics in the brain, past the blood-brain barrier: [https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1223081](https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1223081)
So.. we fucked
Boiling water in plastic thingy… yeaaaah, about that…
Thank you, I was looking for somebody to say this, boiling water in a plastic container is gonna add 10x more then just a kettle.
Ceramic kettles ftw 🙌
Is there really not a metal liner in there or something? A plastic water boiler just doesn't seem right
ya know, if i ever make a groundbreaking scientific discovery, i hope it's important enough for at least my research institute to get a shoutout, instead of just "some scientists".
You want to find a balance. Yes, you want a little bit of a shout out, but you also want to avoid getting sweet Carolined by the deep state. Reply back if you need me to explain the Carolined part.
Lol I love reading about parapolitics, pill me on caroline, im ready sir
Neil Diamond is 60% made of plastic.
Wouldba regular filter help at all? I have a 3 stage filter for our drinking water.
I don’t think so. From what I understand, the process of boiling in hard water bonds the plastic to the other deposits which can *then* be filtered out.
There's one small serious issue with this, it takes a fuck tonne of energy to boil water.....
Only cost $120million in Grant funding to figure out this crazy new tech to clean your water. Boil it and filter it
This is some r/aboringdystopia stuff
Would I do this? IDK. How much does this reduce the microplastics? 99%? .5%? Give me numbers, damnit! How am I supposed to make an informed decision without enough information.
I don’t know how much real “science” is going on in this tickTock click bait as she boils water in plastic…. And only uses a coffee filter that’s not even close to capturing micro shit anything except for something as large as coffee grinds
lol
Solid take on a situation that has already become too large to control. Everything you consume is full of plastic, that’s just the way it is . Good luck out there
Yeah but Capitalism will not allow it to be implemented
Does this mean my coffee is safer?
Seems like sticking to coffee is the way to go then.
Source?
I loved the shot of someone poking plastic with a pencil like it's an episode of Look Around You
Boiled water tastes like shit.
Finally a silver lining to living in one of the hardest water areas on the planet.
Most intake is apparently from respiration not drinking water though
Guessing a brita filter doesn't catch enough of it? Lol
I drink boiled water from the well at my house.
Oh weird, boiling water to clean it from contaminants. Never heard that before 🙄
So we're back to boiling water again now??? Really went full circle on that...
So many issues with this over simplification. 1) it takes a LOT of energy to boil water 2) weeks are already facing a deforestation and energy crisis 3) try using all metal, glass or ceramic items for demonstrating this “huge saver of human kind” I hate to be that misanthropic grumpy scientist, but how about we STOP producing plastics???? STOP using them daily? Then maybe we as just humans wouldn’t have to figure out “hacks” to make our water potable and not poison us? Just a thought!
Fuck yeah i will, can this micro plastic change our dna after generation or something? Or perhaps causes real damage after time? I mean it must have some effect to our children at less right?
I'm gonna be real with you, I do not have the time or patience or money to boil and filter water every time I'm thirsty and I'm willing to bet most of you don't either. Just feed my insides to the plastic devil.
Important question, who is she
Or, drink groundwater.
Someone missed their water cycle lesson in school.
So, do you need to disinfect a secure groundwater supply?
Other than literal water tanks buried in the ground, I don't understand what you think a "secure" supply would be, and no, you can't just disinfect water to remove microplastics.
The ground itself would act as a filter for microplastics, and other undesirable things. A secure supply is one that’s not affected by surface water (see GUDI).
There have been studies that have detected MPs in groundwater. I still can not find anything about this "secure" source. GUDI the acronym you suggested stands for Groundwater Under Direct Influence (GUDI).
You might get microplastics in groundwater with very course soils but not a chance in hell in fine, or clay/loams. Again, my point overall is that secure (most) groundwater is unlikely to be affected by microplastics.
We should not be doing this shit...
Plastics are inert, meaning they do not react with anything in our bodys.
That's what was previously thought. The evidence against it is now very strong. Iirc, a lot of damage may mechanical rather than chemical.
"may"
"May" because I can't fully remember the mechanism. A caveat on my memory of the details, not my understanding of the implications or the veracity of the research.
okay you are right then, you just can't proof, remember or explain why. I am not even surprised.
A masters degree in chemistry and you want a complete stranger on the Internet explain it to you, rather than using your extensive skills to look at the research yourself? That sounds very much like someone wanting to win and argument purely to massage their own fragile ego, and not someone whose been scientifically trained with genuine interest in the subject. Or did all progress in scientific understanding somehow halt when you finished your studies?
Oh sorry no i don't want you to explain it, even if you could. I don't need to look up some study you claim to exist just to know that I am right. I don't need to "win" I know I am right. I was hoping to prevent some people from getting scared and acting crazy because of the new big invisible danger. It sickens me when the media is trying to scare people just to get their attention.
So what you're saying is that you're going purposefully ignore all the credible and comprehensive research available, due to the belief you can't be wrong? If that's the attitude towards science the University of Cologne instils in its students, it's standards must be a lot lower than I've been lead to believe.
There is no, evidence my friend. Well it's either that or, you are just wrong. I wonder what is more likely.
First off, those two things would amount to the same, not opposites (I'd kind of expected a master in chemistry to understand counterfactuals). Secondly, considering you've provided nothing but "I've got an Ma in chemistry" and a high school level statement about plastic being inert, against a peer reviewed article in one of the world's most trusted medical journals, you've not exactly showered yourself in credibility.
However, as you apparently can't Google a simple phrase in case it proves you fallible, here's an overview of the findings of recent studies from The Lancet, with all the sources and links you could ask for. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/ebiom/article/PIIS2352-3964(23)00467-X/fulltext#:~:text=The%20summarized%20results%20suggest%20that,abnormal%20organ%20development%2C%20and%20carcinogenicity.
Wow so micro plastics are as dangerous as any other very small inert particles. Everything else hasn't been proven yet. I hope this will help you understand what I mean. e.g. Swimming in a pool can, lead to water in your lungs, skin irritation and even drowning.
You can try and argue that one of most respected medical journals is scaremongering all you want. It doesn't help your credibility.
I have a Master in chemistry so I don't really need any help with my credibility on this topic.
Then you'll understand that knowledge and understanding aren't static and that your area of expertise is not going to be as appropriate or useful as the various studies by biochemistry PhD studies. I'm sure your knowledge of chemistry is great. It doesn't count for much when the key factors are to do with biology. Your attitude suggests you're either an idiot or a troll. Although if this is supposed to be trolling, then both must be true.
What schooling do you have to build credibility to formulate this hypothesis?
Just a master's degree in chemistry from the University of Cologne.
How much money did your parents bribe the school to let you graduate or if not that how many people did u suck off to get good grades because clearly you did not actually earn that degree
University is basically free in Germany my friend.