• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Micro plastics in Protein

The Hammer

[REDACTED]
Premium Member

"Portland, Ore. – A new study led by researchers at Ocean Conservancy and the University of Toronto and published today in the journal Environmental Pollution found microplastic particles in 88% of protein food samples tested. The samples were drawn from 16 different protein types* destined for U.S. consumers, including seafood, pork, beef, chicken, tofu, and three different plant-based meat alternatives."

Turns out it doesn't matter what you are eating and drinking these days, you are going to be killing yourself slowly by ingesting invisible micro plastics.

Highest concentrations were found in processed meat sources, but still relatively high even in plain chicken breast.
 

McBell

Resident Sourpuss
Highlights
• We observed microplastic contamination ≥45 μm in 16 U.S. protein products.​
• Highly-processed products contained the most microplastics per gram.​
• Microplastic contamination did not differ between brands or store types.​
• Mean U.S. adult exposure from consuming these proteins is >11,000 microplastics/year.​
• Maximum U.S. adult exposure from these proteins is ∼3.8 million microplastics/year.​
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
I think what remains to be determined is the long term health impacts. Younger generations have the most to worry about. They will endure more exposure.

I wonder if “microplastics free” will be a new category of food options. And how much will that cost?
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Cheer up! Nothing in this changes the fact that we are all going to die.
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
How they going to get it free of micro-plastics?
Well, without any expertise whatsoever I speculate that clean non-microplastics environments could be created and plants grown and animals bred and processed.

It could be an exclusive food source if microplastics was shown to be a serious health concern.
 

McBell

Resident Sourpuss
Well, without any expertise whatsoever I speculate that clean non-microplastics environments could be created and plants grown and animals bred and processed.

It could be an exclusive food source if microplastics was shown to be a serious health concern.
Fair enough.
And what a marvelous excuse to jack the prices up through the roof....
 

Quintessence

Consults with Trees
Staff member
Premium Member
It's been known for a while that this will be a thing. The bigger question is what the practical impact is on the health of biological organisms. I studied a fair bit of risk analysis in graduate school and something the general public often fails to understand is that mere exposure to something that is hazardous is not the problem. It's all about dosage - dosage over time, in what quantity, for how long. I don't know where the state of the research is on that as it's not something I keep up on, but last I knew there really isn't a lot of data to know what the actual health effects are going to look like. See:


"Unfortunately, the accurate assessment of human exposure to nanoplastics remains a scientific challenge due to the lack of validated methods, certified reference materials, and standardization across the analytical procedures used [161,162]. Notably, most of the reported studies were conducted using polystyrene due to its ease in synthesis and processing into nanoparticles, while the most common commercial used of plastics are polyolefins (e.g., polyethylene and polypropylene), polyesters, and polyurethanes. Given the large variety in particle size, shape and chemical composition of plastics, the potentially hazardous effects of different types of micro- and nanoplastics to human health remain largely unknown [163]."
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Look at the "common" foods they selected for the study. Shrimp? Really? They literally swim in waters full of micro-plastic pollution. Pork? Hardly animals known for discriminating palates. (Both are also treif, so I am like 'Who cares?')
 

McBell

Resident Sourpuss
Look at the "common" foods they selected for the study. Shrimp? Really? They literally swim in waters full of micro-plastic pollution. Pork? Hardly animals known for discriminating palates. (Both are also treif, so I am like 'Who cares?')
No idea why shrimp is on the list, but:
1. Pork​
2. Chicken​
3. Beef​
4. Lamb Meat​
5. Goat Meat​
6. Turkey​
7. Duck Meat​
8. Buffalo Meat​
9. Goose Meat​
10. Rabbit Meat​
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
since we all die eventually, then there is no reason to fix anything; disease, famine, war, economic/societal collapse, etc. right?
You tell us. Have disease, famine, and war been fixed? If they haven't then apparently any existing reason for fixing them hasn't been sufficient to make it happen.
 

The Hammer

[REDACTED]
Premium Member
Look at the "common" foods they selected for the study. Shrimp? Really? They literally swim in waters full of micro-plastic pollution. Pork? Hardly animals known for discriminating palates. (Both are also treif, so I am like 'Who cares?')

They also checked, chicken, beef, tuna, Pollock, tofu, and other vegetable proteins.
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
They also checked, chicken, beef, tuna, Pollock, tofu, and other vegetable proteins.
So? I eschew "plant-based meat substitutes". I seldom eat tofu. Which, by the way, is usually made from genetically modified plants. The chicken and beef I eat are kosher. I'll bet the researchers didn't select kosher meats. The main thing is they picked possibly some of the most plastic riddled foods of them all.
 
Top