• Cait
    link
    fedilink
    English
    273 days ago

    I’m still waiting for nature to figure out how to process plastics and bring down most of the world’s infrastructure with it. But I’m not qualified to actually know if this is even possible

    • @HexadecimalSky@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      32 days ago

      I thought it already had, I swear I rember some scientists finding or creating something, bacteria fungus or something that processes some polymers and they where tryna get ot to out and eat plastic ig so they can put it in landfills everywhere.

    • @Tinidril@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      243 days ago

      It took a long time for nature to figure out how to process wood, but it eventually happened. My wooden furniture is still standing though.

    • spicy pancake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      293 days ago

      I’m vaguely qualified (biochem degree) to say it’s probably possible

      that being said there’s just a lot of stuff in nature easier to eat than plastic so if some kind of plasticphagic microbe starts causing issues it’ll likely be somewhere otherwise very inhospitable, like near the poles or in space, where there’s not much else in the way of metabolizable carbon sources

      which, lol. imagine going on an Antarctic or space mission and your fucking PPE starts fermenting lmao good luck

      or the ocean might become so horribly poisinous that everything dies and after microbes eat all the dead biomass and then each other, then they start eating the plastic 😬

      • @twice_hatch@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        43 days ago

        imagine going on an Antarctic or space mission and your fucking PPE starts fermenting

        Michael Crichton called it in Andromeda Strain lol

    • GTG3000
      link
      fedilink
      English
      203 days ago

      There’s fungi that are eating the pacific trash patch, but the issue is that there’s not much energy to be gained from plastics we use. It’s slow.

    • @MTK@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      83 days ago

      If I remember correctly it is a real concern and also part of why developing a bacteria that can break down plastic is very dangerous (not just because it could degrade our tools and infrastructure, but also because it will release literally megatons of CO2 into the atmosphere)

      Fyi, in the past there was nothing in nature to break down trees (lignin) and it actually was a problem as they would literally pile up and essentially be the same problem we have today with plastic (ironically it caused global cooling) https://www.thorogood.co.uk/treevolution-how-trees-came-first-and-rot-came-later-in-earths-deep-past/

  • @Agent641@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    73 days ago

    People are freaking out that there is a credit card worth of microplastics in our brains but I’m just paying for things by putting my forehead on the EFTPOS machine and wondering what the limit is.

    • @starchylemming@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      63 days ago

      ah i see, you are living mostly plastic free

      gotta make do with the little material you have

      /jk im sure you have a palm tree there

  • FerretyFever0
    link
    fedilink
    364 days ago

    Couldn’t they do some dialysis type thing with our blood somehow? Idk shit about science lol

    • @L0rdMathias@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      784 days ago

      Yes, in theory. It’s extremely dangerous and absurdly expensive. It also would only address the microplastics currently in the bloodstream - the ones already embedded into organ tissues wouldn’t be reliably filtered out this way.

      • @Rednax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        504 days ago

        When it comes to PFAS contamination, people have been having decent results by simply donating blood often. Getting it out of the system via blood does help to reduce overall levels in your body.

        • @Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          294 days ago

          Donating plasma works even better. They extract a larger volume of fluids per session, twice a week instead of once every 8 weeks.

          Don’t worry about the recipient: If you are donating plasma regularly, your PFAS levels will be well below average.

          • @turtlesareneat@discuss.online
            link
            fedilink
            English
            144 days ago

            A woman having a child is the biggest reduction. Make of that what you will. I sure hope the placenta, and not the baby, is getting the remainder. But I am guessing both.

          • @Rednax@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            164 days ago

            Huh, I thought that they only filtered your blood when donating plasma, hence the PFAS could simply be returned to you. But I have to admit that I’m far from an expert on this matter.

            Either way, we kinda have returned to bloodletting being a reasonable medical approach.

            • @Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              184 days ago

              They centrifuge your blood and return the RBCs, but the PFAS hangs out in the plasma. Mostly. If there was much in the red blood cells, the liver would be removing it and you’d be pooping it out.

          • @otterpop@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            104 days ago

            Here’s a source for anyone interested. I just tested my well water where I’m at and it’s 10x over the legal EPA limit :( . Might be testing my blood next and heading to the plasma donation center!

          • Zagorath
            link
            fedilink
            English
            94 days ago

            Wait, you can donate plasma two times in one week where you are? That feels kinda insane.

            In Australia it’s 12 weeks for whole blood and 2 weeks for plasma. Or 4 weeks for switching from whole blood to plasma.

            • @ayyy@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              84 days ago

              It’s so much worse than you realize. All blood and plasma must be obtained by “donation” for obvious ethical reasons, but American prisoners get incentives for participation/punishment for non-participation. Private American medical companies make billions of dollars in profit every year selling blood on the international market, but the prisoners don’t see a dime of it. The sellers are so unscrupulous that they have been caught knowingly selling tainted prisoner blood, and continuing to do so after being caught.

              • @Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                English
                6
                edit-2
                3 days ago

                The events you’re talking about occurred from the 1970’s to 1983. They haven’t done prison blood drives or accepted plasma from prisoners in over 40 years.

                If you’ve spent more than 72 hours incarcerated, you are ineligible to donate blood products for 12 months.

                • @Machinist@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  13 days ago

                  Not OP, but I was unaware of that. That must have caused most all the AIDS that was caught through transfusions.

            • @Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              84 days ago

              Yep! US allows plasma donation up to two times per week, with at least 48 hours between donations.

              Can’t donate plasma or blood for 8 weeks after donating whole blood, or 16 weeks after donating packed RBCs.

              Packed RBCs are basically the reverse of plasma donation. Instead of returning the RBCs and keeping the plasma, they take two units of RBCs and return the plasma.

          • @klay1@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            4
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            wait are you guys serious? I know about microplastics and pfas in us but is it a fact donating helps to get rid of some?

            • @Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              5
              edit-2
              3 days ago

              For PFAS, yes, definitely. They’ve done studies on this, some are linked elsewhere in the thread. PFAS in the bloodstream is removed through either whole blood or plasma donation.

              For microplastics, I can’t say with absolute certainty, as I don’t know the concentration of microplastics in the blood, or if replacement blood/plasma contains microplastics. But, the mechanism is the same: extract polluted fluids; allow body to replace with non-polluted fluids. Concentration of pollution falls.

      • @Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        134 days ago

        It’s called “plasmapheresis”, and they’ll pay you $40 twice a week to sit in a chair for an hour while they do it.

        • @L0rdMathias@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          114 days ago

          They’re so nice to do this out of the goodness of their hearts for any random person that asks for the procedure, at a financial loss, with no ulterior motive whatsoever.

      • Deceptichum
        link
        fedilink
        English
        94 days ago

        Extreme heat can destroy plastics, if I were to say self immolate would that be enough to remove the imbedded plastics?

    • @abbadon420@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      194 days ago

      Unfortunately, it doesn’t stay in the blood. Sometimes it wedges in nooks and crannies, where I accumulates and doesn’t leave until a tumor pushes it out.

  • @nebulaone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    174 days ago

    Isn’t plastic basically biologically inert? So unless it is physically blocking something shouldn’t we have seen adverse effects if it actually was dangerous? Or maybe health problems just haven’t been associated with it yet. I think with lead it was obvious pretty quickly. I am a dumbass tho, so maybe someone smarter can correct me.

    • @JayDee@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      18
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      The water surrounding DuPont plants manufacturing PFOA-based materials was contaminated with those plastics. A local farmer videotaped his cows develop ulcers, grow tumors, and eventually wither and die. He constantly insisted that something was in the water that was killing his cows. Those same chemicals are now pervasive everywhere, in everyone’s bodies to some extent. It is 100% accurate to say these chemical compounds will kill you longterm.

      • @wewbull@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        14
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        That’s very different though. Nobody claims that the chemicals used in plastic manufacturing are biologically inert, just that the final result is.

        Dupont wasn’t dumping Lego bricks into the pond. They were leaking liquid chemicals.

        Edit: I’m presuming because “This content in unavailable in your area”.

        • @JayDee@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          5
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          Another link talking about the case. It was confirmed that the chemical at high concentration in the water was PFOA, which is the percursor to Teflon, and which was leaking from the factory site. It has the same effects as other perfluorinated carbines (PFCs). It is also the exact chemical group that we’ve been testing peoples’ blood for, PFOA and other PFCs. It’s the group of chemicals we’ve found strong links to various types of cancers. Research communicates that it is not inert in the body as a microplastic.

          It is 100% the reason those cows withered and died like they did. it directly lines up with everything else we know about PFOA. The concentrations were higher than anywhere else, which explains why the cows died so rapidly. The only reason we don’t have complete confirmation is from DuPont meddling to try and downplay this, the same way they meddled by witholding their research on the health risks of PFCs, and the same way they stayed silent and didn’t act when the alarm was sounded by that Parkersburg farmer.

          • @wewbull@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            7
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            I’m confused.

            Is the issue here you’re using the term “micro-plastic” in a different way to me? My understanding of it is “small particles of solid plastic often reduced in size through mechanical processes to microscopic sizes which we find throughout the environment, often distributed by water”. You seem to be talking more generally about chemical water pollution.

            • @JayDee@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              3
              edit-2
              3 days ago

              That is my bad, not explaining this clearly.

              Our formations of plastics usually utilizes petroleum products being formed into long polymeric chains. That’s what provides the pliable, even stretchy nature of many plastics. However, we don’t make all plastics out of petroleum - we also use resin mixtures and various other chemical processes for specialized plastics - PLA, for instance, is synthesized from plant starch. So, when we’re talking about ‘plastics’, we’re usually talking about petroleum products, but it includes other long-polymer-chain materials we artificially synthesize.

              Having covered that, Teflon is often called a forever chemical, but it’s a chemical which we synthesize into long polymer chains so we can attach it to the surface of things. It’s how pans are non-stick, gore-tex is waterproof, and how many food containers are grease-proof. I am of the view that perflourochemicals classify as plastics because of that. And the reason it’s so pervasive everywhere is the same reason all other microplastics are everywhere: it chips off. You use a metal spatula on a nonstick pan - bam, stray Perflourochemicals, as tiny little solid microplastic flecks. And everything points to them not being inert to human health.

    • @Kratzkopf@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      214 days ago

      There is different health implications connected to microplastics like infertility and cardiovascular diseases, although the connections are not quite understood yet. The amount of microplastics in the human body is very alarming though. A study with brain samples found 0.5w% of plastics, which corresponds to roughly 6g of plastic in a brain. That’s a credit card’s worth of plastic.

      This article should give some overview over different findings and implications:

      https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/aug/21/microplastics-brain-pollution-health

      • @nebulaone@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        43 days ago

        Interesting. I had only heard about how it “MAY” be harmful before, which means nothing.

        Danke für die Korrektur.

    • spicy pancake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      73 days ago

      plastic can be oversimplified into “usually biologically inert molecule chains” (polymers) held together by “usually NOT biologically inert accessory molecules” (plasticizers, fillers, etc.)

      BPA is a pretty well-known “fucks you up” plasticizer, hence it being banned for some applications and “BPA-free” marketing taking off (fun fact we’re still figuring out how badly BPA replacements, most being very similar molecules, are fucking us up and to what extent)

  • @buddascrayon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    164 days ago

    Yeah it’ll be like the machine that you find in museums where you put in a quarter and get an injection molded toy hot out of the mold. You just hook your arm up to an IV and it starts extracting your blood and then when it gets enough of the plastic it melts it and pushes it into the mold and spits out a little toy dinosaur.

    • @ultrafastsloth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      73 days ago

      …and you will be so happy for a few moments before you realize the machine never returned you back all your blood. You realize the machine never intended to give it back as you slowly fade into eternal slumber.

      • @Zink@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        33 days ago

        Sound like a futuristic black-mirror-esque solution to blood donation motivation.

        At Blood-B-Kleen, our machine will quickly and safely pull 8 pints of raw dirty blood from your vein and will return 7 pints of your cleaned blood with 99% reduction in plastics and PFAS, plus some hydrating fluids and vitamins. We don’t even charge you for it yet!

  • @Wilco@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    23 days ago

    I want them to 3D print a neat little Star Wars starship miniature out of mine. Something obscure like a Kimogila.