“There’s no escaping them no matter what you eat, it seems.”

It isn’t just seafood that’s loaded with microplastic pollution. In a new study, scientists found microplastics in nearly 90 of sampled meats and meat-like alternatives – including seafood, chicken breasts, beef steaks, tofu, and plant-based burgers.

It’s become well-documented that seafood is often tainted with the presence of microplastics due to the shockingly high quantities of plastic in the planet’s oceans. For instance, a 2017 review found that regular eaters of fish and shellfish could be ingesting up to 11,000 microparticles a year.

However, until now, there’s been relatively little research into the prevalence of plastic in terrestrial protein sources, like beef and chicken.

To pry into the issue, scientists at Ocean Conservancy and the University of Toronto sampled 16 protein types, including highly processed protein products and minimally processed “fresh” products.

    • @Anamnesis@lemmy.world
      7•6 months ago

      How dangerous are they? I see lots of articles about them being in everything but not much about what they actually do when they get inside you.

      • @freebee@sh.itjust.works
        2•6 months ago

        Tiniest pieces of plastic from for example tires would classify as fine dust particles, which is like a containerword for tiny particles from any kind of material, as long as it’stiny enough it counts as PM. PM10 and PM2.5 is somewhat researched. Breathing in fine dust particles often and in large quantities for sure ain’t healthy, correlation with lung irritation, asthma, etc. Whether it’s specifically the plastic share of the PM that’s bad: still unknown I think.

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particulates

    • @andros_rex@lemmy.world
      3•6 months ago

      That’s why “recycling” is so popular I think. The industry knew that there would be pushes against plastic, and came up with an ingenious way to make you the one “responsible” while also selling you the fairy tale that we could just reuse the stuff forever. People feel good about themselves for putting stuff in the blue bin, without realizing the near certainty that it’s going to end up in the landfill too.

    • @Aux@lemmy.world
      0•6 months ago

      It’s not a question of convenience. Plastics require several magnitudes less energy to produce goods than alternatives like metal, glass and wood. If we stop using plastics today our emissions will sky rocket so high the planet will start boiling.

      We need to force governments to recycle better, because a lot of plastics are completely ignored in many countries.

      Here’s a quick example. My hobby is 3D printing and I live in the UK. The most common plastic in this hobby is PLA. It is both sustainable and recyclable. But Britain doesn’t recycle it as part of household waste. There are companies here which offer PLA recycling, but they require at least 50L worth of PLA to pick it up from you. I use about 5kg per year, so even if I throw away everything I print, I will need 10 years to fill the recycling order. But since I only want to throw away failed attempts, it will take a lifetime to fill it.

      If my council would start using hot composters instead of cold ones I could at least throw my PLA waste into compost with food and it would decrease into lactic acid, but the government doesn’t give a shit, so all my plastic goes into landfill.