Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Scientists Call For Ban On Glitter, Say It's a Global Hazard That Pollutes Oceans (cnet.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the cease-and-desist dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from CNET: Whether you love to add a little sparkle to your skin, or you think glitter truly is the herpes of the craft world (once it's on you, it never comes off), some scientists are now claiming that glitter is a hazard to the environment. Glitter, along with microbeads, are considered to fall under the category of microplastics, which are defined as plastics which are less than five millimeters in length. Microbeads are often found in facial scrubs, toothpaste, soaps, cosmetics and more. These microbeads pass through water filtration systems after usage but don't disintegrate, and often end up being consumed by marine life, causing concern among scientists keeping a close eye on how pollution effects fish.

"I think all glitter should be banned, because it's microplastic," Dr. Trisia Farrelly of New Zealand's Massey University told the Independent. Historically, glitter was made from mica rock particles, glass and even crushed beetles. Modern-day crafting glitter is made primarily from metals, while fine-milled cosmetic glitter is made from polyester, foil and plastics.

71 of 121 comments (clear)

  1. I SEE WHAT YOU'RE UP TO by Thud457 · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's a goddamned sneaky backdoor pogrom against FABULOUSNESS!

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  2. The herpes of art supplies by alvinrod · · Score: 3, Funny

    I forget which comedian said it, but I recall a bit where compared glitter to herpes. Once you've got it, you can't get rid of it.

    1. Re:The herpes of art supplies by rwven · · Score: 4, Informative

      Silly goose, that's literally the first sentence of the news post.

    2. Re:The herpes of art supplies by burtosis · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Makes for a great demonstration of pollution in the classroom. Pour four tablespoons of ultra fine glitter in the middle of the floor, it dosent matter how large the room is. Let all the students run around for 10 minutes. Now have them examine where it went - wow it's over everyone and everything almost automagically!? When they inevitably ask - 'ok now how do we clean it up and get it off our clothes?' Keep it real and say 'exactly', then walk out.

    3. Re:The herpes of art supplies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "It's harmless, so don't worry about it. Take a shower, wash your clothes if you don't really like it. It will eventually disperse enough as to be unnoticeable."

      Just like pollution, right?

    4. Re:The herpes of art supplies by Thelasko · · Score: 1

      I've been calling that stuff pollution for years. Mostly because I don't like cleaning it up.

      --
      One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
    5. Re:The herpes of art supplies by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 2

      So, you're going to demonstrate the problem of pollution by spreading around plastic pollutants?

      Isn't that sort of like demonstrating the value of biodiversity by killing off the last pair of dodo birds in front of class? "But how will the species survive now?"

      "Exactly." /walks out

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    6. Re:The herpes of art supplies by slew · · Score: 1

      Isn't that sort of like demonstrating the value of biodiversity by killing off the last pair of dodo birds in front of class? "But how will the species survive now?"

      "Exactly." /walks out

      Isn't that kind of overkill? You only need to kill one of them, right? I think they even knew that back in 1662 ;^)

    7. Re:The herpes of art supplies by alvinrod · · Score: 4, Funny

      As of last month I progressed from not reading articles to not reading summaries. Now I don't even read the headlines before commenting, so if my comment made any sense at all it was purely a coincidence.

      Either that or it was just all an elaborate ruse to see how many [other] people didn't read the summary [either]. Yeah, that's it. I got you good.

    8. Re:The herpes of art supplies by sjames · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If experience is any guide, the kid will visit home from college and when he gets back to his dorm, a bit of that glitter on his bag will catch the light and remind him of elementary school when he first tracked it home.

    9. Re:The herpes of art supplies by ClickOnThis · · Score: 4, Funny

      As of last month I progressed from not reading articles to not reading summaries. Now I don't even read the headlines before commenting, so if my comment made any sense at all it was purely a coincidence.

      I suppose the logical next step is that you don't read your own posts before submitting. Or are you already there? ;-P

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    10. Re:The herpes of art supplies by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 1

      I was originally going to say "killed off the last dodo in front of class", but I just knew some wise-acre would have pointed out that they'd already be going extinct at that point. Heck, even if there was a single pair, that's not exactly a viable population anymore, right?

      Yeesh.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    11. Re:The herpes of art supplies by apoc.famine · · Score: 2

      I used to use this in a general science class to teach about how germs spread. I'd "sneeze" on a desk, paper, etc. before class, and then we'd do some normal activity. 3/4 of the way through class tell everyone what I'd done.

      Inevitably kids would have glitter on their hands, face, desk, pencils, notebooks, etc. It was a very powerful, "this is why you cover your cough, and this is why you wash your hands" teaching tool.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    12. Re:The herpes of art supplies by cyn1c77 · · Score: 1

      "It's harmless, so don't worry about it. Take a shower, wash your clothes if you don't really like it. It will eventually disperse enough as to be unnoticeable."

      Just like pollution, right?

      Yes. And nuclear waste!

    13. Re: The herpes of art supplies by sjames · · Score: 1

      Perhaps not, but I also found a 3rd grade math test once.

    14. Re:The herpes of art supplies by scottrocket · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Newspaper/printer ink used to be polluting; then we switched to organic inks. "Ban all glitter" is knee-jerk magical thinking and unnecessary: Simply alter the composition of the building material. I'm not a chemist, but I'm pretty sure that there are those who can pull this off. Fault can be found with any footprint we leave. To me, "immediate calls to ban" is simply misdirection for (_reason), while real problems go unsolved-and I'm generally an optimist!

    15. Re:The herpes of art supplies by omnichad · · Score: 1

      So throw your trash in the streets and not the landfill.

    16. Re:The herpes of art supplies by arth1 · · Score: 2

      Heck, even if there was a single pair, that's not exactly a viable population anymore, right?

      It could be. Both you and the last dodo are descended from the same first eukaryotic ancestor.

      And you don't even need a pair - a single fertilized female can in theory be enough. Unlikely, but not impossible.

      Genetic variation is a big plus, but not always required. The cheetah has next to no genetic variation due to an earlier bottleneck. Not to mention the bdelloid rotifers, which are diploid (two sets of chromosomes), but were the males are presumed to be extinct for quite some time now, and all offspring gets only the mother's genes.

    17. Re:The herpes of art supplies by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Did somebody say something?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    18. Re: The herpes of art supplies by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

      Darwinism!

    19. Re:The herpes of art supplies by WallyL · · Score: 1

      Sometimes I don't even look at which shill account I'm logged in to before posting!

  3. Oy vey... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    War on Drugs, War on Terror, now War on Ke$ha?? Those "Scientists" have NOOO idea what they unleashed...

  4. Where's the GRA by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 4, Funny

    We need a Glitter Regulatory Administration, laying down the rules and protecting us from our own over-glitterousness.

    1. Re:Where's the GRA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Why? Won't industry regulate itself? hahaha

      I'd love someone to point me to a single industry that actually does truly regulate itself. Not an industry that makes up rules to appear like they regulate themselves yet the rules are in the favor of the industry and not the consumer or rest of the world. Is there any single industry in the world that does truly regulate itself?

    2. Re:Where's the GRA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Is there any single industry in the world that does truly regulate itself?

      Crime is self-regulating. Too much crime, government takes over, too little government, crime takes over. Too much government, everything becomes a crime.

    3. Re:Where's the GRA by sjames · · Score: 2

      The e-cig industry did a fair job of it. That's why the FDA had to lay down the law.

    4. Re:Where's the GRA by cyn1c77 · · Score: 1

      We need a Glitter Regulatory Administration, laying down the rules and protecting us from our own over-glitterousness.

      No, we need to stop wasting materials on frivolous crap like glitter and gratuitous internet use like slas

  5. Glitter by tquasar · · Score: 4, Funny

    Think of the Shiny Happy People! What will happen to them?

    1. Re:Glitter by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Funny

      They'll become matte happy people?

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    2. Re:Glitter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They'll stop holding hands?

    3. Re:Glitter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Shiny Happy People is just a straw man.

    4. Re:Glitter by tquasar · · Score: 1

      Kudos my friend, or is it Kodos?

  6. Glitter is pure evil. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    I curse the bastard that invented it. My house and car have not been glitter free since the kids have been old enough to do "art". Yes, glitter is a global hazard and should be eradicated from existence, but as anyone with kids knows that is an impossible task.

    1. Re:Glitter is pure evil. by Hal_Porter · · Score: 4, Funny

      https://shipyourenemiesglitter...

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    2. Re:Glitter is pure evil. by jafiwam · · Score: 2

      I curse the bastard that invented it. My house and car have not been glitter free since the kids have been old enough to do "art". Yes, glitter is a global hazard and should be eradicated from existence, but as anyone with kids knows that is an impossible task.

      Think of it as cover to prevent getting caught going to the strip club.

  7. In other words ... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 3, Funny

    ... all that glitters isn't for goldfish.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  8. If the nerdy scientists can't have glitter girls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    NO ONE CAN!

  9. *affects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    Yeah, I'm gonna be that guy.

    1. Re:*affects by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      NEXT!

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
  10. All plastics are oil by MrKaos · · Score: 1

    Glitter is another way to sell more oil.

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  11. Re:Oh, the humanity by PopeRatzo · · Score: 3, Funny

    Think of all the Cheerleaders...

    What will become of them?

    They'll become strippers like God intended.

    But what becomes of strippers without glitter? I think we need to put our foot down on this anti-glitter hysteria before it does permanent damage.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  12. Just make it water-solluble and edible by mi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Make the stuff (slowly) water-soluble. So that it can be washed off — in the shower or washing machine.

    To make it even less harmful — and sought after — make it edible...

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    1. Re:Just make it water-solluble and edible by WillgasM · · Score: 2

      There's companies selling biodegradable glitter but they don't sell it cheap.

    2. Re:Just make it water-solluble and edible by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      Well that's a horse of a different color!

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    3. Re:Just make it water-solluble and edible by WillgasM · · Score: 1

      It's made from mica, not plastic.

  13. Re:Oh, the humanity by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

    Yes, but if there is no glitter to get on your clothes then the wife won't know you had a lap dance...

  14. Pogrom against logical consistency by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 2

    "I think all glitter should be banned, because it's microplastic," Dr. Trisia Farrelly of New Zealand's Massey University... Modern-day crafting glitter is made primarily from metals..

    It's more like a pogrom against logical consistency. If crafting glitter is not made from plastic but metal then, unless there is an environmental problem with the metal they use, why should it be banned? If the summary is right then clearly "all glitter" should not be banned, just cosmetic glitter which is made from plastic and Gary.

    1. Re:Pogrom against logical consistency by Jzanu · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The problem is almost entirely the uniquely small size and sudden introduction into a foreign environment. There is a major difference between metal in the ground as ore and metal as it is used in industry, and again a difference between e.g. 1 gram/trillion liters in sea water and 1 gram/billion liters, for everything that breathes it or otherwise lives in constant contact with it. Not just animals but plants, and even both in ecosystems sustain damage. It is the change in availability that literally crowds out existing organisms, causes metabolic problems with what eats it, and especially with what breathes it. Plastic does all that plus has additional problems from chemical leaching that directly harms people, rather than just their food supply.

    2. Re:Pogrom against logical consistency by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It depends strongly on the type of metal though. Iron, even in small chunks, is not going to be an issue because it will rapidly oxidise to rust which is readily found naturally. On the other hand, a metal like lead is highly toxic and relatively stable and is really bad for the environment. So I'm not saying that metal glitter is necessarily fine for the environment all I am pointing out is that if microplastics are bad for the environment then it does not logically follow that we should ban metal glitter. This would be like arguing that plastic bags are bad for the environment so therefore we should ban paper bags.

    3. Re:Pogrom against logical consistency by Jzanu · · Score: 4, Informative

      Except chemistry is very specific, and metal glitter is partly aluminum and partly PET, none of which behaves remotely like iron. Think metallised film, "PET is a hard, stiff, strong, dimensionally stable material that absorbs very little water. " This means it isn't biodegradable, and doesn't dissolve in water at appreciable rates vs the amounts being discharged. There is a wiki link too if you google that but it is less direct.

    4. Re:Pogrom against logical consistency by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

      Yes, chemistry is very specific which is why the original argument against plastics does not hold for metal. This was my point!

    5. Re:Pogrom against logical consistency by Solandri · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I own a boat. Every metal I put into the sea turns into its oxidized form (i.e. ore) within months, if not weeks. I have to work my butt off to prevent this (paint, coatings, sacrificial anodes, galvanic isolator). There are above-water metal parts which I thought were thoroughly painted, yet a few days after being splashed with seawater I notice extensive corrosion.

      If metallic glitter can somehow survive in the ocean for more than a few months with zero maintenance effort, then I wanna know what metal it's made out of so I can build my boat out of it. I'm completely on board with a ban on plastic glitter (I've had to vacuum way too much of that crap up out of my carpets). But I seriously doubt metallic glitter is worthy of such a ban.

    6. Re:Pogrom against logical consistency by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I imagine that it is possible to make a compostable glitter using bioplastic and an ultra-thin layer of aluminum. I imagine this because there are already plastic bags made of a compostable plastic and coated with a layer of aluminum allegedly one angstrom thick, such a minute quantity that it essentially disappears into the background. But is anyone doing that?

      Aluminum is basically the only metal which is relevant to the discussion, unless maybe titanium could be used. That's refined electrolytically now, so if you could figure out how to use vanishingly little of it you could probably get away with using it in a lot of places aluminum is used in minute quantities now.

      There are only so many choices, though. The aforementioned iron just isn't suitable; unless you alloy it with nastier metals, it's not stable enough to stay shiny. We like to just go ahead and oxidize it and use it for a rust color, because that's stable.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    7. Re: Pogrom against logical consistency by PoopJuggler · · Score: 1

      Why are you defending glitter? You're literally taking time out of your life to defend something that has no need to exist. Why do we need glitter at all?

    8. Re:Pogrom against logical consistency by sabbede · · Score: 2

      What struck me was that she wants it banned when it appears to only be a "concern among scientists keeping a close eye on how pollution affects (sic) fish", as opposed to having been demonstrated to be harmful. So it could be a problem, but we don't know for sure yet if it is so calling for a ban is incredibly premature. Bad science!

    9. Re: Pogrom against logical consistency by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      Why do we need glitter at all?

      To be FABULOUS!

      --
      Cheap storage VM.
    10. Re:Pogrom against logical consistency by Verdatum · · Score: 1

      The summary/article is mistaken. Modern glitter is a thin-film coating of metal (aluminum) over a plastic substrate. It's like dicing up a space-blanket (Mylar).

    11. Re: Pogrom against logical consistency by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

      Why are you defending glitter?

      I am not defending glitter, I am defending the principle that we should use be making scientifically sound decisions when it comes to banning things and only ban things which are more harmful than beneficial. Since glitter is basically useless that's a pretty low bar but it still has to be crossed. There seems to be clear evidence support a ban on plastic glitter but not metallic. If we just allow things to be banned by association - essentially making the argument that plastic glitter is bad therefore all glitter is bad - we are setting off down a dangerous road.

  15. Re:scale of the problem? by sexconker · · Score: 1

    The trick is it tends to float.

  16. How about macroplastic waste too? by Subm · · Score: 2

    Why only get rid of microplastics?

    How about most macroplastic waste too? We've filled our world with wasteful packaging, unnecessary plastic bags, disposable everything, and so on.

    If we keep the useful macroplastic and stop producing the rest, we'll still get rid of a lot of waste and pollution.

  17. Re:Oh, the humanity by PopeRatzo · · Score: 3, Funny

    Yes, but if there is no glitter to get on your clothes then the wife won't know you had a lap dance...

    How do you think I met my first two wives?

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  18. Re: Natural Selection by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 3, Funny

    First they came for the glitter, and I did not speak out—
    Because I was not glitter.

    Then they came for the glue, and I did not speak out—
    Because I was not glue.

    Then they came for the paint, and I did not speak out—
    Because I was not paint.

    Then they came for me—and there was nothing left to do crafts with.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  19. Re:scale of the problem? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    Good! So it's going to be much easier to clean up in 2081!

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  20. Use gold by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Gold is safe to eat, harmless to the environment, shiny, and will even clean itself up if it is available in large enough quantities.

  21. Re:scale of the problem? by EETech1 · · Score: 1

    https://m.alibaba.com/product/...

    These guys can supply 8000 kg a day of this type, and there's thousands of types, and there's thousands of manufacturers just like them on Alibaba.

  22. I'll settle for an EPA by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    that actually has some teeth.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  23. Nonsense by RecycledElectrons · · Score: 1

    I recall that in elementary school I was told that plastics break down into smaller and smaller pieces over time.

    If we ban the smallest pieces of plastic, won't the larger stuff still break down over time?

  24. Next ban clothes by Chrisq · · Score: 2

    Since a study found that about 90% of the [plastic] debris was microfibers – both in freshwater and the ocean, and these were identified as coming from clothes then perhaps we should ban these too.

    1. Re:Next ban clothes by Repentinus · · Score: 1

      Mandatory filters for microfibres in washing machines. Scientists studying plastic pollution want them introduced; the industry obviously does not because of the cost. (Clothes also serve a fundamental need of maintaining body temperature; the same cannot be said for glitter.)

  25. Re:Natural Selection by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    You missed out snakes, gorillas and winter.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  26. Screw fish, I demand sparkly strippers! by sabbede · · Score: 1

    Those girls work hard for their money and they deserve to shine. Dr. Trisia is just jealous because she has a stripper name but doesn't have the pole-skills for a real career. That's why she's pretending fish are better than strippers.