Slashdot Mirror
73 Percent of Fish In the Northwestern Atlantic Have Microplastics In Their Guts
According to a new study published today in the journal Frontiers in Marine Science, microplastics have been found in the stomachs of nearly three out of every four mesopelagic fish caught in the Northwest Atlantic. "These findings are worrying, as the affected fish could spread microplastics throughout the ocean," reports Phys.Org. "The fish are also prey for fish eaten by humans, meaning that microplastics could indirectly contaminate our food supply through the transfer of associated microplastic toxins." From the report: Microplastics are small plastic fragments that have accumulated in the marine environment following decades of pollution. These fragments can cause significant issues for marine organisms that ingest them, including inflammation, reduced feeding and weight-loss. Microplastic contamination may also spread from organism to organism when prey is eaten by predators. Since the fragments can bind to chemical pollutants, these associated toxins could accumulate in predator species. Mesopelagic fish serve as a food source for a large variety of marine animals, including tuna, swordfish, dolphins, seals and sea birds. Typically living at depths of 200-1,000 meters, these fish swim to the surface at night to feed then return to deeper waters during the day.
The researchers caught mesopelagic fish at varying depths, then examined their stomachs for microplastics back in the lab. They used a specialized air filter so as not to introduce airborne plastic fibers from the lab environment. The team found a wide array of microplastics in the fish stomachs -- with a whopping 73% of the fish having ingested the pollutants.
The researchers caught mesopelagic fish at varying depths, then examined their stomachs for microplastics back in the lab. They used a specialized air filter so as not to introduce airborne plastic fibers from the lab environment. The team found a wide array of microplastics in the fish stomachs -- with a whopping 73% of the fish having ingested the pollutants.
And what percentage have grit in their guts? Or sand in their guts? Or bits of coral in their guts?
I can see where you're heading with this, but you haven't established anything special about microplastics in the food chain, vs other grit in the food chain. There's just nothing special about one class of inert crap, vs any other class of inert crap.
I'm not an "apologist" for polluters, it seems the oceans have become quite the dump for plastic waste, and it's a shame.
However...
Do these microplastics affect the fish's health and / or significantly impact their lifespan? If not then is there some other reason to be concerned?
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Good thing I don't eat the stomachs of fish. Now if their meat were contaminated with microplastics, then I might worry about it accumulating in my body. Some quick research suggests that microplastics bioaccumulate, as implied by the summary. What really irks me is that 'farm-raised' fish, which should theoretically be free of bioaccumulation problems present in the wild, are fed cut-up wild-caught fish, so the pollutants get fed to them anyway. Where's my grass-fed Kobe fish?!
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
Stop eating plastic you dumb fish
That's just the plastic worms the geniuses used to catch the fish to study.
Every waste known to man, including nuclear, could be in the ocean.
A challenging problem to resolve. I would prolly welcome aliens who may help us reverse this. Not ruling out us figuring this out all by ourselves though.
Your statement reveals that you don't understand it all.
Let me explain it to you - micro-particles of non-digestible or difficult-to-digest stuff gives intestines more to deal with than they should otherwise.
This means they have to work harder, or work less efficiently, or the good work is overpowered by the "dealing-with-shit" stuff. This means that the organism they support doesn't reach its full potential.
TL:DR version: non-digestible input means your guts work less better. Get it?
If that's too difficult for you to cope with, then try supplementing your diet with 20% decomposed plastic bags and get back to us.
They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
233 fish gut contents from seven different species of mesopelagic fish were examined.
Ridiculously small sample.
I find myself curious: where did you find the "20% decomposed plastic bags" figure? TFA only mentions that 73% of mesopelagic fish had some amount of microplastics in their stomachs, without mentioning an actual amount....
Absent a source for your number, I've got to assume you're just scaremongering (IOW you made up a scary number to try to bolster an argument - your prviliege, but I don't have to buy into your argument just because you have a scary, made-up number)....
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
They examined the stomach contents of fish. Okay.
They found "microplastics" in about three out of four fish. Okay.
How much? It couldn't be a lot, because they were worried about contaminating the samples with microplastics from the air itself.
That means that the amounts they were looking for were literally microscopic, and very, very low in volume.
It's more a testament to the ability to find incredibly small amounts of the stuff than any indication that the amount they found was large.
This is a lot like the "we found Fukushima radiation in the ocean off the US coast" story - where the amount of cesium was unimaginably small - three ATOMS of the stuff per cubic meter...
The problem seem to be that those microplastic bullet are by nature accumulating some chemicals on their surface you might not want to end in fish while floating in water (there were a few article last month about that), then releasing in while in the stomach of the fish. The problem is not per see the microplastic bullet, but those "rider" chemicals...
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Luckily the Queen declared war on plastics:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/02/11/queen-declares-war-plastic-david-attenborough-documentary/
Of course, what the Queen doesn't mention is that the majority of her billions came from her share in Shell, which has been the most polluting company ever. I bet now she has seen the light, she's going to give those billions back, to fight plastic pollution.
i am pure veg
the affected fish are not even eaten by humans
tuna eat them, though
learn to read
Okay I'm convinced. This person who responded to an article about scientists doing research saying but they should do research and hasn't done any research also says we won't die from it. Case closed nuff said.
By George Carlin:
The air and the water will recover, the earth will be renewed, and if it’s true that plastic is not degradable well, the planet will simply incorporate plastic into a new paradigm: the earth plus plastic.
The earth doesn’t share our prejudice towards plastic. Plastic came out of the earth. The earth probably sees plastic as just another one of its children. Could be the only reason the earth allows us to be spawned from it in the first place: it wanted plastic for itself. Didn’t know how to make it, needed us. Could be the answer to our age-old philosophical question, “Why are we here?” “Plastic, assholes.”
I think the 20% was an example to prove a point, not a basis of fact or an actual statistic...
Right now, fish that are not farmed are advertised as "wild caught" because, you know, that sounds better. The term makes us think of pristine Alaskan streams. If farmed fish raised in filtered water canbe advertised as "plastic free," this will flip.
They didn't die of them, and neither will we. Rather than complaining about something you saw under a microscope why don't you do some research?
I'm hoping you're headed to an all-you-can-eat Fugu buffet soon so we can ensure your logic doesn't infect actual research.
Eventually fish adapt and start digesting plastics. Earlier trash is future food.
I predict this will be the response after reading followup studies on ocean health.
Only their meat.
I don't think the concern here is that the plastics are displacing nourishment by bulk in the stomachs of the fish. As for human beings, doctors literally prescribe that patients get more indigestible bulk in their diets. Plastic bags are a poor choice, but not on the grounds of their indigestibility.
Theoretically sand doesn't leech dioxins into the fish's body. That's been mentioned in OP and TFA. You're the one claiming that plastic is inert, and I'd be interested in how you came to that conclusion.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
If that's too difficult for you to cope with, then try supplementing your diet with 20% decomposed plastic bags and get back to us.
It would be a new data point for science. So please proceed.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Father owns a fishing business in a classic New England fishing town.
The size of his catch each year since 1980 has been the same size. The average fish size (which he keeps track of) has a plus/minus deviation of about a quarter kilo each year. That's 150 tons each haul.
More alarmist bullshite, just like the Mercury claims to try and clamp down on an otherwise very healthy blue collar trade.
TL:DR version: non-digestible input means your guts work less better. Get it?
If that's too difficult for you to cope with, then try supplementing your diet with 20% decomposed plastic bags and get back to us.
Um. If something is non-digestible, doesn't that mean you just shit it out? If you can't digest it, it just passes through. Much like when you feed corn to dogs. They can't digest corn, so it comes out looking much the way it did going in, yellow kernels, unaffected by digestion.
Also, I'd like to point out, if it can't be digested and somehow remains lodged in the gut, that wouldn't affect the parts we'd be interested in for eating. We don't eat the entrails. Now I suppose there is the matter of it somehow becoming stuck within the digestive system, but I haven't seen anything like that mentioned. Why would it get stuck in there? You'd think, as I already said, it'd just pass through like any other non-digestible matter.
This is not new info. Plastics pass through wastewater treatment plants and plastic left on beaches or or bays get into the oceans. Fish see this waste as food and eat it.
The Solar System and beyond is just too beautiful.
Thank God that the fish are taking the hit that otherwise would fall to us. It is wonderful that we throw the guts away and therefore this becomes the perfect filter to these demonic substances that pervade our food system.
Speaking of shit posters. Hi Ray!
I bet microsilicon particles too! everywhere! the beach is positively saturated with em! :P
different sizes, different shapes, all chemically inert in any reasonable metric.
TL:DR should really go at the start as it's a summary, rather like an abstract... not to difficult to understand eh?
As for the plastics, as another poster pointed out, the fish will just shit it out.
Does it go on forever?