Slashdot Mirror
Microplastics Found In 93 Percent of Bottled Water Tested In Global Study (www.cbc.ca)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from CBC.ca: The bottled water industry is estimated to be worth nearly $200 billion a year, surpassing sugary sodas as the most popular beverage in many countries. But its perceived image of cleanliness and purity is being challenged by a global investigation that found the water tested is often contaminated with tiny particles of plastic. The research was conducted on behalf of Orb Media, a U.S-based non-profit journalism organization with which CBC News has partnered. Professor Sherri Mason, a microplastics researcher who carried out the laboratory work at the State University of New York, and his team tested 259 bottles of water purchased in nine countries (none were bought in Canada). Though many brands are sold internationally, the water source, manufacturing and bottling process for the same brand can differ by country. The 11 brands tested include the world's dominant players -- Nestle Pure Life, Aquafina, Dasani, Evian, San Pellegrino and Gerolsteiner -- as well as major national brands across Asia, Africa, Europe and the Americas. Researchers found 93 per cent of all bottles tested contained some sort of microplastic, including polypropylene, polystyrene, nylon and polyethylene terephthalate (PET).
Orb found on average there were 10.4 particles of plastic per liter that were 100 microns (0.10 mm) or bigger. This is double the level of microplastics in the tap water tested from more than a dozen countries across five continents, examined in a 2017 study by Orb that looked at similar-sized plastics. Other, smaller particles were also discovered -- 314 of them per liter, on average -- which some of the experts consulted about the Orb study believe are plastics but cannot definitively identify. The amount of particles varied from bottle to bottle: while some contained one, others contained thousands.
Orb found on average there were 10.4 particles of plastic per liter that were 100 microns (0.10 mm) or bigger. This is double the level of microplastics in the tap water tested from more than a dozen countries across five continents, examined in a 2017 study by Orb that looked at similar-sized plastics. Other, smaller particles were also discovered -- 314 of them per liter, on average -- which some of the experts consulted about the Orb study believe are plastics but cannot definitively identify. The amount of particles varied from bottle to bottle: while some contained one, others contained thousands.
when we introduce a cheap alternative to natural products, there's always a hidden cost the greedy selfish and irresponsible manufactures don't ever want to acknowledge
The top 10 rivers that dump plastic waste into the oceans are in Africa and Asia. 6 of them are in China.
And that, dear friends, is yet another data point about "free trade." That tasty arbitrage that lets you get your iPhone 75 for cheaper than if it were produced domestically is brought to you buy a country that gives absolutely zero fucks about its environment or whether or not you're eating microplastics in your food.
Enjoy.
So, lemme get this straight. The water that comes shipped in plastic, also contains plastic?! Mind. Blown.
Next you're going to tell me that piping the universal solvent through lead pipes causes it to pick up lead.
It's a costly process, so you end up drinking this production "dirt". Cheers!
Never touch the stuff, fish fuck in it!
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Don't compare against nonexistent perfectly safe solution. We use plastic bottles because they were much less dangerous than glass bottles. If you're worried about the dangers of plastic in the containers leaching into the water, you have to compare to the dangers of the next best alternative - glass bottles and the cuts they could give you when they broke.
Nothing in the world is 100% safe. You try to find what offers the best combination of utility and safety, and live with the inherent risks with that solution satisfied that you've minimized the risk..
So you're telling me that someone tested a bunch of bottled water, almost all of which is inside plastic bottles, and they discovered plastic in them? And they were surprised by the findings?
Two bottled waters I purchase are from a local well or mountain spring where there are no sources of animal waste or industrial pollution. My community has a recycling program that collects cans, bottles, and paper so these things don't go into oceans, rivers or a landfill..
Nestle make water? Really? Is that like the 'McWater' of the bottled water industry?
As for Dasani - aren't they actually CocaCola company? Didn't they try to sell tap water in bottles? Oh yes, they did: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/...
I wonder if this means the 'premium' brands such as Evian, or Buxton Spring or whomever are actually okay?
But add to that all the other sources of microplastics: washing clothes, vacuuming carpets, all the plastic items that surround us, rubber tyres, paints and it is reasonable to ask: does one more source really make much difference? Is it worth getting upset about?
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
So it's a test done in Canada, reported by CBC, about bottled water from countries other than Canada. Well that doesn't tell me anything about bottled water sold in Canada now, does it?
#DeleteFacebook
If it's in the water, how much is in things like soda and fruit juices? I've always thought milk in plastic bottles tastes very plasticy. I only buy waxed paper cartons because of this. So the real question to me is how much have I already consumed?
To those who think "We just don't know if it's harmful." You are just thinking chemically. By their very presence these microscopic pieces of plastic can mechanically get in the way. They can clog a vital spot, say the entrance to a lioposome or mitochondria, or just lower the absorption abilities of lung or other their tissues. Even at low levels, it doesn't belong and I don't want it in me.
Rather than use it 'till someone shows it hurts you, how about don't use it until someone proves some form of benefit?
On the one hand you take life too seriously, and on the other, you do not take playful existence seriously enough. Seth
Now, did anyone bother to find out if such microplastics in the water posed some sort of... problem?
You know, health wise?
Because the article just pointed out these microplastics are in our tap water too. Should we also be worried about that?
Show me on the 1st Amendment bobblehead where the moderator touched you...
It's not opportunity cost. It's just actual cost. Glass costs more to make, and ship (due to heavier weight).
Your ad here. Ask me how!
Obviously, since the water tastes like plastic, there must be plastic in the water.
Most Plastics leach hormone like chemicals original study link is broken.
Setting this aside we'd still have to deal with the estrogens from birth control pills that are in the water but this can't help.
We do have leverage, we just aren't willing to use it. That leverage is both trade and military force.
Consider an alternate history where the federal government vetoed NAFTA, did not give MFN status to China and had kept a 600-1000 ship USN after the Cold War. None of that is wild thinking as those are things that could have been done by simply making different choices at key points in the last 25 years.
You bet your ass China would clean its shit up if a few hundred USN ships appeared beyond missile range and imposed a naval blockade of China until they agree to clean up their act.
"Unwilling to act" != "No leverage." Everything you call impossible is just the result of our choices.
When they include more spring-sourced waters, like Poland Spring, I'll be interested. No, I don't buy those exclusively, but surprise, I can name at least two cities in the US that receive spring-sourced water from their public utilities, and it is in fact better than most bottled water, right out of the tap. And I miss that water.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
Most plastics are chemically inert, they don't form tiny sharp needles like asbestos and the quantities are ridiculously small anyways.
So what is going to happen besides, well, shitting tiny plastic particles.
There's an excellent article on this very topic here.
Happy people make bad consumers.
Or: Plastic (even bpa free plastic) that when digested has been show to mimic estrogen found in most of the water people drink.
You're saying that people are intentionally choosing a higher risk for cancer, over getting cut by broken glass? No. Sorry, but that's silly. People are intentionally choosing a higher risk of cancer for 1. cost and 2. convenience. That's all it is. People are generally stupid and frequently make really illogical, irrational decisions.
I don't respond to AC's.
There's an excellent article on this very topic here.
FWIW, I found the linked article pretty interesting. Thank you. Worth checking out.
Friday, March 09, 2018
Microplastics found in 73 percent of fish in the Northwest Atlantic, according to latest research
https://www.naturalnews.com/2018-03-09-microplastics-found-in-73-of-fish-in-the-northwest-atlantic-according.html
The Carboniferous period is the source of 90% of our coal though. Coal formation during that time was 600 times the 'normal' rate. Apparently because the wood got buried and compressed instead of broken down into carbon and oxygen. The bacteria that could break it down evolved later.
Source: http://phenomena.nationalgeogr...
Perhaps these particles are the result of the bottle manufacturing and are already inside the empty bottle before the water is added? Certainly they're not manufactured in a cleanroom so there must be some amount of plastic dust in the air that will find its way inside bottles.
What you are describing is a world where trees evolved independently of the organisms which break down wood.
The Fantastically Strange Origin of Most Coal on Earth.
This is just to move the attention away from what is in tap water.
Nothing that can't be solved with a second helping of 30% of your income.
Plastics are inert and just pass through your system. I'll bet there are other non-plastic things found in bottled water that would be far worse for you. But everything is there in such small quantities, drink on.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
>All living things evolve alongside each other, not independently of each other.
No. Many living things evolve completely separated from each other by their inability to coexist in the same environments, separated by geographical distances and by oceans, or some otherwise total lack of contact. Lions evolve independently of blind cave fish. If this weren't true, the idea of "invasive species" wouldn't exist.
>What you are describing is a world where trees evolved independently of the organisms which break down wood.
There is nothing about evolution that precludes wood-digesting fungus from evolving *long* after trees covered the earth.
The organisms which broke down wood simply didn't exist yet.
That shouldn't be a stretch, if you accept that organisms can evolve to consume/metabolize chemicals that no other life on earth previously could.
Big example is photosynthesis.
I'd be interested in seeing the actual study, with controls, since 'm guessing that the plastic micropipet tips they used to transfer water and dyes likely added some microplastics as well.
I'm curious what reason you have to believe that plastic is inert.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
...if 100 micron bits of plastic are getting through the filters, there could be a slew of microbes, grit, and other impurities. Don't they filter this stuff at all?
I'm just going to drink from the backyard hose, the way God and The Beaver intended.
They most certainly aren't inert.
Plastics used in food packaging are generally pretty inert, though.
Also, a lot of its non-reactivity has to do with the length of the polymers. Break down plastic, and it's far more reactive, unsurprisingly, as it's generally linked hydrocarbons.
Because billions of people drink bottled water, most of which apparently has plastic particles in it. DIdn't you read the headline? Sheesh.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
100 micron is pretty big (about the size of table salt crystals). It might be hard to see, but it is trivial to filter.
I filter every drop of water entering my house with a 30 micron sediment filter.
I additionally filter my drinking water with an inexpensive 5 micron carbon filter followed by a more expensive 0.001 micron reverse osmosis filter.
Heck, I even filter the air circulating in my house with a 3 micron furnace filter.
China has just enough nukes that they'd have a choice: nuke our blockade line or nuke our cities. Also, let's be serious here. The main reason the United States is not taken seriously is that we're the world's cop always throwing our weight around and half-assing it. If our foreign policy were like China's, China would take us much more seriously if we barked at them because they'd know that anything serious enough to us to make us demand action is going to receive a follow through that no one wants.