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.

17 of 177 comments (clear)

  1. And another interesting stat... by DeplorableCodeMonkey · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  2. Water shipped in plastic contains...plastics? by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Water shipped in plastic contains...plastics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Honest question: is the 100 micron size for microplastics significant for some reason? The environment is filled with things that are bad for us but our bodies provide some degree of mitigation for many things. At what sizes and concentrations do we observe negative effects to the body?

    2. Re:Water shipped in plastic contains...plastics? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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.

      The plastic almost certainly isn't coming from the water dissolving the plastic. Then there is always the issue of the tap water being tested being superior in this regard. You would think it would have a lot in it from the PVC pipes using that metric.

      What I find amusing about this is that people have been sold the idea that bottled water is somehow healthier. for us. Excluding places like Flint, Michigan, it isn't.

      We've had our tap water tested against bottled, and it's better in all respects. A tad hard, good Magnesium content, and the taste is right up there with pure spring water from the local mountains.

      Just remember folks, that Bottled water you just paid 3 bucks for 12 ounces was bottled by a company that can make more money the cheaper they produce the stuff. Since most people are convinced it is better for us, they'll keep buying it no matter what.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    3. Re:Water shipped in plastic contains...plastics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Absolutely. Nature always deals in round even numbers. 99 microns would just be unnatural.

    4. Re:Water shipped in plastic contains...plastics? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Honest question: is the 100 micron size for microplastics significant for some reason?

      I think that the reason they used 100 micron is that it shows that the water contamination is coming after the water is filtered. 100 microns is pretty big.

      Then again - and it is just my cynicism showing - I suspect that a lot of bottled water isn't filtered at all.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    5. Re:Water shipped in plastic contains...plastics? by hey! · · Score: 2

      From TFA:

      Microplastics are the result of the breakdown of all the plastic waste that makes its way into landfills and oceans.

      In other words this is not the kind of contamination you'd expect coming from the bottle the water ships in. Given how slowly these compounds break down, with a sensitive enough assay you're bound to find this stuff everywhere in an industrialized country. Microplastics are found in most municipal tap water, which is the source for most bottled water. If your test is sufficiently sensitive, you'll find them in spring water due to worker, airborne and general environmental contamination.

      The question is whether the currently detectable levels of microplastics are biologically significant. Nobody is ready to answer that question yet. This kind of question frequently comes up when there's an advance in testing. When you can test for heretofore undetectable levels of something, you find it in places you didn't know it was, and can't be sure what that means.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  3. Water? by stealth_finger · · Score: 2

    Never touch the stuff, fish fuck in it!

    --
    Wanna buy a shirt?
    https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
  4. Plastic was found inside plastic bottles? by Vermonter · · Score: 2

    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?

  5. Who? by coofercat · · Score: 2

    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?

  6. Re:No surprise, plastics aren't natural by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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

    Doesn't have to be artificial. Could be natural too...

    Many years ago, when woody plants were first developing there was nothing in nature that could break down wood. There was a build up of wood all over the planet before organisms first learnt to devour them. I can't help but wonder if microfragments of wood and fragments of wood didn't "pollute" and "accumulate" in the world like plastic does today. Obviously, wood was created by biological processes, not man-driven processes, but it was essentially the same thing- an increasing volume of the planet's surface area being "polluted" by a product that can't and won't break down for potentially thousands of years and just accumulating.

    Eventually organisms will evolve to devour plastic and break down those yummy hydrocarbon bonds. Until then, we've got a mess on our hands, like the world did when wood was an undigestable product.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  7. Re:Well and spring water by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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..

    Microplastics do. That's the point of this study. When you open the cap, lots of microplastics deposit into the water (most too small to be seen with the eye, a significant portion small enough to be absorbed into your blood stream)- some are already in the water from the bottle and from other sources. Unless you pisas and kakas directly into a plastic recycling plant... all that plastic you are consuming passes through you and out of you in your waste... And eventually makes it's way into rivers and oceans. All those tiny microplastics will pass through many organisms...

    The question is, do all these microplastics going around your body cause any harm? We don't know.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  8. Re:Opportunity cost by cayenne8 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    We use plastic bottles because they were much less dangerous than glass bottles.

    Err...what danger???

    Seriously...I grew up when pretty much ALL store bought drinks were in glass.

    I remember buying cokes in regular sized and even 2L glass bottles, and as a kid...finding them and returning to the 7-11 to get the deposit back on them.

    I can assure you there were no mass outbreaks of cuts, dismemberments or death due to everything being in glass bottles.

    Sure, if you drop them, they can and did break, but at least back then, we had enough common sense to not step in the middle of them barefoot.

    Hell, even today...I pretty much only buy beer in bottles, just tastes better.

    I only buy canned beer when around water (boating, swimming pools, etc).

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  9. Canada? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 2

    Microplastics found in 93% of bottled water tested in global study

    Report from CBC.ca

    His team tested 259 bottles of water purchased in nine countries (none were bought in Canada).

    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
  10. Re:Opportunity cost by dryeo · · Score: 3, Informative

    Those 2 litre glass bottles were banned pretty quick as they had a habit of blowing up. As for danger, a friend cut her foot pretty bad wading in a local lake, same with my dog, who needed 3 or 4 stitches on her foot. Of course the real reason glass went away was cost.

    --
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  11. Re:Not buying it by Tyler+Durden · · Score: 4, Informative

    There's an excellent article on this very topic here.

    --
    Happy people make bad consumers.
  12. Re:Not buying it by Yggdrasil42 · · Score: 4, Informative

    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...