I love the movie Children of Men but always thought the core conceit — that humanity could suddenly become infertile en masse — was a bit silly. Now I’m terrified that it’s not only possible, but...
I love the movie Children of Men but always thought the core conceit — that humanity could suddenly become infertile en masse — was a bit silly. Now I’m terrified that it’s not only possible, but could be imminent. Like, forget climate change and all the other existential threats we’re facing; this would absolutely have snuck up on us and could be devastating.
I highly recommend the book. Unfortunately I read it first and found the movie lacking. The core concept has been quietly and gradually happening for a long time. At some point it may feel sudden...
I highly recommend the book. Unfortunately I read it first and found the movie lacking.
The core concept has been quietly and gradually happening for a long time. At some point it may feel sudden to folks who didn't know that.
For what it's worth, for me it's very suspicious that all but two of my AFAB friends are diagnosed with PCOS. Out of the remaining two, one is suspecting PCOS but is undiagnosed, and one has been...
For what it's worth, for me it's very suspicious that all but two of my AFAB friends are diagnosed with PCOS. Out of the remaining two, one is suspecting PCOS but is undiagnosed, and one has been verified not to have PCOS but also has almost all of her AFAB friends having been diagnosed with PCOS, with barely any overlap between our two friendship groups. Many of my partner's AFAB friends also are diagnosed with PCOS.
Granted, I have 0 clue why that is. Plenty of factors are probably at play. It's certainly a bit concerning, and I'm even saying this as someone who could probably be classified as an antinatalist by a lot of people - though I don't use the label myself.
Call me a fool but for all the reporting on microplastics, I haven’t seen much discussion of how (or if?) it’s harmful. I’d love to be wrong about this but I really get the feeling that an...
Call me a fool but for all the reporting on microplastics, I haven’t seen much discussion of how (or if?) it’s harmful.
I’d love to be wrong about this but I really get the feeling that an enormous amount of media attention for this stuff is simply saying it exists, and allowing my own mind create the boogeyman of what that means. It feels distantly similar to lots of other ways the media allows people to create their own boogeymen, which I think is a part of how far-right bullshit gains support from people who really wouldn’t otherwise support it
I’ll admit the vast majority of my understanding on microplastics is from articles and the following discussion from friends and family (and tildes) but it feels like every conversation steps past the underlying “and it’s bad” when talking about how it’s everywhere
The presence of microplastics is correlated to heart and artery health and Parkinson's and types of dementia. Polystyrene nanoplastics cause congenital defects in chickens and affect white blood...
A lot about how micro and nanoplastics interact with the body is still actively researched so not much can be said for certain. But evidence is building that they do have an impact on our health.
Ah I didn’t consider how it was all fairly new (as far as science research goes) but I suppose that makes a lot of sense — it’s much easier to test for “microplastics are present in this sample”...
Ah I didn’t consider how it was all fairly new (as far as science research goes) but I suppose that makes a lot of sense — it’s much easier to test for “microplastics are present in this sample” than it is to test for “this is the harm that microplastics cause” or even “this is the mechanism for how microplastics cause harm”
Thanks for providing those links! I’ll admit I’m not a biologist so some of the specifics go over my head, but (I think) I understand enough about scientific writing more generally, so I hope to unravel some of what is being studied here.
It may take me a while (I’m currently writing this in bed when I should be sleeping) but I’ll take a look through these, and see if I can’t update my understanding further.
No worries, I tried as much as possible to find articles that are generally accessible (side note: I really love The Conversation for this. The articles are a collaboration between researchers...
I'll admit I’m not a biologist so some of the specifics go over my head
No worries, I tried as much as possible to find articles that are generally accessible (side note: I really love The Conversation for this. The articles are a collaboration between researchers active in the topic and journalists, so both content and presentation are typically sound). The actual research articles are referenced in the links though.
I'm currently writing this in bed when I should be sleeping
I wrote my original response way past my bedtime too, haha! Hope you have (had) a good sleep!
Exactly my thoughts about this topic as well. It's always "Microplastics found in X" or ""Microplastics found in Y" and never ""Microplastics found to have this specific Negative Effect". The very...
Exactly my thoughts about this topic as well. It's always "Microplastics found in X" or ""Microplastics found in Y" and never ""Microplastics found to have this specific Negative Effect".
The very few times I've seen articles exploring negative effects from microplastics, I was always reminded of this XKCD comic with how high a dose of microplastics they were using.
I have been wondering the same. With some short googling, I found this article: https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2024/02/427161/how-to-limit-microplastics-dangers It's honestly a pretty poor article. It...
It's honestly a pretty poor article. It says that BPA and PFAS (teflon) are known to be bad for you. That is absolutely true, and that is why it is being phased out of basically all food products. But it does not follow that all microplastics are bad. It would be like saying that since brass can contain lead or arsenic (which is true), we should never use it for anything that contacts food or water (why not just use lead free brass). I would love to see some more research into this.
Appreciate the link. I only had a brief moment to scan the report. Do the authors explain or speculate why the four subjects who were found to have 0 micro or nanoplastics had none ? It says they...
Appreciate the link.
I only had a brief moment to scan the report.
Do the authors explain or speculate why the four subjects who were found to have 0 micro or nanoplastics had none ? It says they are not trying to analyze route of entry (which I agree would be too large of a scope for this research). It’s just amazing they couldn’t even find any measurable amounts even using something as sensitive as SEM.
Other food for thought - the subjects were all undergoing IVF (or other assisted pregnancies), I wonder if the findings follow for individuals not seeking IVF.
Lastly, I can’t believe that MPs have also been found in meconium(different study). Gen Alpha should also be called the plastic generation.
I love the movie Children of Men but always thought the core conceit — that humanity could suddenly become infertile en masse — was a bit silly. Now I’m terrified that it’s not only possible, but could be imminent. Like, forget climate change and all the other existential threats we’re facing; this would absolutely have snuck up on us and could be devastating.
I highly recommend the book. Unfortunately I read it first and found the movie lacking.
The core concept has been quietly and gradually happening for a long time. At some point it may feel sudden to folks who didn't know that.
For what it's worth, for me it's very suspicious that all but two of my AFAB friends are diagnosed with PCOS. Out of the remaining two, one is suspecting PCOS but is undiagnosed, and one has been verified not to have PCOS but also has almost all of her AFAB friends having been diagnosed with PCOS, with barely any overlap between our two friendship groups. Many of my partner's AFAB friends also are diagnosed with PCOS.
Granted, I have 0 clue why that is. Plenty of factors are probably at play. It's certainly a bit concerning, and I'm even saying this as someone who could probably be classified as an antinatalist by a lot of people - though I don't use the label myself.
Call me a fool but for all the reporting on microplastics, I haven’t seen much discussion of how (or if?) it’s harmful.
I’d love to be wrong about this but I really get the feeling that an enormous amount of media attention for this stuff is simply saying it exists, and allowing my own mind create the boogeyman of what that means. It feels distantly similar to lots of other ways the media allows people to create their own boogeymen, which I think is a part of how far-right bullshit gains support from people who really wouldn’t otherwise support it
I’ll admit the vast majority of my understanding on microplastics is from articles and the following discussion from friends and family (and tildes) but it feels like every conversation steps past the underlying “and it’s bad” when talking about how it’s everywhere
The presence of microplastics is correlated to heart and artery health and Parkinson's and types of dementia. Polystyrene nanoplastics cause congenital defects in chickens and affect white blood cells in mice. The second link also mentions that human proteins can stick to these nanoplastics, which affect how they travel through the body. Polystyrene nanoplastics also affect human white blood cells.
A lot about how micro and nanoplastics interact with the body is still actively researched so not much can be said for certain. But evidence is building that they do have an impact on our health.
Ah I didn’t consider how it was all fairly new (as far as science research goes) but I suppose that makes a lot of sense — it’s much easier to test for “microplastics are present in this sample” than it is to test for “this is the harm that microplastics cause” or even “this is the mechanism for how microplastics cause harm”
Thanks for providing those links! I’ll admit I’m not a biologist so some of the specifics go over my head, but (I think) I understand enough about scientific writing more generally, so I hope to unravel some of what is being studied here.
It may take me a while (I’m currently writing this in bed when I should be sleeping) but I’ll take a look through these, and see if I can’t update my understanding further.
No worries, I tried as much as possible to find articles that are generally accessible (side note: I really love The Conversation for this. The articles are a collaboration between researchers active in the topic and journalists, so both content and presentation are typically sound). The actual research articles are referenced in the links though.
I wrote my original response way past my bedtime too, haha! Hope you have (had) a good sleep!
Exactly my thoughts about this topic as well. It's always "Microplastics found in X" or ""Microplastics found in Y" and never ""Microplastics found to have this specific Negative Effect".
The very few times I've seen articles exploring negative effects from microplastics, I was always reminded of this XKCD comic with how high a dose of microplastics they were using.
I have been wondering the same. With some short googling, I found this article: https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2024/02/427161/how-to-limit-microplastics-dangers
It's honestly a pretty poor article. It says that BPA and PFAS (teflon) are known to be bad for you. That is absolutely true, and that is why it is being phased out of basically all food products. But it does not follow that all microplastics are bad. It would be like saying that since brass can contain lead or arsenic (which is true), we should never use it for anything that contacts food or water (why not just use lead free brass). I would love to see some more research into this.
Research found microplastics in the follicular fluid of 14 out of 18 women.
Wow.
We’re doomed.
Link to study:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0147651325002040
Appreciate the link.
I only had a brief moment to scan the report.
Do the authors explain or speculate why the four subjects who were found to have 0 micro or nanoplastics had none ? It says they are not trying to analyze route of entry (which I agree would be too large of a scope for this research). It’s just amazing they couldn’t even find any measurable amounts even using something as sensitive as SEM.
Other food for thought - the subjects were all undergoing IVF (or other assisted pregnancies), I wonder if the findings follow for individuals not seeking IVF.
Lastly, I can’t believe that MPs have also been found in meconium(different study). Gen Alpha should also be called the plastic generation.