Advertisement

Microplastics are just one way the world is trying to kill you

Close-up side shot of microplastics on a person's fingers.
Recent studies suggest humans inhale about 5 grams of plastic per week, roughly the same weight as a credit card.
(Getty Images / iStockphoto)

See more from the L.A. Times in Google Search. Set us as preferred

When I was a kid growing up in the San Fernando Valley, regular smog alerts kept us off the playground and confined to our classrooms in the hottest months.

The air quality back then was famously terrible. Often, you could see an ugly brown stripe across the horizon. This made for colorful sunsets, but on bad smog days, if you inhaled sharply, your lungs would actually ache.

These days, thanks to strict regulations and technological advancements such as catalytic converters and the removal of lead from gasoline, much of the smog has disappeared from the skies above our city. But not all.

Advertisement

New study: As global plastic production grows, so too does the concentration of microplastics in our bodies.

In the 1995 Todd Haynes film “Safe,” Julianne Moore played a woman in suburban Los Angeles who believed she was being poisoned by everyday chemicals in her environment — car exhaust, household cleaning products, hair sprays, lawn fertilizers and pesticides, even perfumes. At the time, critics wrote about the movie as a metaphor for the scourge of AIDS, or perhaps about the toxicity of modern life.

Now, though, it feels like a literal portrayal.

I stand over my gas stove and wonder how many years I am taking off my life as I inhale nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide and benzene while browning a piece of meat. Gardeners at the apartment house next door assure me that the pesticide they occasionally spray in the front garden is safe for my dog and me. Safe pesticide? Yeah, sure.

In January, our world was upended by hurricane force winds and unthinkably devastating fires. The toxins unleashed by that catastrophe will be felt by Angelenos for decades.

In the immediate aftermath, runoff from the Palisades fires, full of heavy metals and other debris, polluted the surf and probably still does. The sands of Venice Beach are littered with bits of what appear to be charred materials from the structures that burned in January. This summer, something — it’s not clear what — has poisoned dogs in the Venice Canals.

And now, with increasing alarm, I’ve been reading up on the pervasiveness of microplastics, not just in our environment, but in our bodies. Microplastics and their even smaller cousin, nanoplastics, are ubiquitous. Every plastic object begins degrading as soon as it is made, and so, as our world has become dominated by plastic, it has also become polluted by it.

Last week, I learned — with horror — that researchers in New Mexico discovered through autopsies that humans have microplastics in every organ, and a full plastic spoon’s worth of them in their brains. (Some say we inhale the equivalent of a credit card in microplastics each week. I’m not sure which image is less appealing.)

Advertisement

“Plastic is now threaded through the flesh of fish, where it is interfering with reproduction, and the stalks of plants, where it is interfering with photosynthesis, and in much else we place on our dinner plates and set about eating,” wrote Benjamin Wallace-Wells in a New York Times piece with the chilling headline, “You Are Contaminated.”

“There might be plastic in your saliva and almost certainly in your blood,” he wrote. “And because plastic has been found in ovarian follicular fluid and testicular tissue and in a majority of sampled human sperm, it is already embedded in not just the yet to be born but also the yet to be conceived.”

So, other than slowly morphing into much less attractive Barbie and Ken dolls, should we worry about all that plastic infiltrating our bodies?

Researchers don’t have a firm grip yet on the harm that microplastics can wreak on the human body, but they are seeing correlations with a host of diseases and cancers, cognitive disorders such as Alzheimer’s, and premature birth and low birth weight. Even heart attacks.

“Everything you don’t want to happen in your body at the cellular level is associated with microplastics,” Stanford University epidemiologist and pediatrician Angelle Desiree Labeaud told the Stanford Daily in February. She was commenting on a study that found food from the university’s dining halls contained worrisome high levels of plastics.

While public health experts zero in on the cause of dog deaths and illness, there are no barks and no wagging tails in the Venice Canals.

You can get all the vaccinations, drink all the raw milk, eat all the leafy greens, cut out red meat and exercise every day, but we have so much less control over our health than we’d like to believe.

Advertisement

Rubber shedding from car tires, it turns out, is a significant source of the dangerous particulates we unknowingly inhale every day. Parkinson’s disease has been linked to environmental pollution, and research has found that people who live close to golf courses are more vulnerable to it, probably due to pesticides used on the greens, which also seep into the groundwater.

Last year, we were instructed to throw out any black plastic kitchen utensils because they are made from recycled electronic materials that contain harmful fire retardants. Before that, we were told to get rid of Teflon pans because they contain a “forever chemical” linked to a number of health issues, including high cholesterol, high blood pressure, low birth weights and higher risk of some cancers.

Meanwhile, new research shows that popular melamine sponges — like the Magic Eraser — shed trillions of microplastic fibers every month, potentially polluting our homes, our food and our waterways.

Much as we hate to admit it, our health is not so much about personal choice as it is about systems beyond our control.

Bluesky: @rabcarian
Threads: @rabcarian

Insights

L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any news articles.

Viewpoint
This article generally aligns with a Center Left point of view. Learn more about this AI-generated analysis

Perspectives

The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.

Ideas expressed in the piece

  • Recent research indicates microplastics accumulate in human organs at alarming rates, with brain tissue containing concentrations seven to thirty times higher than in liver or kidney samples, suggesting a troubling pattern of neurological bioaccumulation[1][3][4][5].
  • A study published in Nature Medicine documented microplastics embedded within brain immune cells, particularly microglia, triggering inflammatory responses that could contribute to neurodegenerative conditions like dementia, with notably higher accumulation observed in individuals diagnosed with cognitive decline[1][3][4][7].
  • Scientists have identified microplastics crossing the blood-brain barrier and accumulating in quantities equivalent to approximately “a spoonful” in adult brains, with concentrations rising significantly over time from 2016 to 2024 samples, indicating an accelerating environmental exposure trend[2][3][4][5].
  • Researchers hypothesize that microplastics, especially those originating from ultra-processed foods which contain significantly higher plastic particle concentrations than whole foods, may be the missing link explaining the 22% increased depression risk and 41% higher likelihood of sleep disturbances observed in consumers of processed food diets[2][5].
  • Emerging evidence suggests microplastics activate similar biological pathways as those implicated in mental health disorders, including inflammation, oxidative stress, and mitochondrial dysfunction, creating plausible mechanisms through which plastic particles could influence brain health and cognitive function[2][5][6].

Different views on the topic

  • While microplastics have been detected in human tissues, the research team behind the Nature Medicine study explicitly states their findings “are associative and do not establish a causal role for such particles affecting health,” emphasizing the need for more sophisticated analytical techniques and larger cohort studies before drawing definitive health conclusions[3][4].
  • Scientists acknowledge current methodologies for detecting nanoplastics remain limited, with many visualization and spectroscopic approaches only capturing particles larger than 1-5 micrometers, creating significant gaps in understanding the full scope of exposure and potential biological impacts[4][6].
  • Some researchers caution that while concerning correlations exist between microplastic presence and health conditions, establishing direct causal relationships requires more evidence, as the human body has evolved sophisticated defense mechanisms against foreign particulates that may mitigate potential harm[6][8].
  • Experts note that while microplastics have been found in numerous biological samples including blood and placental tissue, the field of microplastic health research remains in its early stages, with limited longitudinal human studies capable of separating microplastic effects from other environmental and lifestyle factors[6][8].
  • Some toxicologists argue that determining actual health risks requires understanding not just the presence but the specific chemical composition, shape, size distribution, and concentration thresholds of microplastics, which current studies have yet to fully characterize across diverse populations[6][8].

A cure for the common opinion

Get thought-provoking perspectives with our weekly newsletter.

Advertisement