Michael Rosenthal

(1/2019) We previously wrote in this column about the uses and downsides of using plastic, primarily on the use of plastic bags. Here we will take a look at a broader perspective on plastic use, its impact on the environment, and the progress that has been made in reducing the contamination of the environment.

Plastic accumulation in the environment has a negative effect on wildlife, animal habitats, and the earth. Plastic pollution is categorized as micro-, meso-, or macro, depending on size. Because plastics are inexpensive to manufacture and are durable, they receive high levels of use. But because of the chemical structure of most plastics, they do not degrade easily; and hence, pollute land, waterways, and oceans in a major way. This plastic pollution has a major effect as well on marine animals, who can both get entangled in plastic waste or have their health negatively impacted by internal exposure to the chemicals in plastic waste.

Some 380 million tons of plastic is produced worldwide yearly, and some 6.3 billion tons have been produced worldwide from the 1950s to the present. If you are old enough, you can member when soda and beer came in glass bottles, then in metal cans. Only about 9% of this plastic has been recycled and about 12% incinerated. The rest of it enters the environment into landfills, in the broader environment, and into the oceans. Though there have been some efforts toward reducing plastic use and promotion of recycling, plastic waste in the environment continues to grow.

MIcrodebris are plastic pieces between 2 millimeters and 5 millimeters in size. They end up in ocean waters through rivers and streams. They are so small that it is impractical to salvage them after release. They often end up ingested by organisms and can cause adverse health effects. They often carry remnants of pesticides. MIcrodebris has been found on beaches worldwide. Macrodebris is plastic larger than 20 mm. This category includes the infamous plastic grocery bags. They are often found in ocean waters and can have a serious negative impact on native organisms. Macrodebris is often trapped by fishing nets, weighing up to 6 tons. Some plastic items decompose faster than others. The Marine Conservancy has predicted that the decomposition rate of a foam plastic cup will take 50 years!

Another major source of plastic pollution is ocean-based sources. Merchant ships expel cargo, sewage, used medical equipment, and other types of waste into the ocean. It is estimated that 20% of the debris that pollutes ocean water, some 5.6 million tons, comes from these sources. Naval, research, and pleasure crafts all contribute to this pollution. Discarded fishing gear is thought to be the major source of ocean plastic pollution.

Litter that reaches the oceans is often toxic to marine and human life. Toxins that are components of plastics include diethyl phthalate, a carcinogen, as well as the toxic metals lead, cadmium, and mercury. Plankton, fish, and humans ingest these toxic chemicals through the food chain, and thus can cause illness and death.

Entanglement in plastic debris affects and kills many marine organisms, including fish, seals, turtles, and birds. The entanglement in the plastic leads to suffocating or drowning, starvation, and availability to predators. It has been estimated that at least 267 different animal species have suffered from entanglement or ingestion of plastic debris, and that over 400,000 marine mammals perish annually due to plastic pollution in oceans.

So, plastic has serious adverse effects on ocean critters and eventually on humans, as well as on other species. including birds. It is in the best interest of worldwide health to reduce plastic pollution as much as possible. Reducing the use of plastic bags and replacing them with reusable or biodegradable materials is one good step, but not the whole story.

One might be concerned about plastic pollution of tap water. A 2017 study found that 83% of tap water around the world contained microparticle plastic pollutants. Human health impacts are not clear, but studies are taking place.

And where does all this plastic in the oceans originate? A reliable study in 2015 found that the majority plastic pollution in the oceans comes from China, Indonesia, the Philippines and other Asian and African countries.

The examples above as well as others make it clear that efforts to reduce the use of plastics and to promote plastic recycling are important. Substitution in supermarkets of reusable or biodegradable bags is one important initiative. Though biodegradable plastic has some advantages, it is not totally without its own problems. Biodegradables degrade best in industrial composters, and methane gas may be a product. The degrading process is slow, and often biodegradation is not complete. Incineration of medical materials has to be done carefully in order to minimize the impact of toxic gas or ash.

My conclusion is that we should reduce the use of plastic waste as much as we possibly can.

We have written before about the imagined link between vaccination and autism, and have stated here that there has been no scientific evidence uncovered that links them. An important new research study, reviewing more than 80,000 children over a four-year period, reinforces that conclusion. Kaiser Permanente looked at these tens of thousands of children in the hospital system and found absolutely no association, published in a respectable journal, between the prenatal Tdap (tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis (whooping cough) vaccine and autism spectrum disorder. It is the latest in a long line of studies showing that there is absolutely no link between vaccines and autism. Why has this myth of the vaccine-autism link persisted, when there is absolutely no evidence whatever linking them? In 1998 a fraudulent research paper was published showing a connection between the MMR (measles, mumps, and rubella) vaccine and autism. This fraudulent paper published by a British doctor has had a terrible impact in causing many parents to avoid vaccines for their children. It is recommended by the medical establishment that pregnant women get the Tdap vaccines so they can develop antibodies and pass them on to newborn children, that children get their first vaccine at two months of age, and that they receive a second dose at four months of age.

A related story is that measles, which was headed to elimination in Europe, has surged to the highest level in two decades, as vaccination rates fall short. (I had measles as a child, long before the vaccine was developed, and I can assure you it was not fun!). The increase in Europe is because only 90% of children receive the recommended two-dose vaccination in early childhood as recommended. The cause is attributed to a combination of complacency, lack of information, opposition to vaccination, distrust of government, and economic and political instability, says an official in the World Health Organization. The countries most affected are Ukraine, Italy and Greece. Migration of those from countries with low vaccination rates, particularly the Middle East and Africa, is thought to be a major factor. Health officials seek a 95% coverage in each community. Measles is spread by exhaled airborne droplets. An infected person could cause the disease in 12 to 18 people breathing the same air; by comparison, for influenza the number of individuals infected by exhaling is only 2 or 3. Measles fortunately only rarely causes death; however, it can do lasting harm to survivors with weak immune systems. Anyone who has had measles has lifelong immunity.

Michael is former chemistry professor at Mount. St. Marys

Read other articles by Michael Rosenthal