• elucubra@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      You know, I’ve never understood why there are no warning labels on the bottles of the stuff.

    • lennybird@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Notably, tumor tissue contained significantly more plastic. On average, cancerous samples had about 2.5 times the concentration found in healthy prostate tissue (about 40 micrograms of plastic per gram of tissue compared with 16 micrograms per gram).

      Sure, though it’s to be expected that everything contains water in the body. To expect microplastics, however, is kind of different – leaving aside their showing a legitimate difference in microplastic quantity between healthy and unhealthy prostates.

      • TheObviousSolution@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Correlation still doesn’t prove causation. Tumors process resources different than surrounding cells. The worst thing about the study is that it chooses to focus on microplastics without distinction when we know certain types of plastics have far higher carcinogenic risk than others, it would have just taken than slight bit more effort to actually make it worthwhile.

        • Jyek@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Yeah, what if it happens that micro plastics are somehow being trapped in tumors actually removing them from the bloodstream? What if cancer is how we can get the micro plastics out? I’m only half joking here lol. A bleak thought for sure.