Plastics free world: A mirage : Ramesh Shrestha

Plastics is not a problem

There is a serious need for public education on dangers of nanoparticles of plastics on human health, much more beyond environmental pollution by plastics.

The flexibility and durability of plastics found its application virtually in every manufactured product from everyday household appliances to aeroplanes in the sky to submarines in the deep sea. Plastics have profitably replaced paper, wood, glass and metals in many components of manufactured goods possibly for good. Mass production of plastics started during the 1930s with accidental discovery of polyethylene in petroleum byproducts. In the early 1950s the world produced 1.35 million metric tons (MMT) and in 1970 it reached 50 MMT and in 2019 the world consumed 460 MMT. Plastics now have a ubiquitous presence in our everyday life.

Plastics as such is not the problem. Replacing paper by plastics must have saved hundreds of millions of trees annually, essential to clean air with a natural process. Replacing metals by plastics made products lighter, perhaps cheaper and also might have helped many minerals and ores left where they belonged. The biggest issue about plastics is the lack of a regulatory system on its application and recycling to control environmental pollution and its implications on human health. Plastics pollution is well recognised but actions required remain limited to remedy the situation. One significant aspect of plastics pollution, which is fairly recognised but not fully acted upon is infiltration of the human body by plastics.

Coexisting with plastics

Nanoparticles of plastics have been found in almost all tissues in human body such as lungs, liver, brain, heart, placenta, spleen, digestive track, kidney, bone marrow, lymph nodes and body fluids such as blood, breast milk, semen, urine and feces (Stanford Medicine News Center 29 January 2025). Similar findings have also been reported by various institutes in European countries. A detailed study on nano plastics in the brain was published in the magazine Nat Med 31, 1367 (2025). Above findings are based on autopsies of various accident victims in Europe and USA. Nanoparticles of plastics have also been found in living human beings in lungs of surgical patients and blood donors in the United Kingdom and Netherlands (Environment International, Vol 163, May 2022, 107199).  

The three sources from where nanoparticles (1 µm (nanometer) is 1x10^-6mm) of plastics are accumulated in the human body are, through skin contact; second source is ingesting foods contaminated with plastics and the third is through inhalation.

According to scientists nano plastics with size under 100 µm are able to break cellular barriers and can easily be absorbed by human skin, especially by sweat glands, hair follicles and damaged skin surface (NanoImpact. Vol 29, Jan 2023, 10044). Nano plastics with size ranging from 20 µm to 100 µm are used in beauty products to improve consistency, texture, to make water resistant, to add volume, to improve viscosity, etc. Beauty products such as soap, shampoo, body scrubs, facial wash, lipsticks, mascara, body lotions, toothpaste, etc. contain nano plastics of various sizes. Nano plastics once absorbed can induce cellular inflammation, cell damage and structural changes in tissue cells. The kind of damage and extent of damage depends on type and amount of nano plastics in the tissue. Plastics manufacturers use hundreds of different types of synthetic chemicals to produce desired plastic quality - thickness, flexibility, strength, colour, etc. These chemical molecules are present in nano plastics. The long term impacts of these chemicals are yet to be fully understood (Nanomaterials, Basel. 2021 Feb 16;11(2):496).

Ingestion of nano plastics is possibly the most common source of nano plastics in the human body. Heating foods and beverages in plastic containers releases billions of nanoparticles which contaminate foods. Foods stored in plastic containers also contaminate foods with nano plastics. Another most common source of nano plastics people ingest is through tea bags, which has become universally popular. Tea bags are made of food grade polymers made up of various types of nylon. When these bags are immersed in hot water, warmer than 40^0C it releases 11.6 bn microplastics and 3.1 billion nano plastics from a single tea bag (Int J Surg. 2023 Mar24;109 (3):515-516). The most serious concern is the contamination of seafood with nano plastics. Ninety-nine percent of seafoods (fish shrimps, crabs, mussels, and oysters) analysed have various concentrations of nano plastics. Majority of the nano plastics found in seafood were of textile origin (Journal of Sea Research. Vol 194, August 2023, 102410). As seafood constitutes a major source of protein diet, it is likely that millions of people are ingesting nano plastics on a daily basis, involuntarily.

Drinking water from plastic bottles, especially bottles which have been exposed to the heat such as sunlight is another common source of nano plastics. A one-liter bottle was found to have 240k nano plastics in three top brands of bottled water. Inhalation of polluted air, especially air filled with smoke from burnt garbage, tires, etc. is another source of nano plastics in the human body.

Health implications

Nano plastics have crossed the cell barrier and blood-tissue barrier as demonstrated by its presence in all internal organs of the human body. The consequences of the presence of nano plastics in internal organs of the human body are yet to be fully understood. Experimental studies in animal models have shown dysfunctional cells and cell deaths in tissues concentrated with nano plastics. As all nano plastics contain molecules of various synthetic chemicals attached to it the risk or damage depends most likely on the type of nano plastics and the chemical molecules attached to it and the types of tissues. As such experiments cannot be conducted on living human beings, the exact response to this question may not be answered anytime soon. Overall, some of the damages predicted include inflammation of internal organs, potential impact on reproductive function, cognitive malfunction, etc. (Food and Chemical Toxicology. Vol 203, Sept 2025, 115595.; Journal of Xenobiotics. 2025, 15,6)

Regulate and educate?

The optimist believes that we will find solutions to every problem faced by humanity with technology. While believing in optimism, there are needs to educate the populace on the public health significance of plastic pollution beyond environmental concern. It may be a while before scientists will be able to present concrete examples of the health impacts of nanoparticles of plastics in internal organs of the human body. Should the regulatory authorities ban the use of teabags, which is used worldwide? OECD countries have banned the use of microbeads in beauty products since 2018. Some popular brands have phased out microbeads from facial scrubs and shampoo but many companies are seeking a 12-year transition phase. Perhaps the ban should be on production rather than marketing. There are at least 500 known cosmetics companies across the globe which may not be affected by the ban. Few drops of face wash can release 100k+ microbeads which end up in the ocean and become fish foods which end up in dinner plates in restaurants or a household dinner plate. Cosmetic companies were producing beauty products without microbeads and nano plastics prior to the 1970s. What would take these companies to return to the old formula without microbeads and nano plastics?

Single use plastic bags, straws, etc. have been banned by 127 countries & territories to contribute to stopping environmental pollution. It is unlikely to make any dent to protect human health by nanoparticles of plastics. There should be a total ban on production, not just marketing. Countries also need regulations to prohibit excessive packaging of household goods and groceries to reduce use of plastics.

Read more articles by Ramesh here.