They are very small, almost invisible fragments of plastic formed as a result of the fragmentation of thin plastic products. Generally, when talking about plastic pollution, reference is made to microplastics found in marine and terrestrial environments.

Drinking straws, plates and cutlery, bags and bottles, all made of plastic, are broken down into corpuscles or fragments over a very long period of time: fragmentation is caused not only by high temperatures or the effect of ultraviolet rays but also by wave movement, wind force and the action of microbes. The combination of these con-causes stimulate, or if you prefer, facilitate the disintegration of these plastic products (compounds) into tiny pieces that disperse into the surrounding environment, polluting it.

We generally speak of microplastics when the fragment is less than 5 millimetres in size. Man has catalogued and identified two types of microplastics: primary and secondary.

Primary microplastics are plastic particles intentionally produced by the industrial supply chain. They are usually used in cosmetics or household cleaning products. They are used to increase the “abrasive action” of the products they are designed for, such as dishwashing detergents or even toothpaste. In these specific cases, the size of the primary microplastics is well below 5 millimetres – indeed, we often speak of “fractions of a millimetre”, almost impossible to see with the “naked eye”.

A widely discussed and criticised material, manufacturers have considerably reduced their use in recent years, but nevertheless many commonly used products are still “enriched” with primary microplastics.

Secondary microplastics are formed during the use or incorrect disposal of plastic objects. Plastic fragments resulting from the use or washing of synthetic clothes or from tyre wear and friction are typical examples. Think of the waste water from our washing machines, which, following a load of washing sweatshirts or T-shirts, can contain as many as several thousand plastic particles that are, during discharge, released into the environment.

Plastic waste, in the so-called “decomposition” phase (which can last even decades), can turn from macroplastic to microplastic (think, for example, of the damage that the decomposition of a plastic bottle thrown into the sea can cause). In reality, there are very simple actions that are needed for the correct disposal and reuse of the plastic objects we are accustomed to using every day; actions that, if repeated by everyone diligently, would not only greatly decrease the volume of secondary microplastics but also, and above all, decrease their devastating environmental impact.

The use of plastic, particularly for the packaging of industrial products, has increased considerably since the Second World War. An easy-to-process and inexpensive product that, in many situations, has provided real benefits to mankind, but its continuous and inexorable production in recent decades has generated heavy consequences in terms of pollution (i.e. plastic waste).

Research published in Science advances, has calculated that in 2016 alone, global plastic production was 422 million tonnes and that global plastic waste production in the same year was 242 million tonnes.

Another recent research published by the Pew Charitable Trusts (an American non-governmental organisation) calculated that the amount of plastic that today ends up in the oceans could be reduced by about 80% if only mankind would start to correctly use all the tools and technology at its disposal but, unfortunately, either through inertia or economic interests, this is not the case. The same study also pointed out that at present, human activities pour about 11 million tonnes of plastic into the sea every year and that, if action is not taken now, this will easily increase to about 30 tonnes by 2040.

However, the same research also underlined a fact, a truth of fundamental importance and significance that should serve to make everyone reflect: unfortunately, there is no real solution to the problem, the important thing is to make several solutions converge in the same direction, i.e. create awareness in people and correct everyone’s habits; more attention and more cooperation on several fronts to decrease the production of plastic materials, certainly the phases of separate collection, sorting and disposal of waste must be improved.

The problem of microplastic pollution is much debated by scientists and doctors today. While environmental damage is proven, there are still few conclusions that measure and certify the actual damage this type of pollution can cause to our bodies and our health.

Many studies, however, have focused on the geographical extent of the problem in order to understand not only its origin but also its concentration. Below is a list of all the research and places where the investigation has been proactive. Simplifying, we can already state that microplastic pollution is a worldwide problem: this means that the possible consequences will be worldwide and will affect all inhabitants of the Planet. Only through a “worldwide dialogue” will it be possible to reach real solutions:

• researchers from the State University of Milan and the University of Bicocca carried out research in the Stelvio National Park. The results recorded the presence of as many as 75 plastic particles per kilogram of sediment: an alarming result. More information.
• the problem of microplastic pollution is so widespread and impactful that research has shown the presence of plastic fragments even in table salt. For more details.
• hard to even imagine, but numerous traces of microplastics have also been found in Arctic ice. Here is the study.
• a study carried out by researchers at the Universidad de Almería (Spain), found traces of microplastics on the bodies of honeybees and, consequently, in the honey subsequently obtained (the observation sites were: the city of Copenhagen and adjacent peripheral areas, such as the Danish countryside). Find out more details.
• a study conducted by the Centre for Oceanic and Atmospheric Research at Japan’s Kyushu University simply wanted to show that the numbers related to microplastic pollution may, in fact, be much higher than is currently believed. Find out more.

We speak of microplastics when the fragments are less than 5mm in size but when the size is less than 0.1 micrometre we speak of nano-plastics. In the latter case, the pollution is even more insidious because it is “non-visible pollution”; tiny bodies of plastic invisible or almost invisible to the human eye and, unfortunately, rivers, lakes, seas and oceans are full of them. Nano-plastics, precisely because they are invisible, lead us to underestimate the problem: we think it is something that does not affect us closely just because we do not see it or do not “touch” it directly, in reality the threat exists and is even more powerful.

Several studies have testified to the seriousness of this particular type of pollution because it can also reach our tables through the food we eat. Many of the foods we habitually eat (fish, meat, milk and beer or honey, to name but a few), today more than ever, are potentially polluted precisely by fragments of micro- and nano-plastics and, in some circumstances, even the very water we drink. Unfortunately, the link between the food chain and single-use plastic pollution, especially today, has become very close.

Today, as the link that exists between the chain that brings food and water to our tables and the incorrect disposal of the plastic material used has become very close, pollution by microplastics has reached truly alarming volumes. This is why scientists, researchers and doctors all over the world have started to study the phenomenon in order to investigate and measure how many microplastics humans can ingest and, therefore, understand what the possible consequences are from a “health” point of view.

The problem exists and is no longer even questioned: it is now proven that microplastics are present in the water we drink every day, albeit in infinitesimal quantities. It is also known and proven that microplastics are also present in very large quantities on the seabed of seas and oceans (and not only in surface waters). Plastic is even present in the snows and ice of the Arctic and in mountains, even the highest ones, such as Everest.

Analyse the research results in detail and find out how much plastic humans ingest in 7 days (about 5 grams). Here the research details.

The answer to this question is not obvious because there are many factors and variables to consider. The answer, therefore, cannot be absolute and universally valid.

A research carried out in Canada by the University of Victoria has been published in Environmental Science & Technology, which showed that the water contained in a plastic bottle can safely contain around 22 times the amount of microplastics than those contained and recorded in domestic tap water. Using more precise numbers, it can be stated that people who regularly consume water contained in plastic bottles ingest about 130,000 plastic fragments or fibres over a 12 calendar month period, while those who consume water from the tap ingest about 4,000 plastic fragments and fibres over the same period.

Drinking water from the tap is therefore not only quick, practical, convenient and economical but, above all, reduces the production of further plastic waste and is more convenient from a “health” point of view.

Disposal of plastics has become a fundamental practice. Through proper disposal, new objects/products can be obtained but, perhaps, what most of us do not know is that energy, heat and electricity can also be obtained from disposal.

When plastic waste is not recycled for the production of new objects, it is used for energy production. The “waste-to-energy” is the process by which plastic waste is used as fuel: by burning it is converted into energy.

Today there are two main recycling techniques:

• mechanical recycling: it is fortunately becoming common practice to reuse plastics, but those that can no longer be reused are mechanically and thermally processed to become material suitable for making new objects;
• chemical recycling: this consists of a kind of “backward production”. The polymers* that make up the plastic material are broken down into monomers through a complex processing system. Basically, this technique, although slightly expensive but still convenient, almost completely recreates the initial raw material.

*What is commonly called “plastic” is nothing more than a structure made up of macromolecules called polymers. In turn, polymers are composed of monomers, i.e. even simpler structures.

The care and protection of our environment and our own health also and above all passes through a careful and diligent reduction of food waste, waste understood not only as “food” but also as the components used to package it (plastic material). The most important message that must stand out is related to waste disposal; of course, common sense must guide people to a more conscious handling of the exploitation of resources.

Depending on how they are processed and subsequently used, plastics can differ enormously. Lightness, practicality and cost-effectiveness are the characteristics they share but, in reality, there is no single “type” of plastic. Plastic is an easy material to process and this facilitates its production on an industrial scale.

The most common plastics in the objects we use on a daily basis are:

• polyethylene (PE): mainly used to make bags, crates, adhesive tapes, bottles, rubbish bags, pipes, toys, etc;
• polypropylene (PP): mainly used for food containers, bottles and furniture;
• polyvinyl chloride (PVC): often used in the production of insulation films, fixtures and pipes;
• polyethylene terephthalate (PET): generally used for water and soft drink bottles, but also for making clothing;
• polystyrene/polystyrene (PS): widely used for food trays, packaging and wrapping, but also cutlery and plates.

Watch this video explaining the correlation between microplastics and the food we consume

Plastic has been and is one of the most widely used materials since the post-war period for the production of objects of all kinds and uses. Even at a “cursory” glance, one can easily see how our homes are “studded”, in the truest sense of the word, with plastic objects: chairs and tables, dustpans, brooms and litter bins, but also glasses and plates, vases, frames and photographs, pens and notebooks, toys and tech objects, as well as the packets of our children’s snacks or snacks that populate the kitchen shelves….etc, etc… .

Disposable objects (especially straws, bottles, bags, plates and cutlery) account for an important percentage of plastic waste and are the ones that pollute our seas the most. Objects of “habitual” use that can actually be replaced by non-plastic variants, durable over time and for multiple uses (one example above all, glass bottles). The problem related to the use and disposal of single-use plastic has recently seen the intervention of the European Union which has banned, as of 3 July 2021, precisely the use of single-use plastic.

There is still little scientific and medical research investigating this sensitive issue. Among other things, one aspect not to be underestimated is the possibility that some consequences of plastic poisoning may not manifest themselves in a short space of time. To date, it is still very complicated to precisely list the consequences that microplastic pollution can have on our health. Therefore, getting the first answers and recording more precise considerations on the negative effects could take a long time: several data from different historical periods have to be cross-referenced, and a well-done research can not always be conceived and carried out in a few months.

Today, however, the scientific community is unanimous in believing and sharing one certain fact: humans ingest a considerable amount of plastic on a weekly basis, and this happens through food, air and water. In 2021, research by the University of Utrecht was published in Science that studied and monitored lung cells following contact with micro-fragments of plastic. Read the conclusions of this research.

Plastic is now omni present, even and especially in the form of tiny fragments. It can alter an entire ecosystem, creating threats and permanent consequences for both fauna and flora.

Unfortunately, microplastics in rivers, seas and oceans are easily ingested by the fish and marine animals that inhabit these habitats. Microplastics are often mistaken by fish for food, and when this happens, plastic inevitably enters the food chain. This means that, sooner or later, microplastics ingested by fish arrive on our tables and plates and, therefore, in our bodies.

Microplastics (and especially nano-plastics), being very light and almost invisible to the naked eye, are very easily transported by wind and clouds, falling to the ground in thunderstorms, rain and/or snowfall. This is why it is easy to find plastics even in the most remote corners that are hardly accessible to man himself.

In addition, nano-plastics can very easily penetrate the ground to great depths, even reaching the water table, the very water from which man draws his drinking water.

In metropolises and, more generally, in large population centres, the water network is nowadays well built and structured; the water that reaches our homes is on average good and of high quality. After all, in a modern society, the standards of municipal waterworks must meet very stringent parameters. Obviously we are talking about countries that have reached an “average” standard of quality of life because unfortunately, even today, in many other parts of the world water is not readily available and what little is available is of poor quality.

Although much could be said on this second aspect, let us try to give an answer to the question at hand:

safety controls are very prompt in reporting anomalies and inconsistencies so our tap water, which we use for cooking and drinking, is not only convenient and always available but also clean and healthy. Nevertheless, tap water can be unpleasant to the taste precisely because it has been disinfected and cleaned. It is “the fault” of the chlorine in the water that makes it taste a little unpleasant (precisely because it is added to make it safer and cleaner). On the other hand, microplastics are not always filtered and blocked by municipal purifiers; moreover, even if they were filtered, the long journey from the aqueduct to our tap could be further contaminated by other microplastics or waste of a different nature. Unfortunately, in this case, pollution is almost totally invisible and unavoidable.

In any case, in order to reduce and eliminate microplastics from the water in our homes, there are purifiers and filters on the market today that are designed and conceived to block these fragments. Generally, the filters are “hollow fibres” that have the function of blocking even the tiniest foreign corpuscles and waste and providing clean, healthy water.