Germany has seen a 64% decrease in plastic bag usage since 2015. Recently Germany agreed to ban the sale of single-use plastics, including plastic straws, cutlery, cotton buds, and food containers by July 2021.
Many disposable plastic products are superfluous with no sustainable use of resources. In addition, plastics end up too often in the environment or in the oceans. We are taking an important national step in the fight against the plastic flood.
We throw away 1.3 billion tons of trash worldwide every year, and Germany alone produces 3 million tons of plastic waste annually. Germany’s recent bill to ban singe-use plastic is in accordance with the EU’s directive to reduce plastic waste.
Many of the single-use plastics we go through a day are full of toxins like BPA and BPA alternatives. A study published by the Journal of Environmental Science and Technology examined 34 everyday plastics made of 8 different types of plastic and showed that 74% of the products were toxic in some way.
With a healthy gut and a healthy lifestyle, the chances of experiencing health problems from plastic toxicity are extremely unlikely. Still, for the environment and your health, you’re better off avoiding single-use plastics and using reusable alternatives.
Reusable Grocery Bags Are Being Banned as Plastics Industry Takes Advantage of COVID-19
States and cities are rolling back plastic bag bans at the grocery store and enacting bans on reusable grocery bags as the plastics industries ramps up lobbying during the COVID-19 pandemic. San Francisco, the first municipality to ban plastic bags, has banned customers from bringing reusable grocery bags while the state of California has lifted their plastic bag ban for 60 days. Oregon has lifted its plastic bag for the same period, and cities like Bellingham, WA, and Albuquerque, NM have announced they will allow the bags during the pandemic. Massachusetts, Illinois, New Hampshire, and Maryland are among the states that have banned or strongly discouraged the use of reusable grocery bags due to coronavirus fears.
It is critical to protect the public health and safety and minimize the risk of Covid-19 exposure for workers engaged in essential activities, such as those handling reusable grocery bags.”
There is evidence to suggest that efforts to stop the spread of coronavirus by banning reusable bags don’t actually work any better than using plastic bags does. Scientists have found that coronavirus can linger on hard surfaces like stainless steel and plastic, where the novel coronavirus can survive for 2-3 days. Meanwhile, there is no evidence to date that coronavirus can survive on what we wear and most reusable bags lack the hard buttons and zippers that clothes have.
At the grocery store, plastic bags don’t reduce exposure for customers or essential workers any more than reusable bags do. Plastic bags have been received, stocked, and distributed by a person who has likely not been tested for COVID-19 for a multitude of reasons. Cashiers wear gloves, but many haven’t received proper training on how to limit the spread of disease while wearing gloves.
So those workers are constantly touching food, people’s money, people’s hand, carts and touch screens–without cleaning their hands or changing their gloves. But we know that the gloves can carry a bioburden and increases the risk for transfer of germs.”
Your grocery store clerk is touching money, their workstation, the plastic bag carousel, every bag they gave you, and every single item you and everyone else in store give them. Simply using plastic bags doesn’t stop that.
Properly washed reusable bags eliminate points of exposure for everyone. The cashier doesn’t need to touch the bag carousel. The customer isn’t handed bags that have been touched by multiple people. The cashier doesn’t need to touch the plastic bag carousel that has been repeatedly handled and doesn’t even need to touch the reusable bag if the customer holds it open while grocery items are dropped in. Reusable bags are touched by one person and can be washed for reuse immediately upon returning home. So why would governors ban them? The answer lies in the plastics industry.
Influence Infrastructure
Plastics makers have capitalized on coronavirus fears, including heavy pushes from lobbyists to end all plastics bag bans. Groups like Bag the Ban and American Progressive Bag Alliance have been especially active in overturning bans and promoting single-use plastics as a way to maintain public safety. Tony Radoszewski, president and CEO of the Plastics Industry Association, recently penned a letter to Alex Azar, the secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
We are asking that the Department of Health and Human Services investigate this issue and make a public statement on the health and safety benefits seen in single-use plastics. We ask that the department speak out against bans on these products as a public safety risk and help stop the rush to ban these products by environmentalists and elected officials that puts consumers and workers at risk.”
Plastic bag sales in the U.S. were projected to reach 1.4 billion dollars this year. Thanks to the lift on bans during the pandemic, those numbers will likely be higher than expected. In addition to the rollback of previously instated bans, pending bans have also taken a hit. A proposed ban of plastic and paper bags and polystyrene food containers in New Jersey died in January. The plastics ban proposed in New York has been held since February by a lawsuit filed by Poly-Pak Industries Inc., Green Earth Food Corp., Green Earth Grocery Store, Francisco Marte, The Bodega, and the Small Business Association. Meanwhile, the plastics recycling industry is seeking a 1 billion dollar bailout due to the coronavirus. The U.S. system is notoriously bad at processing plastics with only 10% of plastics actually being recycled.
Plastics Are Not Here to Make Friends
The plastics industry is having a party, and the American people will be left with both the bill and the cleanup. Senator Tom Udall (D-NM) has proposed the Break Free From Plastic Pollution Act.
By asking for a billion-dollar handout, Big Plastic is trying to maintain what already is the status quo: that is, taxpayers funding and taking responsibility for the waste of plastic producers…When we surface from this pandemic, plastic pollution will still be at crisis levels — and matters may be even worse, as industry tries to exploit this pandemic to leverage more marketing for single-use products.”
BPA Linked to Insulin Resistance, Diabetes in Humans
A new study now links “safe” levels of Bisphenol-A (BPA) and the development of type-2 diabetes, insulin resistance, and other metabolic disorders. The Food and Drug Administration considers BPA safe at oral exposure levels of 50 micrograms per every kilogram of body weight every day. Published in the Journal of the Endocrine Society, researchers based at the University of Missouri wanted to determine if humans exposed to BPA exhibited the same symptoms as mice. Frederick vom Saal, an endocrinologist at the MU College of Arts and Science and co-author on the study, thinks this study provides a compelling argument that they might.
This exploratory study needs to be replicated because it suggests that BPA exposure at a dose considered safe by U.S. regulators could alter glucose-stimulated insulin responses in humans…Our study is an initial step toward investigating whether exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals, such as BPA, contributes to insulin resistance and eventually Type 2 diabetes.”
Methods
For this study, researchers gave non-diabetic men and postmenopausal women oral doses of the FDA’s safe level of BPA. They also administered a placebo. Those who were given the BPA had altered insulin responses. Those results occurred both when scientists used an oral glucose tolerance test and a hyperglycemic clamp.
Most people know BPA is bad, even if they don’t know why it’s bad. In addition to insulin resistance, the chemical has been associated with inflammatory bowel disease, obesity, cancer, and a whole host of hormonal issues. It’s been banned in the majority of children’s products, but the alternatives to BPA aren’t much better. A recently released Washington State University study found that BPA alternatives like bisphenol-S caused genetic abnormalities similar to those caused by the product they’re replacing.
Even something as simple as a cash register receipt can be a big deal. The BPA found in register receipts is unbounded, meaning it is loose and more readily absorbed through the skin. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency conducted receipts tests in 2014 and found that the thermal paper used in 18 hospitality business had from 54–79 micrograms of BPA per square centimeter of paper. That’s more than the accepted safe oral dose of BPA.
Death By a Thousand Cuts
At this point, it’s plastics. There are several different types of plastic, and not all of them have inspired a cause for concern. Part of that can be attributed to a desire from good enough by plastics manufacturers and government officials. But good enough has so far led to a steady increase in mystery illnesses that linger and seriously impact a person’s quality of life.
Study Links Restaurant Food To Higher Levels of Plastic-Based Chemicals In Blood
Some reports indicate that Americans eat more and more of their meals at restaurants. Other reports say restaurant eating is on the decline. Most reports say that millennials are eating out more and that they don’t know how to cook. We’re not sure where the truth lies, but we’re pretty sure it’s not normal for twenty-year-olds to be cooking most of their own meals. And, more importantly, young consumers are growing more concerned with finding healthier food choices, whether they are eating out or not.
On that note, the single most important thing you can do for your health is to prepare your own food from scratch. Now, a new study published in the journal Environment International states that Americans’ are getting more than they bargained for when they eat out. Eating out restaurants frequently is correlated with higher body levels of phthalates.
Phthalates are not food additives; at least, they’re not intentional. Phthalates are chemicals that are mixed with plastics to make them more pliable or flexible. They are also linked to reduced semen quality, diabetes, lower IQ, cancer, and more. The chemicals can leach into food as they are stored in restaurant-style plastic containers, handled with food-handling gloves, and processed through plastic processing equipment.
George Washington University, UC-Berkeley, and UC-San Francisco analyzed urine sample data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, which is a government-backed health survey that is performed every two years. Data from more than 10,000 Americans (between 2005 and 2014) included urine analysis along with what they ate the day before and where they got the meal. Approximately two-thirds of the respondents reported having eaten restaurant food the prior day.
We found that people who eat out more at full-service restaurants, cafeterias, and fast-food restaurants have nearly 35 percent higher phthalate exposures than people who bought their food from a grocery store, and are presumably eating at home,” – Ami Zota, senior author on the study, Mother Jones
The reports also states that people who ate restaurant-made meat sandwiches (including hamburgers) saw increased phthalate levels higher than that of people who ate homemade meat sandwiches. Fast food consumption showed a big increase in phthalate exposure.
Our findings suggest that eating fresh, less processed foods at home can potentially reduce biologically-relevant phthalate levels in your body, and that’s something you could do tomorrow,” – Julia Varshavsky, lead author on the study
Phthalates last in the body for about a day, so the good news is that it’s not too hard to detoxify oneself of most of them by not eating out, but it begs the question, what other plastic and chemical contaminants are we getting from restaurant foods? Not to mention rancid industrial cooking oils, GMOs, and extreme cooking temperatures that cause Advanced Glycation End Products.
Microplastics In Tap Water and Beer Around the Great Lakes, and Everywhere Else
A new study sampled twelve different beers in the Great Lakes area and found all to be contaminated with microplastics. Researchers also surveyed tap water from the same region and found microplastics in eight of the nine samples as well.
The study was published in the online journal PLOS ONE last month. Most microplastics discovered were 5 millimeters in length or shorter, according to the researchers. For reference, a penny is 19 millimeters in diameter.
The study was led by UMN School of Public Health graduate student Mary Kosuth. Sherri Mason, of the State University of New York at Fredonia, is a revered expert in microplastics contamination. She assisted with the study. UMN School of Public Health associate professor Betsy Wattenberg oversaw the study.
Wattenberg found it interesting that the amount of plastic in the beer samples did not coincide with the amount of plastic found in the tap water used to make the beer.
The amount of microplastics detected in the beer didn’t necessarily match the amount of microplastics detected in the water that was used to make the beer. And that sort of suggests that the plastics can be introduced at different steps in the process of making the beer.” – Wattenberg
The same team also collected 159 tap water samples from 14 countries and discovered that 81% of the samples tested also had microplastic contamination.
I think what was surprising was the widespread contamination, that the contamination was detected in tap water throughout the world in many sources of tap water from both urban sources and rural sources, in both developing countries and developed countries,” – Betsy Wattenberg told Wisconsin Public Radio.
There was also a German beer study from 2014 that found microplastics in all 24 brands of beer analyzed.
Massive Beef Recall for Plastic Contamination, Including Kroger Stores
More than 35,000 pounds of ground beef sold by North Carolina food processor JBS USA has been recalled after a consumer found hard, blue pieces of plastic in a package. The ground beef is in a variety of packages and distributed through Kroger locations in North Carolina, Virginia, Indiana, Illinois and eastern West Virginia as well as Food 4 Less and Jay C stores located in the Midwest. Kroger spokeswoman Kristal Howard addressed the recall, saying that Kroger “verified that none of these products are in our stores today…We encourage customers to check their freezers for the potentially affected products and not to consume them but throw them away or return them to their place of purchase for a full refund.”
This is by no means the largest recall of meat with plastic bits this year. In addition to the current recall, 60 tons of beef and 67 tons of Salisbury steak were recalled earlier in the month of April for plastic fragments and pieces of bone, respectively. The past two years, 2016 and 2017, saw the highest numbers of meat recalled for extraneous materials like plastics in the past decade. While those numbers can be partially attributed to massive single occurrence recalls, the fact remains that we are finding more plastic than ever in our food.
This recall, coupled with the ongoing Romaine lettuce scare, make it seem like our food system is headed for an unpleasant awakening. The United States Department of Agriculture doesn’t even keep track of microplastics, a growing issue for seafood. Water is a fundamental part of our food chain, and discoveries of microplastics in bottled water will translate to an agricultural setting if they haven’t already.
Dead Sperm Whale Had 64 pounds of Plastic and Other Trash In Stomach & Intestines
A 33-foot sperm whale carcass surfaced near a lighthouse in Cabo de Palos on Spain’s southeastern coast in February. Washington Post reported that a necropsy revealed the whale had “trash bags, polypropylene sacks, ropes, net segments and a drum, among other things,” located in the stomach and intestines.
Local authorities report that the whale animal died due to peritonitis, inflammation of the abdominal lining, due to blockage from the trash.
The picture, shared by a local environmental group, shows a severely underweight sperm whale. Reports place the animal’s weight at 14,300 pounds. Adult sperm whales are supposed to weight between 77,000 and 130,000 lbs.
Sperm whales reside in the ocean at around 2,000 feet below sea level and feed off of large squid, sharks, and fish. This certainly isn’t the first time. For decades, whales and other marine life have been washing ashore full of plastic.
The presence of plastic in the ocean and oceans is one of the greatest threats to the conservation of wildlife throughout the world, as many animals are trapped in the trash or ingest large quantities of plastics that end up causing their death.” – Consuelo Rosauro, Murcia’s general director of environment
More than 30 sperm whales were found washed up on the beaches of the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, France, Denmark and Germany in 2016 according to National Geographic. Plastic waste, including fishing nets, pieces of a plastic bucket, and a plastic car engine cover were among the remains, found inside the whales’ stomachs.
A 2014 study states that there were 5.25 trillion pieces of plastic debris in the ocean. A study published last year found that 83 percent of samples of ocean water from more than a dozen nations were contaminated with plastic fibers. If that wasn’t scary enough, the amount of plastic in world’s oceans is expected to triple within a decade according to a new UK government report called the “Foresight Future of the Sea.”