New report: Adults inadvertently consume so much plastic, it’s the equivalent to eating around one grocery store bag per month

I am thoroughly grossed out.

According to a new analysis from an environmental non-profit organization based in Washington D.C., the average adult inadvertently consumes so much plastic in their food, that it’s the equivalent to eating around one grocery store bag per month.

When I read that, I was genuinely sick to my stomach. From a new EWG press release:

Plastic on your plate: EWG finds adults may ingest equivalent of up to 12 shopping bags a year

Adults may ingest up to 150,000 harmful plastic particles a year – equal to eating as many as 12 shopping bags annually, according to a new Environmental Working Group analysis.

Now, this study only investigated micro and nanoplastic consumption, not absorption—we’re also being plastic-poisoned by the water in our showers, shampoos and conditioners, laundry soaps and softeners, clothing (synthetic fabrics), receipt paper—so clearly, the number of plastic particles in us must be higher.

The announcement details that a major source of the pollution comes from plastic cutting boards, but also lists the contamination from plastic food packaging as well as plastics breaking down into our soil and water supplies:

Crops can absorb micro and nanoplastics from contaminated soil and water, while seafood is continuously exposed to floating plastic particles that can bioaccumulate and cling to tissue.

Consider a brief public service announcement: Dump the plastic cutting boards and invest in a single “end grain” wooden cutting board that’s not slathered in toxic lacquer chemicals, and uses a food safe, nontoxic glue to bind the wood together (hardwoods like walnut and cherry are superior). Wood is self-healing, and the way the wood is sawn and assembled into a single board makes for a self-sanitizing piece of kitchen equipment; the capillaries of the grain draw in bacteria and quickly suffocate them. Here’s what Dr. Dean Cliver, whose field of study was food microbiology and toxicology, found in his research:

Wood is intrinsically porous, which allows food juices and bacteria to enter the body of the wood unless a highly hydrophobic residue covers the surface. The moisture is drawn in by capillary action until there is no more free fluid on the surface, at which point immigration ceases. Bacteria in the wood pores are not killed instantly, but neither do they return to the surface.

(I recall reading that some studies showed that harmful bacteria were killed in as little as 10 minutes without any cleaning agents, though I can’t seem to find the study in this moment.)

Back to microplastics.

EWG, being progressive, has a “solution” that we as conservatives wouldn’t support, which is to use the weight and authority of the government to intrude in the marketplace,“requiring companies and governments to eliminate single-use plastic, minimize the use of plastic where possible, and prevent plastic waste from polluting the environment.”

In fact, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris did exactly that when they announced a “phase-out” of single-use plastics from federal food services operations, including military chow halls in deployed locations—naturally, those throwaway utensils and food cartons will have to be replaced with a far more expensive “biodegradable” materials, and you just got a little more national debt tacked onto your back.

But, I have a few better and more cost-effective solutions, that actually apply to the government’s role in society:

Build an impenetrable wall along the southern border. The open border has seen the migration of more than ten million people just in the last few years alone, many of whom trekked up from the lower Americas, leaving an unbelievable wake of (almost entirely) plastic garbage behind them.

Don’t promote fake pandemics, and surgical masks as a solution for a common cold virus. These masks take 450 years to biodegrade and as they do, they leach plastics and chemicals into our water and ground—in 2020, more than 1.6 billion masks entered our oceans, which explains in part why our seafood is saturated with micro and nanoplastics.

Stop subsidizing wind turbines. According to one study, which made a point to articulate the influence of progressive dollars in the industry’s research and how this study was different, found this:

[A]n estimated annual emission of microplastics of approx. 62 kg per year per turbine.

And 20 turbines more than 1.2 tonnes each year and 31 tonnes over 25 years.

In Norway there are close to 400 turbines with a wing diameter of 130 meters or more. Estimated total emissions from these 400 turbines are 25 tonnes a year.

Over the course of 25 years, this amounts to an estimated 620 tonnes!

This study was specifically analyzing rainfall’s impact on turbines, but just think about what this means for the hundreds of thousands of turbines in use around the world.

Think the progressive politicians (who supposedly love the environment) might take these things into consideration when they’re serving us in our legislative bodies?

I know, I know, wishful thinking.

Free image, Pixabay license

Image: Free image, Pixabay license.

If you experience technical problems, please write to helpdesk@americanthinker.com