Bahaya Kandungan BPA dalam Plastik

Kandungan BPA dalam Wadah Plastik Bahaya untuk Kesehatan, Kok Bisa? 

14/10/2021

Dalam kehidupan sehari-hari, penggunaan wadah berbahan plastik masih sering dijumpai. Harganya yang relatif murah dan mudah ditemukan menjadi salah satu alasan bagi sebagian besar orang menggunakannya. 

Bagi Anda yang menggunakan produk-produk tersebut, mungkin tak asing dengan istilah BPA. Misalnya pada produk bayi yang sering dilabeli dengan logo BPA-Free. Lantas,sebenarnya apa itu BPA? 

Bisphenol-A atau yang biasa disebut dengan BPA adalah bahan kimia yang digunakan dalam kemasan plastik polikarbonat untuk membuat plastik tetap keras dan tidak mudah hancur. Lazimnya, BPA kerap dipakai dalam kemasan galon.  

Selain pada plastik, BPA juga digunakan untuk melapisi bagian kemasan dari makanan kalengan, produk kebersihan, pipa suplai air, dan dental sealant atau lapisan plastik tipis yang dipasang untuk melindungi gigi dari kerusakan. 

Bahaya BPA bagi Kesehatan 

Penggunaan produk yang terkontaminasi BPA secara terus-menerus akan memengaruhi kesehatan tubuh, bahkan bisa membahayakan kesehatan. Terlebih jika bayi atau anak-anak yang terkena paparan BPA tersebut. 

Meski saat ini sudah banyak produk bayi yang tidak lagi menggunakan BPA, namun beberapa produk lainnya masih saja ada yang mengandung BPA. Dalam diskusi virtual bertema "Mendesain Regulasi Bisphenol-A (BPA) yang Tepat" yang diselenggarakan Centre for Public Policy Studies (CPPS), Rabu (13/10/2021), Ketua Umum Asosiasi Ibu Menyusui Indonesia (AIMI) Nia Umar mengungkapkan bahwa BPA berisiko tinggi memengaruhi kesehatan bayi. 

"Tidak hanya di botol dot tetapi juga di peralatan makan lainnya, di peralatan makanan-makanan kaleng. Yang membuat BPA ini berbahaya adalah ketika ada pemanasan berulang kali dari plastik, sehingga bagian dari BPA ini larut ke dalam makanan yang ada di dalam asupan di dalam botol," ujarnya. 

Pada ibu hamil, BPA dengan mudah masuk ke dalam rantai makanan antara ibu dan bayi. Biasanya BPA ditemukan dalam urin, darah, tali pusar, maupun ASI. "Janin dan bayi juga bisa terpapar BPA karena kalau pun mereka ngga mengonsumsi susu formula, dari tali pusar bisa kena (BPA) dan masuk, lalu bisa juga kalo dia minum ASI, ASInya perahan yang ditaro di dot juga bisa. Atau kalau menyusui (langsung), dan ibunya menggunakan banyak (benda) yang terkontaminasi BPA tanpa disadari," tutur Nia.

Dokter spesialis anak sekaligus anggota Ikatan Dokter Anak Indonesia (IDAI) dr Irfan Dzakir Nugroho, Sp.A, M.Biomed mengatakan hal yang senada. Menurutnya, BPA ditemukan di hampir semua anggota tubuh yang mungkin disebabkan masifnya penggunaan kemasan pangan. dr Irfan mengungkapkan ada lebih dari 130 studi yang melaporkan efek berbahaya dari BPA. 

Beberapa di antaranya adalah dapat menyebabkan kanker payudara, pubertas dini, penyakit jantung, infertilitas, katalisator penyakit saraf, dan obesitas. 

Bagaimana Mekanisme BPA Memengaruhi Kesehatan? 

BPA dapat memengaruhi hormon endokrin seperti estrogen, androgen, dan tiroid. Selain itu, paparan BPA yang berlebih dapat menyebabkan gangguan homeostasis metabolik pada anak, gangguan struktur dan fungsi otak, efek kesehatan di usia selanjutnya pada anak. 

"Pada usia dewasa atau usia produktif BPA bisa memengaruhi produktivitas dan bisa juga menyebabkan gangguan pada saat kehamilan dan persalinan. Dan juga menyebabkan obesitas dan beberapa penyakit metabolik," ungkap dr Irfan. 

Kontaminasi BPA dapat membahayakan ibu hamil, karena mengganggu kerja endokrin, dan mampu untuk meniru hormon estrogen. Pada laporan yang terbit pada tahun 2008 oleh Program Toksikologi Nasional AS menemukan bahwa adanya efek pada otak, perilaku, dan kelenjar prostat pada janin, bayi serta anak-anak akibat paparan BPA yang masuk melalui plasenta, ASI, pemberian susu botol, dan pemberian makanan atau minuman yang telah terkontaminasi BPA. 

"Menurut studi, pemaparan BPA pada fase kehamilan (gestasional) di mana paparan BPA pada masa ibu hamil, maka ini akan berefek terhadap anaknya. Di mana anaknya akan mempunyai gangguan perilaku dan aspek emosional yang kurang baik. (Ganguguan ini) bisa dilihat pada anak-anak di usia 3 tahun," tandasnya. 

Tak hanya pada bayi, BPA juga dapat menimbulkan bahaya pada kelompok usia anak-anak, di antaranya: Menyebabkan gangguan tumbuh kembang, perilaku depresif, ansietas, dan hiperaktif Memengaruhi perilaku emosional dan kekerasan Memengaruhi senyawa yang dihasilkan oleh otak seperti dopamine, serotonin, acetylcholine, dan hormon thyroid

Sumber :

https://www.kompas.com/sains/read/2021/10/14/110300223/kandungan-bpa-dalam-wadah-plastik-bahaya-untuk-kesehatan-kok-bisa?page=all.

Galon BPA atau Plastik PET

Mana Lebih Bahaya Bagi Kesehatan, Galon BPA atau Plastik PET? 

Jumat, 29 Juli 2022

Pertanyaan paling menohok terkait air minum dalam kemasan (AMDK) galon plastik adalah, mana yang lebih berbahaya buat kesehatan manusia, antara galon polikarbonat (PC) plastik keras yang mengandung bisphenol-A (BPA) atau galon yang menggunakan plastik polyethylene terephthalate (PET)?  

Kedua jenis kemasan plastik ini memiliki kelebihan dan kekurangan terkait risiko kesehatan bagi manusia. Terkait produk-produk makanan dan minuman, kemasan polikarbonat yang kita kenal sebagai plastik keras atau kaku itu biasa digunakan sebagai galon isi ulang air minum 19 liter. 

Sementara, kemasan PET biasa digunakan untuk botol air minum ukuran 300 mililiter hingga 1 liter dan galon 15 liter. Sejumlah penelitian mengungkap, BPA berdampak terhadap kesehatan melalui mekanisme gangguan hormon, khususnya hormon estrogen. 

BPA pada gilirannya berkaitan dengan gangguan sistem reproduksi, baik pada pria maupun wanita, diabetes, obesitas, gangguan sistem kardiovaskular, gangguan ginjal, kanker, dan perkembangan kesehatan mental. 

Sementara itu, PET dibuat dari, salah satunya, etilen glikol, yang juga berpotensi menimbulkan risiko kesehatan bila dikonsumsi secara ekstrem berlebihan. 

Guru Besar Teknik Kimia Universitas Diponegoro, Prof. Dr. Andi Cahyo Kumoro, turut memberikan pandangannya.  "Pelepasan BPA pada galon guna ulang rentan terjadi bila galon sampai tergores atau terpapar sinar matahari langsung. Efeknya,  paparan BPA bisa memunculkan gangguan pada sistem saraf dan perilaku anak. Sedangkan pada ibu hamil bisa memicu keguguran," ujar Prof. Andi dalam keterangannya, Jumat 29 Juli 2022.  

NPR Epidemiolog Fakultas Kesehatan Masyarakat Universitas Indonesia (FKM UI), Pandu Riono, turut mendorong rencana pelabelan BPA, agar segera dilaksanakan. Dorongan ini berkaitan dengan masih adanya penolakan atas rencana itu dari kalangan industri air minum dalam kemasan. 

“Efeknya jangka panjang. Kalau (BPA) tidak berdampak, kenapa negara maju sudah membatasi dan melarangnya. Langsung saja wajib labelisasi, kok takut pada industri. Produsen kelas dunia  seperti Danone di Prancis sudah mengganti wadah produknya ke jenis plastik yang bebas BPA," jelasnya.  

"Yang jadi pertanyaan, kenapa unit Danone di negara berkembang tidak mengadopsi hal yang sama? Seharusnya sama-sama fair dong. Lagi pula ini kan hanya pelabelan. Masa label saja keberatan," sambungnya.  

Kekhawatiran terhadap efek BPA juga datang dari Ketua Umum Asosiasi Ibu Menyusui Indonesia (AIMI) Nia Umar. Dia mengatakan, BPA berisiko tinggi memengaruhi kesehatan bayi. Pada ibu hamil, BPA dengan mudah masuk ke dalam rantai makanan antara ibu dan bayi. 

Biasanya BPA ditemukan dalam urine, darah, tali pusar, maupun ASI.   Sementara itu, dokter spesialis anak sekaligus anggota Ikatan Dokter Anak Indonesia (IDAI) dr Irfan Dzakir Nugroho, Sp.A, M.Biomed, mengungkapkan, BPA ditemukan di hampir semua anggota tubuh, antara lain disebabkan masifnya penggunaan kemasan pangan.   

Irfan menyampaikan, ada lebih dari 130 studi yang melaporkan efek berbahaya dari BPA. Beberapa di antaranya antara lain menyebabkan kanker payudara, pubertas dini, penyakit jantung, infertilitas, katalisator penyakit saraf, dan obesitas.

BPA diketahui dapat memengaruhi hormon endokrin seperti estrogen, androgen, dan tiroid. Selain itu, paparan BPA yang berlebih bisa  menyebabkan gangguan homeostasis metabolik pada anak, gangguan struktur dan fungsi otak, efek kesehatan di usia selanjutnya pada anak.  

Sedangkan pada usia dewasa atau usia produktif BPA bisa memengaruhi produktivitas dan bisa juga menyebabkan gangguan pada saat kehamilan dan persalinan, termasuk menyebabkan obesitas dan beberapa penyakit metabolik. 

Plastik PET Berbeda dengan kandungan BPA pada polikarbonat, kandungan etilen glikol pada PET tidak memunculkan pengaturan (pelarangan), baik di dalam maupun luar negeri. Sejauh ini, belum ada satu negara pun menerapkan pelabelan terhadap potensi efek etilen glikol pada plastik PET. 

Ini bukan karena tidak adanya penelitian lapangan terkait migrasi zat kimia itu dari kemasan PET. Tetapi lebih karena bahaya dan dampaknya pada kesehatan potensinya lebih besar ada pada galon BPA dibanding plastik PET. 

Frank Welle, ahli kimia yang berfokus pada interaksi bahan kemasan dengan pangan dari University of Freiburg, Jerman, dalam makalahnya “The Facts about PET” menulis bahwa, jika dibandingkan dengan jenis plastik lain, PET lebih lengai (inert) atau tidak mudah mengalami perubahan kimia.  

Pada gilirannya, menurut Welle, monomer PET, seperti etilen glikol, hanya dapat bermigrasi dalam jumlah yang sangat kecil ke dalam pangan yang dikemasnya. Mengutip penelitiannya pada 2004, dia menunjukkan bahwa tingkat migrasi etilen glikol dari kemasan PET, jauh di bawah batas standar yang ditetapkan Organisasi Kesehatan Dunia (WHO). 

"Nilai kompeten berbahaya di dalam kemasan PET seperti etilen glikol dan antimon (yang hanya digunakan sebagai katalis) masih jauh di bawah standar apabila tidak dilakukan perlakuan khusus layaknya percobaan (seperti dipanaskan pada suhu dan jangka waktu tertentu atau direaksikan dengan bahan kimia tertentu)," kata Welle menyimpulkan.

Sumber :

https://www.viva.co.id/gaya-hidup/kesehatan-intim/1503417-mana-lebih-bahaya-bagi-kesehatan-galon-bpa-atau-plastik-pet?page=all

Kemasan PET Ada Kandungan yang Berbahaya

Pakar IPB: Kemasan PET pun Sebenarnya Ada Kandungan yang Berbahaya

06 Sep 2022, 10:04 WIB

Dosen dan peneliti di Departemen Ilmu dan Teknologi Pangan Institut Pertanian Bogor (IPB), Nugraha Edhi Suyatma menyayangkan semakin liarnya isu soal BPA di masyarakat. Menurut Edhi, isu BPA bisa memberikan kesalahan persepsi di konsumen bahwa kemasan galon guna ulang itu berbahaya, sementara kemasan plastik-plastik lainnya itu terkesan aman.

"Padahal, seperti yang kita tahu bahwa BPA itu ada di mana-mana, tidak hanya di galon polikarbonat, tetapi ada juga di kemasan kaleng, botol bayi, atau di dot. Itu mestinya dilarang total bagi bayi dan anak-anak," kata Edhi dikutip dari keterangan resmi yang diterima Health Liputan6.com pada Senin, 5 September 2022.

Edhi menjelaskan bahwa di makanan kaleng ada riset yang mengatakan hampir 90 persen enamel pada kaleng itu terbuat dari epoksi,"Epoksi itu adalah BPA dan BPA adalah sebagai basic. Jadi, seharusnya ini kan juga perlu dilabeli juga.".  

Sehingga dengan berhembusnya isu BPA, bisa menyebabkan terjadinya mispersepsi di masyarakat bahwa kemasan yang tidak mengandung BPA itu aman-aman saja.

"Padahal, kemasan lain itu juga belum tentu aman. Kemasan PET misalnya, itu juga ada risiko dari bahan senyawa yang lain yang berpotensi ke arah negatif. Di PET ada kandungan antimon, asetildehid, etilen glikol, dan lain-lain yang juga berbahaya," katanya.

Dia juga mengkritisi langkah BPOM yang seolah membiarkan kampanye negatif terhadap galon polikarbonat. Edhi menilai bahwa ini justru bertentangan dengan BPOM sendiri pada aturan label pangan.  

"Jadi, ketidaksepahaman saya pada aturan pelabelan BPA ini adalah, khawatirnya nanti malah ada prasangka buruk kalau BPOM itu dianggap membela salah satu brand. Itu yang pasti akan muncul karena fenomena ini," ujarnya.

Teror Isu BPA Harus Dihentikan

Sementara itu Ketua Komisi Penegakan Regulasi Satgas Sampah Nawacita Indonesia, Asrul Hoesein, meminta agar 'teror-teror' yang mendiskreditkan produk galon guna ulang kemasan polikarbonat yang ramat lingkungan untuk segera dihentikan.

Asrul, mengatakan, tindakan meneror yang dilakukan terhadap galon guna ulang ini sebenarnya bukan hanya menciderai usaha air minum dalam kemasan (AMDK) galon guna ulang saja, tapi juga menciderai rakyat.

“Saya katakan bahwa itu bukan menciderai perusahaan AMDK galon guna ulang saja, tapi juga rakyat. Karena, yang masuk-masuk ke rumah tangga itu kan AMDK galon guna ulang," katanya. 

Dia juga mengkritisi BPOM RI yang seakan mendukung tindakan peneroran ini.

"Jadi, kunci permasalahan isu galon guna ulang ini termasuk juga karena BPOM yang seakan membiarkan isu ini terjadi berlarut-larut hingga saat ini," katanya.

BPOM Diminta Tegas

Oleh sebab itu, Asrul berharap BPOM menghentikan sikap yang seakan mendukung beredarnya isu negatif terhadap galon guna ulang ini di masyarakat.

"Sebab, kalau tidak berhenti, hal ini akan jadi bumerang bagi BPOM sendiri yang akan dituding bersikap diskriminatif," katanya.

Dia mengatakan BPOM itu seharusnya tidak hanya fokus mengawasi galon guna ulang saja, tapi juga minuman-minuman lainnya seperti teh, kopi, dan lain-lain.

"Jadi, untuk BPOM, tolong minum-minuman teh, kopi, diperiksa sumber airnya. Ini catatan untuk BPOM, jangan cuma galonnya saja itu yang diawasi. Karena ada ribuan kemasan di supermarket yang harus diurus BPOM di luar galon," katanya.

Dia juga mengingatkan agar perusahaan tidak ada yang melakukan persaingan tidak sehat.

"Boleh produksi dan memasarkan produk, tapi jangan melakukan kampanye negatif terhadap orang lain," katanya.  

Sumber :

https://www.liputan6.com/health/read/5060749/pakar-ipb-kemasan-pet-pun-sebenarnya-ada-kandungan-yang-berbahaya?page=3

Mikroplastik pada Makanan dan Minuman

Mikroplastik Berbahaya yang Mungkin Ada di Makanan Kita

Selasa, 3 Oktober 2023 | 10:36 WIB

Mikroplastik adalah potongan kecil plastik yang berukuran kurang dari lima milimeter. Mikroplastik tidak hanya ditemukan di lingkungan seperti di udara, air sungai atau air laut saja. Mikroplastik, bahkan sebenarnya juga ditemukan di dalam air minum dan makanan, yang artinya potongan plastik kecil ini mungkin ada di dalam tubuh kita.

Partikel-partikel mikroplastik bisa berasal dari berbagai sumber, termasuk pemecahan plastik yang lebih besar, produk-produk plastik mikro dan limbah plastik yang tersebar di lingkungan. Penelitian telah menunjukkan bahwa mikroplastik ditemukan di dalam tubuh manusia termasuk darah, tinja dan jaringan tubuh yang pada akhirnya dapat berdampak negatif pada kesehatan tubuh.

Dampak Negatif Mikroplastik bagi Tubuh

Mikroplastik dapat berdampak negatif bagi kesehatan tubuh, di antaranya:

Kemungkinan paparan zat kimia

Mikroplastik memiliki kemampuan yang baik dalam menyerap zat kimia dari lingkungan. Ketika mikroplastik masuk ke dalam tubuh manusia melalui udara yang dihirup, makanan atau minuman, zat kimia yang menempel pada mikroplastik bisa berpindah ke tubuh manusia.

Risiko peradangan

Risiko peradangan akibat partikel mikroplastik yang masuk ke dalam tubuh manusia hingga kini masih belum dipahami sepenuhnya dan masih terus diteliti. Namun, potensi reaksi inflamasi tubuh berlebihan mungkin terjadi saat mikroplastik dan zat kimia berbahaya yang diserapnya masuk lebih dalam ke tubuh.

Inflamasi berlebihan dapat meningkatkan risiko penyakit kronis seperti penyakit jantung, diabetes, atau gangguan autoimun.

Gangguan hormonal

Mikroplastik yang terpapar zat-zat kimia berbahaya bisa masuk ke dalam tubuh dan menjadi zat-zat pengganggu hormon yang memengaruhi sistem endokrin manusia. Ini dapat berdampak pada keseimbangan hormon di dalam tubuh dan memiliki efek jangka panjang yang tidak diinginkan.

Selain zat-zat pengganggu endokrin, mikroplastik juga mungkin membawa logam berat atau polutan organik yang meningkatkan paparan bahan kimia berbahaya di tubuh.

Jenis Mikroplastik yang Mungkin Terkandung di Dalam Makanan dan Minuman

Tidak hanya mungkin terhirup oleh hidung, mikroplastik juga bisa masuk ke dalam tubuh melalui makanan atau minuman. Adapun beberapa jenis mikroplastik yang bisa ditemukan di dalam makanan atau minuman di antaranya:

BPA (Bisphenol A)

BPA adalah bahan kimia yang digunakan dalam produksi plastik seperti botol plastik, galon air kemasan, peralatan makan, peralatan dapur, mainan, lapisan pelindung kaleng makanan atau minuman serta produk kemasan makanan lainnya. BPA telah menjadi subjek perhatian karena potensinya sebagai zat kimia yang dapat mengganggu sistem endokrin.

BPA dapat menyebabkan dampak negatif lain bagi tubuh, di antaranya:

• Memengaruhi perkembangan otak janin dan anak-anak
• Memengaruh kesehatan reproduksi pria
• Berdampak pada perubahan perilaku anak-anak
• Meningkatkan tekanan darah, diabetes tipe 2 dan penyakit kardiovaskular

Dioxin

Dioxin adalah sekelompok senyawa kimia yang sangat beracun yang merupakan produk sampingan dari proses industri dan pembakaran termasuk pembakaran sampah, pembakaran bahan bakar fosil dan proses kimia tertentu. Dioxin dikaitkan dengan masalah sistem reproduksi termasuk gangguan menstruasi, penurunan kesuburan dan masalah perkembangan seksual.

Dioxin juga dapat mengganggu fungsi sistem kekebalan tubuh, gangguan hormonal, meningkatkan risiko perkembangan kanker serta memengaruhi sistem saraf dan perkembangan otak anak-anak secara negatif.

Phthalate

Phthalate adalah kelompok bahan kimia yang digunakan sebagai agen pemlastis. Bahan kimia ini dapat meningkatkan fleksibilitas, kekuatan dan daya tahan plastik sehingga lebih mudah dibentuk dan tahan lama. Beberapa jenis phthalate dikaitkan dengan gangguan hormonal yang berdampak negatif terutama bagi anak-anak.

Polyethylene dan polypropylene

Kedua jenis bahan kimia ini membuat kemasan menjadi lebih ringan dan tahan lama. Penelitian menemukan bahwa bahan kimia ini mungkin berkontribusi terhadap beberapa jenis kanker.

Sumber :

https://www.ai-care.id/penyakit/mikroplastik-berbahaya-yang-mungkin-ada-di-makanan-kita

Mikroplastik Ada di Jantung hingga Otak

Mikroplastik Ada di Jantung hingga Otak, Masuk via Air Minum

20 September 2023 09:30

Kandungan mikroplastik di air minum ternyata bisa masuk ke jantung hingga otak. Hal ini diketahui berdasarkan penelitian yang dilakukan para ilmuwan tentang dampak mikroplastik terhadap kesehatan.

Studi tersebut menemukan beberapa hasil awal yang bikin ngeri dalam percobaan yang dilakukan pada tikus.

Tikus tua dan muda diuji dengan meminum air dengan kandungan plastik mikroskopis yang tersuspensi selama tiga minggu. Para peneliti di Universitas Rhodes Island menemukan jejak polutan telah terakumulasi di setiap organ tubuh mamalia kecil tersebut, bahkan di otak.

Kehadiran mikroplastik ini juga dibarengi dengan perubahan perilaku seperti demensia pada manusia, serta perubahan penanda imun di hati dan otak.

"Bagi kami, ini sangat mengejutkan. Ini bukan mikroplastik dosis tinggi. Namun hanya dalam waktu singkat, kami melihat perubahannya," jelas ahli saraf Jaime Ross, dikutip dari Science Alert, Selasa (19/9/2023).

"Tidak ada yang benar-benar memahami siklus hidup mikroplastik ini di dalam tubuh, jadi salah satu hal yang ingin kami jawab adalah pertanyaan tentang apa yang terjadi seiring bertambahnya usia,"

"Apakah Anda lebih rentan terhadap peradangan sistemik dari mikroplastik ini seiring bertambahnya usia? menghilangkannya dengan mudah? Apakah sel-sel Anda memberikan respons yang berbeda terhadap racun-racun ini?"

Hasilnya mungkin tidak dapat diterapkan secara langsung pada manusia, tetapi penelitian yang melibatkan model hewan seperti ini adalah langkah awal yang penting dalam penelitian klinis selanjutnya.

Baru-baru ini, para ilmuwan menemukan mikroplastik bersembunyi di usus manusia, beredar di aliran darah, berkumpul di paru-paru, dan merembes ke plasenta.

Pada tahun 2021, para ahli toksikologi memperingatkan bahwa penelitian di masa depan perlu segera mengungkap pengaruh polutan ini terhadap kesehatan manusia, terutama karena paparannya kini hampir mustahil untuk dihindari.

Beberapa tikus juga diberi air minum biasa sebagai kontrol.

Selama uji coba tiga minggu, perilaku tikus dinilai secara teratur selama uji lapangan terbuka yang mendorong perilaku eksplorasi. Mereka juga melakukan tes preferensi terang-gelap, yang didasarkan pada keengganan alami hewan pengerat terhadap area yang terang benderang.

Dibandingkan dengan kelompok yang dikontrol, tikus yang meminum air yang terkontaminasi mikroplastik selama tiga minggu menunjukkan perubahan perilaku yang signifikan. Perubahan terjadi terlihat terutama pada tikus yang lebih tua.

Pada akhir tiga minggu, partikel mikroplastik berpendar merah ditemukan di setiap jenis jaringan yang diperiksa tim seperti otak, hati, ginjal, saluran pencernaan, jantung, limpa, dan paru-paru. Plastik juga ada di kotoran dan urin tikus.

Fakta bahwa polutan terdeteksi di luar sistem pencernaan menunjukkan bahwa polutan tersebut mengalami sirkulasi sistemik.

Kehadiran mereka di otak sangat memprihatinkan. Hal ini menunjukkan bahwa polutan yang berpotensi beracun ini dapat melewati penghalang kekebalan yang memisahkan sistem saraf pusat dari aliran darah tubuh lainnya, sehingga mungkin menyebabkan masalah neurokognitif.

Sumber :

https://www.cnbcindonesia.com/tech/20230920075758-37-473918/mikroplastik-ada-di-jantung-hingga-otak-masuk-via-air-minum

Plastic Canisters Poisoned Your Body with Nano Particles

Did you know that all plastic canisters poisoned your body with nano particles, these “tubes” as an polymer synthetic elementaire reach you blood vascular vessels and brains. This is in fact the Fibonacci sequence Toroidal spins as the opposite frequency vibrations waves to reject your Krystal frequency energy. This will cause inflammatory all over your body what gives you itches on your skin and other heavy problems as tiredness and anxious behaviours. Aggressive response to hold you in a flow of low frequency! 

It’s better to take natural glass (Kristal) or copper, clay. 

Humanity underestimated the problem of the way of living in this evil system. Take your responsibility NOW and throw it away as much as possible. Even bottles by the process of solvating by light and moisture will cause the same damage to your body.

Microplastic Fibres were Found Deep in the Lower Lungs

Study finds plastics found in masks present in patients’ lungs

By Amanda Brown Apr 17, 2022  3

Microplastic fibres were found deep in the lower lungs of living human beings in almost every person sampled in a recent UK study.

The study from Great Britain discovered microplastic particles — present in many COVID-19 masks — in the lung tissue of 11 out of 13 patients undergoing surgery.

Polypropylene (PP) and polyethylene terephthalate (PET) were the most prevalent substances present in the lungs.

The microscopic plastic fragments and fibres were discovered by scientists at Hull York Medical School in the UK. Some of the filaments were two millimetres long in patients undergoing surgery whose lung tissue they sampled.

The plastic dust and microscopic debris comprises the same plastics used to manufacture the ubiquitous surgical masks worn by hundreds of millions of people around the world as mandated by governments in an attempt to halt the spread of COVID-19.

The material most commonly used to make these masks is PP — PP fabric is made from a “thermoplastic” polymer, meaning that it’s easy to work with and shape at high temperatures.

Blue surgical masks can also be made of polystyrene, polycarbonate, polyethylene, or polyester, all of which are types of fabrics derived from thermoplastic polymers.

Disposable blue masks are to be found littering almost every city street in the developed world after two years of COVID-19 mandates ruled that masks should be worn in most indoor environments much of the time. Healthy adults, children, the immunocompromised, and the elderly have all been subject to mask mandates.

Microplastics were detected in human blood for the first time in March, showing the particles can travel around the human body and may become embedded in organs. The impact on health is still to be determined.

Researchers are concerned because microplastics cause damage to human cells in the laboratory and air pollution particles are already known to enter the body and cause millions of premature deaths each year.

Mask under a microscope. Image courtesy E.P. Vicenzi/Smithsonian’s Museum Conservation Institute and NIST

“Airborne microplastics (MPs) have been sampled globally, and their concentration is known to increase in areas of high human population and activity, especially indoors. Respiratory symptoms and disease following exposure to occupational levels of MPs within industry settings have also been reported,” the UK study said. “In total, 39 MPs were identified within 11 of the 13 lung tissue samples… These results support inhalation as a route of exposure for environmental MPs, and this characterization of types and levels can now inform realistic conditions for laboratory exposure experiments, with the aim of determining health impacts.”

“We did not expect to find the highest number of particles in the lower regions of the lungs, or particles of the sizes we found,” said Laura Sadofsky, at Hull York Medical School in the UK, a senior author of the study. “It is surprising as the airways are smaller in the lower parts of the lungs and we would have expected particles of these sizes to be filtered out or trapped before getting this deep.”

“This data provides an important advance in the field of air pollution, microplastics, and human health,” she said.

The research used samples of healthy lung tissue from next to the lung region targeted for surgery. It analyzed particles as small as .003mm in size and used spectroscopy to identify plastic types.

It also used control samples to account for the level of background contamination. The study has been accepted for publication by the journal Science of the Total Environment.

An older study published in 2020 looked into the risks associated with mask-wearing and the inhalation of microplastics. The study concluded:

• Wearing masks poses microplastic inhalation risk, reusing masks increases the risk

• Wearing N95 masks poses lowest microplastic inhalation risks in the long term

• Wearing masks, except for N95, poses higher stripe-type microplastic inhalation risk

• Wearing masks poses considerably lower spherical-type microplastic inhalation risk

• Wearing masks leads to lower gross microplastic inhalation risk in the long term

“Surgical, cotton, fashion, and activated carbon masks wearing pose higher fibre-like microplastic inhalation risk, while all masks generally reduced exposure when used under their supposed time (<4 h),” the study said.

Chris Schaefer is a respirator specialist and onsite training expert based in Edmonton, Alta. He has been teaching and conducting respirator fit testing for more than 20 years with his company, SafeCom Training Services Inc. His clients include government departments, Canada’s military, Alberta Health Services, educational institutions, and private industry. Schaefer is a published author and a recognized authority on the subject of respirators and masks.

The Western Standard asked Schaefer if he believed surgical masks of the type used by millions of Canadians, and people throughout the world, presented a significant risk of microplastic inhalation from the masks themselves. He began by clarifying that the face covering generally referred to as a ‘mask’ is not, in fact, a mask, at all.

Schaefer refers to COVID-19 face coverings as “breathing barriers.”

“What has been mandated in hospitals and through the general public through this whole COVID-19 agenda, are not masks. They don’t meet the legal definition [of a mask,] “Shaefer said. “A [proper] mask has engineered breathing openings in front of mouth and nose to ensure easy and effortless breathing. A breathing barrier is closed both over mouth and nose. And by doing that, it captures carbon dioxide that you exhale, forces you to re-inhale it, causing a reduction in your inhaled oxygen levels and causes excessive carbon dioxide. So they’re not safe to wear.”

“As far as whether it could cause somebody to inhale the polypropylene fibres that are used to make this and synthetic polymers that are used to make the filtration of these devices — absolutely. Take a pair of scissors and cut one open. You can see that in between the two main covers that are encapsulating, these loose fibres are breaking away. They’re becoming dislodged from the cover itself, just through normal wear and tear and the agitation of putting it on and taking it off,” Schaefer said.

“The heat and moisture that it captures will cause the degradation of those fibres to break down smaller. Absolutely, people are inhaling [microplastic particles]. I’ve written very extensively on the hazards of these breathing barriers the last two years, I’ve spoken to scientists [and other] people for the last two years about people inhaling the fibres. If you get the sensation that you’ve gotten a little bit of cat hair, or any type of irritation in the back of your throat after wearing them,” said Schrieffer. “That means you’re inhaling the fibres.”

Schaefer said we will have to wait to see the the long-term effects of the inhalation of microplastics from masks.

“So we know that people are inhaling the fibres. What the risks are going to be, what the effects are going to be — it could be anything — but it could definitely cause lung inflammation and could cause full-body inflammation. Absolutely,” Schaefer said.

“This is not normal. Anybody who would normally be exposed to any type of synthetic polymers or polypropylene fibres [in an occupational environment] would have to wear approved respiratory protection. These breathing barriers are not respirators. These fibres break down to between .2 mm, and the large ones are five mm. So they’re totally inhalable, they break down very small and and, well, what that’s going to do to people in the in the form of lung function — as well as toxicity overload in their body — I guess we’ll know in a few years.

Although the latter study assessed the masks’ abilities to filter incoming environmental microplastics, the study did not assess whether particles were shed from the construction of the mask fabric itself on its alternate side — particles that would enter the lungs of a wearer.

Sumber :

https://www.westernstandard.news/features/study-finds-plastics-found-in-masks-present-in-patients-lungs/article_056590f2-0615-5bc9-aab0-730e7704634e.html

Plastic Diminishes the Mind

Yesterday decided to dabble into the lead and copper rule of 1991. This rule focused on reducing the amount of copper and lead in the public water supply.  But this rule never addressed the toxic fluoride, pesticides, or chemical runoff. What is interesting is more than 2/3rd of the country has lead or copper pipes. If it was as toxic as we were told a majority of the population would have been gone long ago. 

Now what is also interesting is how copper benefits the mind while plastic diminishes the mind. 

It makes me wonder if lead and copper (being part of the 7 sacred metals) have something to do with our overall health. Just my thoughts on this topic. What are yours? Do you have lead or copper pipes by you?

Researchers in the Field of Brain Plasticity

When the elderly start to be forgetful, it is usually regarded as the first sign of Alzheimer’s disease or dementia. According to the guidelines issued in 2019 by the World Health Organization (WHO), “getting regular exercise, not smoking, avoiding harmful use of alcohol, controlling one’s weight, eating a healthy diet, and maintaining healthy blood pressure, cholesterol and blood sugar levels” apparently helps to reduce the risk of developing dementia. 

This claim is purely hypothetical!

Neurologists argue that Alzheimer’s is an age-related “neurodegenerative disease” that affects the functions of brain cells, whereas brain researchers argue that the memory impairment is caused by brain atrophy or enlarged ventricles. According to Dr. Hamer's findings, a brain atrophy is the result of repetitive scarring processes in the brain due to continuous conflict relapses of any biological conflict. Enlarged ventricles are linked to the choroid plexus and the distress of having difficulties memorizing (“the thoughts don’t flow smoothly”). Hence, it is not the large size of the ventricles that causes dementia, as suggested, but the other way around, namely that the short-term memory loss activates a Biological Special Program that enhances the production of cerebral spinal fluid (in the conflict-active phase) leading, eventually, to an enlargement of the ventricles (see internal hydrocephalus).

In conventional medicine it is assumed that dementia is somehow related to “plaques” in the brain (“Although the cause of Alzheimer's disease is not known (sic!), plaques are often found in the brains of people with Alzheimer's”, (Mayo Clinic). In reality, these “plaques” are calcium deposits that form over time due to constant conflict relapses that interrupt the healing process; here shown on both hemispheres of the (post)sensory cortex, the area of the brain that corresponds, biologically, to separation conflicts. Typical separation conflicts are the death of a life-long spouse, the loss of a partner or friend, little or no contact with the immediate family (children, grandchildren), or having to move to a senior’s or nursing home.

A concurrent Kidney Collecting Tubules Constellation, when abandonment/existence/refugee conflicts and separation conflicts occur together, adds confusion and disorientation to the memory loss. The result is the typical clinical picture of Alzheimer’s disease. Behavioral changes such as belligerence, social withdrawal, or depressed moods indicate further conflicts and additional constellations. 

In 1986, David Snowdon, an epidemiologist at the University of Kentucky, began a research project that became known as the Nun Study (published in 2001). The goal of his investigation was to determine the causes of Alzheimer’s disease by focusing on a group of 678 Catholic sisters who are members of the School Sisters of Notre Dame congregation in Mankato, Minnesota. The participants were between 75 and 107 years of age. The homogeneous lifestyle and environment of the sisters made the nuns an ideal population to study. In addition to assessments of their medical records and regular testing of their physical and cognitive performances, the participants agreed to donate their brain after death for research purposes. The outcome was remarkable! The postmortem examination of the nun’s brains revealed that a significant number were showing pathologies of Alzheimer’s in their brain, even though the sisters never exhibited signs of memory loss during life. Researchers in the field of brain plasticity suggested that the nuns’ mental activities favored the development of new neural networks that eventually assumed the work of the degenerated brain cells. The science of GNM takes a different approach. Based on the findings that every disease is caused by a biological conflict (First Biological Law), the memory decline, as seen in Alzheimer’s patients, does not originate in the brain but instead in the psyche, precisely, from lasting separation conflicts leading over time to dementia.

Mikroplastik Dibalik Kemasan Botol dan Gelas Plastik

Selasa, 9 Mei 2023 13:03 WIB

Kandungan mikroplastik dari hasil penelitian atas tiga merek air mineral dalam kemasan saat diteliti di laboratorium FMIPA-Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Rabu (14/3). Air minum dalam kemasan (AMDK) plastik yang kita minum ternyata mengandung mikroplastik berbahaya. Konsumen menelan butiran plastik tak kasat mata dalam AMDK botol atau gelas plastik yang dikonsumsi sehari-hari.

Hal ini terungkap dari hasil penelitian global yang dilakukan oleh State University of New York at Fredonia dan didukung oleh organisasi media nirlaba di Amerika Serikat, Orb Media. Penelitian ini menguji 259 botol air minum dari 11 merek yang dijual di delapan negara, termasuk air minum yang diproduksi salah satu produsen AMDK di Indonesia. Hasilnya, 93 persen AMDK yang menjadi contoh, ternyata mengandung mikroplastik.

“Indonesia menjadi salah satu negara yang diambil sampelnya karena memiliki pangsa besar air minum dalam kemasan. Tim peneliti mengambil 30 botol AMDK salah satu produsen dari Jakarta, Bali, dan Medan dan dibawa ke New York pada November 2017 untuk diuji di laboratorium State University of New York at Fredonia,” demikian paparan tim peneliti via publikasi rilis mereka.

Hasilnya sangat mengkhawatirkan, karena setiap botol, rata-rata mengandung 382 mikroplastik partikel per liter. Bahkan, kandungan mikroplastik terbanyak ada dalam 1 sampel botol yang mencapai 4.713 partikel mikroplastik per liter.

“Ukuran mikroplastik yang ditemukan beragam, mulai dari 6,5 mikrometer atau setara sel darah merah, hingga lebih dari 100 mikrometer atau setara dengan diameter rambut manusia,” papar riset tersebut.

Paparan dari banyak temuan hasil riset, kandungan mikroplastik dalam air minum dapat menimbulkan dampak kesehatan yang serius bagi manusia. Ahli toksikologi dari Universitas Indonesia, Budiawan, menyatakan bahwa partikel mikroplastik berukuran sama atau lebih kecil dari sel manusia berpotensi menjadi bahaya, karena dapat diserap dan masuk ke dalam aliran darah.

Selain itu, akumulasi mikroplastik dalam tubuh dapat mengganggu kerja organ vital seperti ginjal dan hati. “Akumulasi terjadi kalau tubuh tidak mengeluarkan partikel asing secara alami lewat ekskresi,” kata Budiawan.

Ahli nutrisi, Tan Shot Yen, juga mengatakan bahwa semakin kecil partikel mikroplastiknya, semakin mudah dan semakin banyak diserap sel. Tan merujuk salah satu penelitian dari Pusat Informasi Bioteknologi Nasional Amerika Serikat tentang dampak partikel itu terhadap plankton di perairan bebas yang telah tercemar.

“Dampak terberatnya adalah gangguan pertumbuhan dan reproduksi. Tentu saja, jika mencetuskan radikal bebas, resiko kanker tidak bisa ditepis,” kata Tan.

Di luar botol plastik, riset terbaru yang dilakukan oleh para peneliti dari Fakultas Kelautan dan Perikanan (FKP), Universitas Hasanuddin (Unhas), Makassar, bekerja sama dengan lembaga FMCG Insights menunjukkan, AMDK gelas plastik ternyata juga paling banyak terkontaminasi mikroplastik.

Penelitian ini dilakukan terhadap beberapa merek AMDK dalam berbagai bentuk kemasan, yaitu botol, galon, dan gelas. Dari tiap-tiap merek dan kemasan diambil sampel empat buah.

Hasil penelitian ini kemudian mendapati bahwa hanya ada lima dari total 48 sampel yang tidak terkontaminasi oleh mikroplastik. “Dengan kata lain, ada 89,6 persen sampel AMDK yang terkontaminasi mikroplastik,” kata Khusnul Yaqin, salah satu peneliti utama yang bersama timnya melakukan penelitian dan pengambilan sampel di Makassar, Sulawesi Selatan.

Berdasarkan hasil penelitian timnya, ia mengatakan bahwa mikroplastik yang ditemukan di dalam AMDK bisa juga berasal dari sumber air bakunya atau mikroplastik yang ada di udara pada saat proses pengemasan AMDK.

“Yang menjadi perhatian saat ini adalah keberadaan mikroplastik dalam jumlah besar di badan perairan, yang bisa berakibat fatal bagi biota laut,” kata ahli ekotoksikologi itu. Dengan kata lain, mikroplastik bisa berpengaruh pada rantai pangan yang nantinya masuk dan terakumulasi di dalam tubuh manusia, artinya, bicara mikroplastik tak bisa dilepaskan dari siapa yang paling bertanggungjawab sebagai penyumbang sampah dan mikroplastik terbesar di Indonesia.

Berdasarkan laporan brand audit yang dikeluarkan oleh NGO di bidang lingkungan. AMDK gelas plastik yang paling banyak menyumbangkan sampah di perairan Indonesia. Itu artinya memperbesar kerusakan lingkungan dan memperbesar risiko penyebaran mikroplastik dari konsumsi makanan laut ke tubuh manusia. (*)

Sumber :

https://nasional.tempo.co/read/1723618/mikroplastik-dibalik-kemasan-botol-dan-gelas-plastik

Bukti Bahwa Perubahan Iklim Nyata, Bencana di Mana-mana

Senin, 21 Agu 2023 14:45 WIB

Perubahan iklim adalah sesuatu yang nyata. Hal ini setidaknya terlihat dari bencana alam yang lebih sering terjadi di berbagai negara. Di bulan Agustus saja, kita mendengar bencana banjir di China, Italia, dan India, gelombang pasang di Inggris, dan Prancis, badai di Jepang, Maroko dan Iran, hingga kebakaran dahsyat di Hawaii.

Bukan berarti Indonesia aman-aman saja. Menurut laporan Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana (BNPB), ada 2.216 peristiwa bencana alam di Indonesia selama periode 1 Januari-2 Agustus 2023. Banjir (758 kejadian) dan cuaca ekstrem (731 kejadian) menjadi bencana alam terbanyak yang terjadi di Indonesia dalam periode tersebut.

Siswanto M.Sc, Peneliti Cuaca dan Iklim Ekstrem Badan Meteorologi dan Klimatologi (BMKG), dalam live Eureka! 'Bumi Akhir Zaman' beberapa waktu lalu juga memaparkan sejumlah data dan fakta dampak perubahan iklim di Indonesia.

Juara Satu Dunia, Orang Indonesia Paling Tidak Percaya Global Warming

"Kita tertimpa dampaknya, banjir, longsor, kekeringan, puting beliung yang tidak biasa terjadi di suatu lokasi menjadi biasa, siklon tropis yang tidak pernah terjadi di wilayah Indonesia atau jarang terjadi, sekarang sering muncul," ujarnya menjelaskan berbagai bencana alam yang merupakan dampak perubahan iklim.

Setidaknya, ada empat bukti Indonesia terdampak perubahan iklim berdasarkan data yang dipaparkan Siswanto. Berikut di bawah ini adalah buktinya.

1. Penyusutan es

Puncak tertinggi di Indonesia, Puncak Jaya di Pegunungan Jayawijaya di Papua, mengalami penyusutan es secara signifikan. Lapisan Es Abadi Jayawijaya bahkan diperkirakan akan hilang.

Salah satu penelitian tim BMKG yang bekerja sama dengan salah satu universitas di Amerika, melakukan ekspedisi untuk memonitoring ketebalan lapisan es yang masih dimiliki Puncak Jaya.

"Kita menyebutnya Lapisan Es Abadi Jayawijaya. Tetapi ternyata dari penelitian tim kami menunjukkan bahwa lapisan es yang kita miliki itu kemungkinan tidak akan abadi lagi, diprediksi di tahun 2020-2030 kemungkinan lapisan es itu akan makin berkurang bahkan habis," kata Siswanto.

2. Gas rumah kaca (GRK) meningkat

Peningkatan karbondioksida, metana, dan nitroksida berkontribusi besar atas terjadinya pemanasan global. Semakin menumpuk GRK di stratosfer kita maka akan semakin meningkat suhu permukaan Bumi.

Menurut Siswanto, sejauh ini tingkat GRK Indonesia memang masih berada di bawah rata-rata tingkat GRK global. Namun Indonesia pernah melampaui angka rata-rata GRK global pada tahun 2013, dan 2015-2016.

"Saat itu CO2 kita menanjak dibandingkan global karena terjadi kebakaran hutan dan lahan. Ketika terjadi kebakaran hutan dan lahan maka emisi GRK kita, konsentrasi CO2 makin meningkat dan menyebabkan atau berkaitan langsung dengan kejadian pemanasan global di dunia ini," ujarnya.

3. Suhu terus naik

Berdasarkan data, rata-rata suhu Indonesia masih berada di bawah rata-rata suhu secara global. Namun jika dilihat per lokasi, di wilayah seperti Jakarta, Surabaya, Semarang, Medan, dan kota-kota yang padat penduduk atau yang sangat kuat aktivitas urbanisasi maupun urban developmentnya, suhunya sudah melampaui global.

"Jakarta ini suhunya sudah lebih cepat dan lebih kuat 1,4 kali peningkatannya dibandingkan suhu global," Siswanto memberikan contoh.

Sebelum tahun 1950, sebenarnya suhu Indonesia terutama suhu Jakarta, masih berada di bawah rata-rata global maupun rata-rata Indonesia. Namun sejak 1962 hingga sekarang, suhu udara di Jakarta makin meningkat secara signifikan dan dia melampaui rata-rata Indonesia maupun global.

4. Penurunan tanah

Sudah banyak peneliti baik dari Indonesia maupun luar negeri yang mengungkapkan fakta adanya ground sinking atau penurunan tanah. Fakta-fakta ini juga yang memicu ungkapan, 'Jakarta akan tenggelam di 2030'.

Dalam sebuah studi, ada wilayah-wilayah yang penurunan tanahnya diprediksi sampai -4 meter. Ini memang belum terjadi, melainkan prediksi hingga tahun 2030.

Otak Manusia Menyusut Akibat Perubahan Iklim

Selain itu, terdapat problem penurunan tanah yang disebabkan oleh faktor mekanis di luar dari persoalan perubahan iklim dan pemanasan global. Hal ini berkaitan dengan kehidupan manusia dan tata kelola perkotaan kita.

"Penurunan tanah ini disebabkan dua hal besar. Pertama, karena pengangkatan atau pengambilan air tanah yang berlebihan. Kedua, akibat tekanan permukaan akibat dibangunnya gedung-gedung tinggi yang ada di wilayah-wilayah dekat pantai sehingga menyebabkan tanah makin mudah turun," kata Siswanto.

Sumber :

https://inet.detik.com/science/d-6887706/bukti-bahwa-perubahan-iklim-nyata-bencana-di-mana-mana.

Mikroplastik turut mencemari udara Jakarta

Riset terbaru: selain perairan, mikroplastik turut mencemari udara Jakarta

Diterbitkan: Maret 9, 2022 12.45pm WIB

Lecturer on Marine Science Department, Universitas Sriwijaya

Pengungkapan

Penelitian ini merupakan kolaborasi dengan support fasilitas dan pendanaan dari lembaga riset nasional, yaitu LIPI. Pada jurnal yang telah diterbitkan, peneliti LIPI yang terkait (M.Reza Cordova) merupakan salah satu penulis jurnal tersebut

Jakarta merupakan kota yang dikepung polusi udara. Sebagian besar polusi tersebut berasal dari sektor transportasi, disusul oleh industri dan pembangkit listrik.

Material-material pengotor seperti nitrogen oksida (NOx), sulfur oksida (SOx), ataupun partikel debu berukuran 2,5 mikron (PM 2,5) menjadi biang keladi pencemaran di atmosfer Jakarta.

Namun, sumber pencemaran udara di Ibu Kota bukan hanya itu. Riset kami menemukan plastik berukuran sangat kecil (mikroplastik) yang terombang-ambing di udara sekitar Ancol, kawasan pesisir Jakarta. Ini merupakan penelitian pertama di Indonesia tentang mikroplastik di atmosfer (mikroplastik atmosferik) pada ketinggian 28 meter di atas permukaan tanah.

Temuan ini semestinya menjadi informasi untuk meningkatkan kesadaran dan menjaga kelestarian lingkungan. Pasalnya, bukan hanya di perairan, udara yang kita hirup pun tak lepas dari risiko pencemaran mikroplastik.

Cara mendeteksi mikroplastik di udara

Plastik merupakan bahan sintetis yang selalu dapat terpecah ke dalam bentuk yang lebih kecil, bahkan hingga mencapai ukuran mikrometer atau yang biasa dikenal dengan mikroplastik. Ukurannya bisa lebih kecil dari rambut manusia.

Ukuran yang kecil mengakibatkan “monster mikro” ini dapat terbawa ke seluruh bagian suatu badan air dan bahkan terakumulasi pada mahluk hidup.

Sedangkan, mikroplastik atmosferik merupakan mikroplastik yang berterbangan di udara sekitar kita, bersama dengan debu atau partikel kecil lainnya. Ukurannya yang kecil mengakibatkan mikroplastik dengan mudah terhirup dan berisiko mengakibatkan infeksi saluran pernapasan dan gangguan paru-paru.

Kami meneliti keberadaan mikroplastik atmosferik dengan pengambilan sampel selama setahun. Sampel diambil menggunakan alat penampung air hujan yang steril dan berbahan kaca. Alat ini dilengkapi dengan corong dan juga diisi dengan 10 ml air yang telah disuling (aquades).

Alat penampung kemudian diletakkan pada atap gedung Pusat Penelitian Oseanografi Lembaga Ilmu Pengetahuan Indonesia (LIPI) di Ancol, Jakarta Utara, yang bebas dari gangguan pohon maupun gedung lainnya.

Setiap bulan, alat penampung dipasang selama 96 jam. Sampel mikroplastik yang diperoleh kemudian dihitung dan diamati menggunakan mikroskop. Kami melakukan identifikasi bahan-bahan yang terkandung pada mikroplastik menggunakan spektroskopi inframerah (FT-IR).

Hasilnya, terdapat rata-rata 15 partikel mikroplastik yang jatuh setiap hari pada areal seluas 1 meter persegi (m²). Mayoritas di antaranya (80%) berukuran sekitar 0.3-0.5 milimeter (mm), sisanya berada pada rentang 0.5-1 mm.

Kami juga mencatat jumlah mikroplastik meningkat drastis pada musim hujan (November-April). Kami menduga mikroplastik ini terbawa oleh tetesan air hujan. Semakin tinggi curah hujan, semakin banyak mikroplastik yang terjatuh.

Sebagian besar mikroplastik yang kami peroleh setiap bulannya berbentuk fiber (serat penyusun pakaian). Sebagian kecil lainnya berbentuk potongan-potongan kecil dan foam (gabus).

Adapun mayoritas (82%) mikroplastik atmosferik yang kami temukan di Ancol merupakan plastik jenis poliester (PET). Ini merupakan material produk garmen.

Sedangkan, sisanya berbahan polistirena (PS) - jamak dipakai sebagai material kemasan styrofoam. Ada juga polibutadiena (PB) atau karet sintetis, dan polietilena (PE) yang dipakai sebagai bahan kantung plastik sekali pakai.

Menilik dari dominasi bentuk, ukuran, dan jenisnya, mikroplastik yang diperoleh ini merupakan emisi dari kegiatan rumah tangga. Bentuk fiber dan polimer PET umumnya diperoleh dari aktifitas di daerah perkotaan, seperti garmen dan penatu (laundry).

Berbahayakah mikroplastik di udara Jakarta?

Jumlah temuan mikroplastik atmosferik di Ancol sebenarnya masih lebih sedikit dibandingkan kawasan metropolitan lainnya di dunia. Misalnya, di Dongguan, Cina, mikroplastik yang ditemukan mencapai 36 partikel setiap hari pada luas areal 1 m². Sedangkan di Paris, Perancis, mencapai 110 partikel.

Mikroplastik juga ditemukan di udara sekitar Hamburg, Jerman, sebanyak 275 partikel, dan London, Inggris, mencapai 771 partikel.

Studi yang dilakukan di jalan utama di kota Surabaya di ketinggian 1,2 meter pada 2019 silam juga menemukan konsentrasi mikroplastik sebesar 247 partikel.

Meski demikian, patut diingat bahwa Ancol sebagai lokasi pengambilan sampel dalam penelitian kami merupakan kawasan yang tidak dihuni banyak penduduk. Aktivitas lalu lintas juga tidak terlalu padat, dan dekat dengan Teluk Jakarta.

Selain itu, sampel yang kami dapatkan di Ancol adalah mikroplastik yang jatuh pada ketinggian 28 m. Semakin tinggi lokasi pengambilan sampel, mikroplastik yang diperoleh juga akan semakin sedikit.

Temuan ini akan berbeda apabila pengamatan kami lakukan di ketinggian yang lebih rendah dengan aktivitas penduduk yang lebih padat. Misalnya, jika pengambilan contoh mikroplastik kami lakukan di pusat kota Jakarta dengan ketinggian yang dekat dengan hidung kita (sekitar 1,5-2 meter), tidak menutup kemungkinan mikroplastik yang didapat akan lebih banyak.

Walaupun risiko ini sudah diketahui, sejauh ini belum ada pemantauan mikroplastik di udara Jakarta, ataupun baku mutu mikroplastik di udara yang dibolehkan. Karena itu, kami menyarankan kandungan mikroplastik atmosferik menjadi salah satu unsur kualitas udara yang harus diukur secara berkala oleh pemerintah. Hal ini dilakukan sebagai upaya untuk meningkatkan kualitas hidup masyarakat, khususnya di Jakarta.

Sumber :

https://theconversation.com/riset-terbaru-selain-perairan-mikroplastik-turut-mencemari-udara-jakarta-177924

Protecting Yourself from Toxic PFAS

Toxic chemicals. Rising cases of sickness. A shocking cover up. It has the makings of a Hollywood movie. Indeed, the release of the blockbuster film Dark Waters had all of these gripping plot points, based on the true story of how a toxic chemical called PFOA contaminated a West Virginia town’s water supply.

Thanks in part to the movie and increased media attention about toxic chemicals, more communities across the U.S. are discovering their drinking water may be contaminated by PFOA or one of the other related chemicals in a category called PFAS (perfluoroalkyl substances).

Whether you know it or not, it’s likely you already have PFAS in your body. The CDC estimates that as many as 97% of Americans have detectable levels of PFAS in their blood (1).

Most PFAS are Toxic Forever Chemicals

Scientists have found that PFAS never degrade or break down (2). For this reason, PFAS are dubbed “forever chemicals.” This means once PFAS get into the environment, they persist virtually forever. And research shows that it takes years before any PFAS starts to leave your body (3).

The problem is that this issue has been undetected for decades. For the past 60 years, industrial companies used PFAS for a wide range of applications. This includes carpet protectants, food packaging, pesticides, non-stick cookware, waterproof textiles, stain repellants, and pesticides.

Companies had the public convinced that these chemicals were completely safe. But it turns out that multiple organizations have suppressed the truth about PFAS to protect their profits (4).

Thanks to several independently funded studies, researchers have now uncovered the cold hard truth: PFAS have poisoned the environment on a global scale and are a serious threat to virtually every person on this planet.

The Pervasive Reach of PFAS

Once PFAS get into the environment, they readily make their way into the food chain, going from the factory floor to drinking water and even the dinner table with ease.

PFAS leach into the environment from a wide range of sources. This includes landfills, factories, and military bases. From these sites, PFAS contaminate the air, soil, and water.

Due to the fact that PFAS are water soluble, they readily leach into groundwater and travel far. One report in the prestigious scientific journal Nature revealed that “PFAS were found in the drinking water of more than 16 million Americans in 33 states” (5). And experts believe that due to a lack of data in many states, these numbers are grossly underestimated (6).

But you don’t even have to have PFAS in your water supply to be exposed. People often turn to bottled water either for convenience or because they have concerns about the quality of their tap water. Yet recent tests show that many bottled water brands tested positive for PFAS (7).

Unfortunately, water isn’t the only way you can get exposed to PFAS. These forever chemicals can also make their way into your body through eating food cooked in non-stick cookware or from the dust within your own home.

Even worse, PFAS have invaded the food chain. Research shows that food wrappers used in take-out or fast-food packaging have PFAS, meaning you get a dose of toxic chemicals with every bite (8).

The Alarming Health Effects of PFAS

PFAS chemicals are readily absorbed by your gut. And when they get in the bloodstream, they stick around for a very long time. Some of these toxins are shown to stay in the body for up to 15 years before they are excreted (9).

Reports published by the National Center for Environmental Health have also found PFAS in samples of human blood, urine, breast milk and even in umbilical cord blood (10). This means these chemicals are, without a doubt, making their way from the environment into humans.

Once these chemicals make their way into your system, they can cause a great deal of harm (11). Scientists have found that exposure to PFAS is linked to:

• Cancer (liver, pancreatic and others) (12)
• Hormone disruption
• High cholesterol
• Obesity (some toxins are obesogens)
• Damage to the immune system (13)

How Can You Minimize the Risks from PFAS?

It’s clear that PFAS are bad news. To make matters worse, it’s virtually impossible to completely avoid exposure. But there are steps you take to minimize the risks from PFAS and support your body’s detoxification efforts.

Avoid exposure to PFAS by ditching non-stick cookware, avoiding packaged food when possible, using an air filter in your home, and opting for organic cleaning products since standard cleaning chemicals can contain PFAS as well.

Since one of the most likely exposure points is drinking water, avoid bottled water when possible, and drink water that has been filtered. The most effective filtration system to remove PFAS is reverse osmosis, but that can be expensive. The next most effective system is an activated carbon filter (14).

Activated carbon filters work through adsorption. Basically, the PFAS stick to the surface of the activated carbon and are therefore filtered out.

Detoxifying with Natural Zeolite

Much in the same way that activated carbon filters out PFAS in water, natural mineral zeolite can act as a filter for toxins in the body. The natural zeolite Clinoptilolite is a powerful yet gentle detoxifier for long-term daily use.

A natural mineral formed from volcanic deposits, zeolites have long been used for their ability to attract and trap toxins. When cleansed and nanosized for optimal absorption, this zeolite can detoxify the body to a cellular level.

Zeolite detoxifies the body in two key ways. As a negatively-charged mineral, it works through cationic exchange. Like a magnet, it attracts positively-charged toxins and holds them within its crystalline structure. It also works via adsorption, where toxins stick to the outside of the zeolite, before passing through the body.

While studies are limited, evidence suggests that zeolite adsorbs PFAS, working to remove toxic chemicals from aqueous solutions (15, 16). Long renowned for its ability to remove heavy metals, zeolite may also be a safe and simple way to potentially reduce your exposure to PFAS.

Given that PFAS lingers in the body for years, and has known damaging health effects, it’s vital to reduce your exposure to these toxic chemicals. Seek out information from your local water supply and reduce exposure through using a water filter and avoiding PFAS-laced food packaging. Adding nanosized natural zeolite is another way to help reduce your body’s toxic burden and optimize your well-being.

Sumber :

https://essentialorganics.thegoodinside.com/pfas-forever-chemicals

PFAS: The water contaminant that scientists say isn't going away

AUGUST 21, 2022 / 9:26 AM / CBS NEWS

On a cold winter day on the Stoneridge Dairy Farm, in Arundel, Maine, Fred Stone was worried more about his cows being cold than himself, especially his prized Brown Swiss, named Blue. "She likes to give me a hard time, as much as she can," Stone told correspondent Lee Cowan.

Fred and his wife, Laura, are only the latest generation to work this dairy; it's been in the family for over a century.

But since November of 2016, every drop of milk – that white gold that's been a reliable livelihood for generations – is now being poured right down the drain.

"It's a helluva waste," said Stone. "Even I can't drink it."

He had no idea the wastewater that the state licensed him to use to fertilize his fields was also swimming with potentially toxic chemicals, called PFAS. Now, his land, his cows (and, yes, their milk) are all contaminated.

Cowan asked, "Had you ever heard of PFAS or any of these chemicals?"

"Never," he replied.

A lot of people haven't. PFAS is an acronym for a family of man-made compounds called per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances. The CDC has listed a host of health effects believed to be associated with exposure to those chemicals, including cancer, liver damage, increased cholesterol, and a lot more. The chemicals are so highly mobile, they're not only being found in soil and ground water, but in the atmosphere, too. In fact, they've even been detected in raindrops falling in some of the most remote areas of the world.

PFAS chemicals have been around for decades. DuPont was the first to use PFAS in Teflon, giving us those non-stick pots and pans. 3M used a different PFAS in its once-popular fabric protector, Scotchgard.

Today, those chemicals' cousins can still be found in almost anything designed to fend off oil, water or grease. That includes things like pizza boxes, paper plates, rain jackets, ski wax, even guitar strings.

PFAS are basically impossible to escape, and scientists say they're likely here to stay.

Toxic "forever chemicals" found in groundwater near more U.S. military bases

"Forever chemicals" in drinking water pose risk even at low levels, EPA says

New study claims 43 states expose millions to dangerous chemical in drinking water

"They are nearly indestructible … You can't get rid of 'em," said Patrick Macroy, the former deputy director of the advocacy group Defend Our Heath in Maine. He explains just why that staying power is so very troubling: "A lot of chemicals, when they go into your body or they end up in the environment, they break down. They slowly decompose. PFAS don't do that. Once you put PFAS somewhere, it's gonna stay there practically forever."

That means the levels of these so-called "forever chemicals" can build up and linger in our bloodstreams forever.

Cathy and Bruce Harrington were notified by Maine's Department of Environmental Protection that their drinking water was tainted with PFAS: "They're supposed to be under 40 parts per trillion," said Cathy. "Ours is 26,000 per trillion."

For the Harringtons, who live next to a farm and use a well, the likely source was two industrial plants not far away.

"They come and tested our water," said Cathy. "And they said, 'We'll send you a report in a couple of weeks or whatever.' And they called us in a few days, and they said, 'Do not drink your water, don't use it for cooking, nothing.'"

All for what, asked Bruce? "Bottom line is, we don't need frickin' eggs to slide out of pans, versus people dying."

Melanie Benesh, a legislative attorney at the Environmental Working Group in Washington, said, "PFAS contamination is really a national crisis, and the real scale of contamination is staggering. The more we test, the more we find it."

Benesh said thousands of sites nationwide are polluted with PFAS. And she lays the blame for that growing crisis squarely at the feet of the companies who invented the chemicals in the first place. "It is the manufacturers, like DuPont and 3M, who have gotten us here today," she said. "So, they've known for 70 years that they were poisoning the water, and they didn't tell the EPA, they didn't tell their neighbors, they didn't tell their workers. They didn't tell anyone because they were making too much money."

In the last two decades, thousands of lawsuits have been brought against the manufacturers for allegedly knowing PFAS chemicals were dangerous. While most deny they did anything wrong, settlement offers have been pouring in, to the tune of billions of dollars.

But Benesh said the manufacturers aren't the only ones to blame: "There has also been regulatory failure. The FDA knew in the 1960s, the Department of Defense knew in the 1970s, the EPA has known since at least the '90s, and they didn't treat the issue with amount of urgency that it needed."

Regulating PFAS is like playing a game of whack-a- mole. DuPont and 3M phased out two of the PFAS suspected of being the most harmful, but they still manufacture others. In fact, there are thousands of variants.

Benesh said, "Many of them have real similarities that make it very likely that one is just as toxic as the other."

Take the plant DuPont built in North Carolina back in the '70s, and then spun off to a different company, called Chemours, back in 2015.

Almost a decade ago, Detlef Knappe, an environmental engineering professor at North Carolina State University, started testing the water near that plant that sits right along the Cape Fear River. In 2017, his research made headlines: A study said a new PFAS called GenX was clearly present in the water.

Emily Donovan, a mother of two who lives about 80 miles downstream from the Chemours plant, said, "It's unholy. We live in America. I should be able to enjoy a shower and not worry that it's going to give me or my kids cancer."

The Cape Fear River is a source of drinking water for more than 350,000 people in and around Wilmington, N.C. Donovan, like most people , just always assumed it was safe. "The EPA doesn't require utilities to regularly test for them," she said, "so there's really no way for the average American to know if it's even in their drinking water right now. Or in their food. Or in their air."

Based on what it called new evidence, this past June the EPA did update its drinking water advisories about PFAS, warning that even the tiniest amount over a lifetime may be enough to cause negative health effects in humans. But it stopped short of creating a new federal drinking water standard.

"There has been no new drinking water standard in the United States since the 1990s," said Donovan. So, she co-founded Clean Cape Fear, a community action group that, among other things, has been fighting for both federal and state agencies to crack down harder on all of the PFAS pollutants.

"You have two choices: You can have a breakdown about it, or you can channel that energy and that heartbreak into something productive and create a positive," Donovan said.

Chemours was forced by state environmental regulators to install a host of anti-pollution technologies. It's cost them millions.

In a statement to CBS News, the company said it's destroying "over 99.99% of PFAS" in the air, and it's reduce(d) "PFAS compounds reaching the Cape Fear River … by 97%."

As for the PFAS that have built up in the ground over the years, Chemours said it will build a barrier wall that will capture and treat that ground water – a process it says will remove nearly all of them.

Detlef Knappe said, "The exposure has dropped dramatically for people who live downstream; it's much tougher for the people who live immediately around the plant whose wells are contaminated."

What Professor Knappe is now interested in investigating is to see how much, if any, PFAS is present in the food grown nearby.  "We have analyzed some of the produce from backyard gardens in that area that suggest the levels can be quite high," he said.

Residents like Jane Jacobs – a member of the native Tuscarora Nation – have always seen the land as sacred. "I'm scared that it's too late," she told Cowan. "I'm scared that we're gonna die because of what we've ingested."

She fears the blight on her tribe's land might just end a way of life.

"My people have always hunted in these swamps, but they're fed by the rivers," she said. "So, now the animals are polluted the same way the water's polluted, because they drank out of the rivers and out of the swamps."

No one who lives off the land would willingly poison it. Fred Stone is certainly one of those people, as are farmers in nearly every state who use treated wastewater to nourish their fields. He, just like his father and his grandfather before him, saw their soil as part of their soul. Cold and draught were supposed to be the biggest threats, not a chemical made by man.

Said Stone, "At some point in time I'm going to have to tell my father and my grandfather what I did with the farm that they entrusted me with."

Cowan said, "But this wasn't your fault, though."

"It wasn't my fault, but it was under my watch. And now, it's gonna be gone. So, that's it. That's the end of the road."

Sumber :

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/pfas-the-water-contaminant-that-scientists-say-isnt-going-away/

EPA issues strongest statement to date about danger of PFAS in drinking water

by Chloe Johnson

EPA Administrator Michael Regan last month made one of his agency's strongest statements to date about the danger of "forever chemicals." New restrictions on those pollutants in drinking water would "prevent thousands of deaths and prevent tens of thousands of serious PFAS-related illnesses," Regan said.

Scientists studying the health effects of the chemicals say that while they can't prove any one case of illness is tied to them, the statement isn't an exaggeration. A growing body of scientific research has confirmed early suspicions that PFAS are linked to some cancers, and added new connections between the chemicals and developmental problems.

Jamie DeWitt, an immunotoxicologist at East Carolina University, leads a lab dedicated to discovering how PFAS damage the immune system. She said the link may seem indirect, but it's valid: If increased exposure to PFAS raises the risk of chronic diseases that can lead to death, then reducing the exposure reduces that risk of death.

That's exactly how the agency calculated its avoided deaths. Regan's comments are based on EPA's economic analysis of the costs and benefits of its proposed water standards, according to a statement from Khanya Brann, EPA deputy press secretary. The rules regulate six types of PFAS, though there are thousands of chemicals in the category.

The document estimates that 7,357 deaths would be avoided from reduced bladder cancer, kidney cancer and cardiovascular disease. The calculations also include benefits from reducing disinfection byproducts in water, or the chemicals that are left over once water has been treated. EPA asserts these chemicals will also be removed with the filtering required to handle PFAS.

Sean Lynch, a spokesman for Maplewood-based 3M Co., wrote in an email that EPA's water rules "lack a sound scientific basis" and that the agency hasn't shown they're needed to protect human health or the environment. Messages to the media office for Chemours, a spin-off of DuPont that still produces fluorinated chemicals, were not returned.

PFAS chemicals were pioneered by 3M in the 1950s. The company and another manufacturer, DuPont, made the oil- and water-resistant chemicals for a dizzying array of applications. Nonstick cookware coatings, waterproof clothing, dental floss and fire-extinguishing foams are just a few where they are used today.

But the carbon-fluorine bonds that enable these uses also make the chemicals persistent. They don't break down in the environment, and some PFAS linger in the body for years.

Documents released after the state of Minnesota sued the company show that 3M knew about toxicity for decades from internal studies it conducted, and DuPont decided to move women out of its production lines in the 1980s because of internal studies showing birth deformities in rats.

But public research on broader health effects has only advanced in roughly the past two decades. A small number of the chemicals have been well-studied, with the most known about the two oldest, and now discontinued, compounds—PFOS and PFOA.

There's now emerging scientific agreement that some PFAS chemicals are linked with several health problems, according to an influential 2022 report from the National Academies of Science Engineering and Medicine. It reported strong enough evidence to link PFAS exposure to developmental problems in children who are exposed before and after birth, increased cholesterol in adults and kids, kidney cancer in adults and reduced antibody response in all ages. More limited evidence suggests increased risk of testicular and breast cancers, hypertension in pregnancy and liver and thyroid issues.

EPA's proposed limit on PFAS in water systems set the standard for PFOA and PFOS almost at the limit of where machines can detect the chemicals. That's in part to protect developing fetuses that are exposed to PFAS in their mothers' bodies through the placenta, and infants, who are exposed through breastmilk.

The evidence for these effects is strong enough that the National Academies report recommends that doctors do additional screening for thyroid issues, cholesterol imbalances, kidney and testicular cancer and the bowel disease ulcerative colitis in patients with significant PFAS exposure. For the most exposed, cholesterol checks should start in children as young as 2; signs of testicular cancer and ulcerative colitis need to be assessed starting at age 15.

"They're saying, 'Hey, doctors, if you're treating patients who live in PFAS-contaminated areas, you need to do more for these patients,'" DeWitt said.

Much of the energy in the scientific world to look at the effects of these chemicals was spurred by the work of the C8 Science Panel. This broad study of health links to PFAS exposure was part of a settlement with DuPont, after the company was sued for contaminating drinking water in the Ohio River Valley. (C8 is another name for the chemical PFOA, because of the molecule's 8-link chain of carbon-fluorine bonds.)

An influential study completed by Philippe Grandjean, an environmental medicine professor at Southern Denmark University, looked at the immune systems of children exposed to these chemicals.

Grandjean, who also co-leads a center devoted to studying PFAS at the University of Rhode Island, initially recruited some 656 pregnant mothers in the Faroe Islands to study the effects of other environmental contaminants and continued to follow up with the children for years. He decided to examine PFAS too, after a study on the chemicals in lab mice was published.

They measured the amount of PFAS in the children's blood at different ages, including after typical childhood vaccinations. Grandjean said the results he ultimately published in 2012 in the Journal of the American Medical Association shocked him—the more PFAS in a child's blood, the fewer antibodies they would produce after a vaccine, as if their immune systems were suppressed. The same association held when researchers looked at the amount of PFAS in the cord blood of newborns.

Part of the problem for developing children, Grandjean said, is that a mother who breastfeeds for six months can transfer as much as half the PFAS in her body to the baby, where the chemicals concentrate ten times as much.

His work and several consecutive studies on the same cohort of Faroese children left Grandjean to conclude that "we are affecting the most vulnerable life stage of the next generation" with PFAS pollution that could cause still-unknown long term effects.

Other research, including some by Grandjean, has linked the chemicals to issues like low birth weight. Hypertension in pregnancy has also been linked with PFAS, including in the original C8 study.

Phil Brown, co-director of the PFAS Project Lab at Northeastern University, said his lab is now working on a study in the United States that will build on some of Grandjean's work studying children. DeWitt said she's investigating how the specific molecule PFOA affects the way cells use energy, and effectively ages them.

DeWitt said the associations right now might not be as clear as for other environmental pollutants, like fine particles in the air, which extensive research has shown can cause heart attacks and other deadly events from even short-term exposure.

But she said that fine particulate matter, also known as soot, has been a recognized problem for over a century; scientists are still catching up with chemicals like PFAS.

"The way things work in our world, we have to generate lots and lots and lots of data about the negative effects for people to think maybe we should change what we do and move to something else," DeWitt said.

Sumber :

https://phys.org/news/2023-04-epa-issues-strongest-statement-date.html

Borrowing From Big Tobacco's Playbook, Johnson & Johnson Knew About Asbestos in Baby Powder for Decades: Reuters

One attorney said 1970s memos that have surfaced due to recent lawsuits are "on par with key docs uncovered in the tobacco litigation."

Dec 14, 2018

A Reuters investigation published Friday charges that Johnson & Johnson, a multi-billion dollar company known for its healthcare products, knew for decades that its iconic talcum baby powder "was sometimes tainted with carcinogenic asbestos," but concealed the information from regulators and the public.

Asbestos, "the name given to six minerals that occur naturally in the environment as bundles of fibers," has been used in North America's automotive, construction, and shipbuilding industries since the late 1800s, according to the National Cancer Institute. The World Health Organization (WHO) warns that "all types of asbestos cause lung cancer, mesothelioma, cancer of the larynx and ovary, and asbestosis (fibrosis of the lungs)."

Because asbestos sometimes occurs in the earth along with talc, contamination is possible. Reuters--along with attorneys for more than 11,000 plaintiffs currently suing Johnson & Johnson, claiming the company's products caused their cancer--examined memos, internal reports, and other confidential documents as well as deposition and trial testimony.

That mountain of evidence, according to Reuters, revealed

that from at least 1971 to the early 2000s, the company's raw talc and finished powders sometimes tested positive for small amounts of asbestos, and that company executives, mine managers, scientists, doctors, and lawyers fretted over the problem and how to address it while failing to disclose it to regulators or the public.

The documents also depict successful efforts to influence U.S. regulators' plans to limit asbestos in cosmetic talc products and scientific research on the health effects of talc.

While, over the past two decades, some legal challenges claiming that Johnson & Johnson products were tainted with asbestos and caused cancer have been unsuccessful, three recent developments seem to signal a shift. A pair of cases in New Jersey and California saw significant awards for mesothelioma patients, and a "watershed" verdict in St. Louis expanded the company's potential liability.

Outlining the St. Louis case, Reuters explained:

The 22 plaintiffs were the first to succeed with a claim that asbestos-tainted Baby Powder and Shower to Shower talc, a longtime brand the company sold in 2012, caused ovarian cancer, which is much more common than mesothelioma. The jury awarded them $4.69 billion in damages. Most of the talc cases have been brought by women with ovarian cancer who say they regularly used J&J talc products as a perineal antiperspirant and deodorant.

"When people really understand what's going on," said Mark Lanier, an attorney for one of the plaintiffs, "I think it increases J&J's exposure a thousand-fold."

Johnson & Johnson, as Reuters noted, "has dominated the talc powder market for more than 100 years, its sales outpacing those of all competitors combined... And while talc products contributed just $420 million to J&J's $76.5 billion in revenue last year, Baby Powder is considered an essential facet of the healthcare-products maker's carefully tended image as a caring company--a 'sacred cow,' as one 2003 internal email put it."

Another attorney who's not tied to the cases against Johnson & Johnson concluded on Twitter that the 1970s memos mentioned in Reuters' report are "on par with key docs uncovered in the tobacco litigation."

Journalist Eoin Higgins, also responding on Twitter, simply said: "What a story. What the fuck."

Johnson & Johnson, meanwhile, has vowed to appeal all verdicts against it and maintains that its products are safe. The company's vice president of global media relations, Ernie Knewitz, wrote in an email to Reuters:

Plaintiffs attorneys out for personal financial gain are distorting historical documents and intentionally creating confusion in the courtroom and in the media... This is all a calculated attempt to distract from the fact that thousands of independent tests prove our talc does not contain asbestos or cause cancer. Any suggestion that Johnson & Johnson knew or hid information about the safety of talc is false.

Following the report, the publicly traded company's shares plummeted by more than 11 percent.

Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

JESSICA CORBETTJessica Corbett is a senior editor and staff writer for Common Dreams.Full Bio >

Sumber :

https://2020plan.net/baby-powder/

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/12/14/borrowing-big-tobaccos-playbook-johnson-johnson-knew-about-asbestos-baby-powder

US food pesticides contaminated with toxic ‘forever chemicals’ testing finds

PFAS are present at ‘potentially dangerous’ levels in widely used chemicals sprayed on food crops destined for Americans’ plates

Sun 7 May 2023 11.00 BST

Some of the United States’ most widely used food pesticides are contaminated with “potentially dangerous” levels of toxic PFAS “forever chemicals”, new testing of the products finds.

The Environmental Protection Agency has previously been silent on PFAS in food pesticides, even as it found the chemicals in non-food crop products. The potential for millions of acres of contaminated food cropland demands swifter and stronger regulatory action, the paper’s authors say.

PFAS from firefighting foam at the the Van Etten Creek dam in Oscoda Township, Michigan.

“I can’t imagine anything that could make these products any more dangerous than they already are, but apparently my imagination isn’t big enough,” said Nathan Donley, environmental health science director at the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), which co-authored the study. “The EPA has to take control of this situation and remove pesticide products that are contaminated with these extremely dangerous, persistent chemicals.”

The groups last Monday submitted the test results to the EPA and the California Department of Pesticide Regulation, asking them to remove these products from use until contamination can be addressed.

PFAS are a class of about 15,000 chemicals often used to make thousands of consumer products across dozens of industries resist water, stains and heat. The chemicals are ubiquitous, and linked at low levels of exposure to cancer, thyroid disease, kidney dysfunction, birth defects, autoimmune disease and other serious health problems. They are called “forever chemicals” because they do not naturally degrade.

The testing found PFAS in three out of seven agricultural pesticides, including Intrepid 2F, which state of California data shows is the second most widely applied product behind Roundup. In 2021, the most recent year data is available, more than 1.7m pounds of it were applied to over 1.3m cumulative acres of California land. Use was highest in the Central Valley on crops such as almonds, grapes, peaches and pistachios.

The study also found the chemicals in Oberon 2SC Malathion 5EC, the latter of which contains the neurotoxin malathion.

Multiple studies have established that crops absorb PFAS and they can be ingested by humans. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) began monitoring PFAS in food in 2019 and has detected them in fruits and vegetables, but has not set any limits.

The fertilizers are also probably polluting water with PFAS. The level of PFOA, one kind of PFAS compound, found in Malathion 5EC was over 100,000 times higher than the level the EPA considers safe in drinking water, though no limit has been set for PFAS in pesticides.

“There is no better way to poison Americans than contaminate our food supply and soils with PFAS, and the blame for this lies squarely on the shoulders of EPA,” said Kyla Bennett, a co-author and science policy director with Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (Peer).

It is unclear why the chemicals are added to pesticides, though some in the industry have theorized they are used as a dispersing agent. The Intrepid 2F manufacturer Corteva-Agriscience in a statement to the Guardian said the product did not contain intentionally added PFAS.

The results are the latest in an ongoing dispute among federal regulators and independent researchers over the scale of PFAS contamination in US pesticides, and the response.

Bennett, a former EPA scientist, first discovered PFAS in pesticides in 2020, and alerted the agency and the Massachusetts department of environmental protection.

For US readers, we offer a regional edition of our daily email, delivering the most important headlines every morning

Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

After conducting its own pesticide testing, the EPA concluded in early 2021 the chemicals were leaching from plastic containers in which they were stored, and said the contamination was limited to pesticides used in mosquitocides. The EPA issued an open letter to the industry reminding it that PFAS can leach, and asking companies to alert it if they were adding PFAS.

But the contamination continues. In late 2022, testing of insecticides used primarily for cotton, but which could potentially be used on food, found PFAS. That testing, along with CBD and Peer’s research, also detected PFAS compounds not known to be used or formed when the chemicals are added to plastic.

The discrepancy suggests the PFAS are not coming from plastic bins, but are added to pesticides by manufacturers, either as active or inactive ingredients, or are inadvertently inserted into products somewhere in the supply chain.

In December, the EPA banned some types of PFAS compounds – but not all – that can be used as inert ingredients in pesticide products, and said at the time that active ingredients are being reviewed. “EPA will share results of that investigation as soon as possible,” an agency spokesperson said. No results have been released, but an EPA spokesperson said the agency has “already analyzed some of the specific pesticides mentioned by CBD and Peer and plans to release those results in the coming weeks”.

PFAS have also previously been found in some widely used flea and tick pesticide products.

In a statement, the EPA said it “has taken significant scientific, regulatory and enforcement actions to address this issue, will continue to take such actions”.

However, it did not say it would halt sales of the pesticides while it investigatesBennett told the Guardian the EPA is “missing in action”.

“The fact that we are likely spraying pesticides with PFAS on food at a time when EPA acknowledges there is no safe level of some of these chemicals is nonsensical,” she added.

Sumber :

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/may/07/food-pesticides-toxic-forever-chemicals-pfas