Thanks for the post. Alarmism in general is not helpful. The great Pacific Garbage patches have been the subject of many alarmist articles. Although I deplore garbage flotsam and dirty waters in general, but the press is all "the sky is falling" which is off-putting and generally false. Keep up the good work, Doc!
Your article was truly eye-opening. I'm reassessing my stance on plastics—I still see some serious issues, but I appreciate how science is helping me view things more calmly. The idea that "plastics are criticized both for being too inert to break down and for being toxic" really made me think. It’s good to know they’re generally non-reactive and pose less of a chemical threat compared to other pollutants, although I'm still concerned about the plastics in my garden since I’m an organic farmers' market regular.
I agree with you on their usefulness for safely storing food, medicines, and other products, and it's reassuring to hear that plastics themselves aren’t inherently toxic. However, I still have reservations about the chemicals used in their production.
When it comes to microplastics, there’s clearly still a concern, even if the debate is ongoing. They’re already in our food chain, which is unsettling—especially the thought of them in our fish. The iconic image of birds with plastic in their stomachs has always been a powerful symbol in environmental activism. As someone who, like Patrick Moore, advocates for birds, it pains me to see this—even if it’s just one bird. While I align with much of your article, I’m also critical of the CO2 narrative and concerned about wind farms harming birds. The issue of large quantities of plastic blocking digestive tracts is still worrying.
Do the benefits of plastics outweigh the potential side effects? It’s a tough question. I completely support the use of sterile, single-use plastics to reduce infection risks and their vital role in medical devices and patient care. I also recognize how plastics contribute to fuel-efficient vehicles, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and enhancing vehicle safety. And I agree that plastics are crucial in building materials, offering durability, corrosion resistance, and reducing maintenance costs.
However, I believe we should continue exploring better alternatives—like Earthship building, which could revolutionize energy use and offer sustainable solutions. Bioplastics might be a better avenue, but that remains to be seen. It would be great to see you explore these topics further, especially the effects of our enormous waste on the environment.
The full impact of microplastics on ecosystems and human health isn’t fully understood, but the potential risks—like ingestion by wildlife and their entry into the food chain—are real. I’ve read that we already have plastics in our systems, and we even expel them, though I’m not sure how true that is. While your article offers some relief, my concerns remain. It would be worth delving deeper into how plastics are made, the chemicals involved, and how effectively they’re recycled. I do know a significant portion of plastic waste isn’t recycled, often due to the complexity of sorting different types and the degradation of quality during the process. And even when they are recycled, it’s often into lower-quality products that eventually end up as waste hugh piles of land fill.
Finally, it would be wonderful to see more discussion on bioplastics and other alternatives. While they offer promising solutions, they aren’t a cure-all. A combination of reducing plastic use, improving recycling systems, and developing new materials seems necessary for a more sustainable future it a hugh topic.
So, discarded plastic waste is unsightly and unwelcome but maybe not as dangerous as we thought. Maybe the alarmism on greenhouse gases and carbon emissions is similarly overdone.
I appreciate you making this point, and am glad to hear there is an alternative narrative on "microplastics" which seem to be the latest scare. But without plastics, we essentially would not have anything that is electrical. Plastics are not only essential parts of high-voltage electrical transformers that are part of the grid, they are an essential part of the "last mile" where they insulate electrical conductors from shorting out. Virtually any electrical device depends on plastics to keep the electricity within its circuits. This includes computers. If we went back to the days of electrical wires in "post-and-tube" or cloth/rubber insulated systems as in the 1880's, where wires in buildings were suspended on wood posts with ceramic tubes holding the bare wires where they might touch something, we would have many fewer electrical devices, and we would have many more house fires where electrical shorts cause fatal fires. We simply could not use electricity for much without plastic, and this includes using solar and wind, and other alternative electrical generation. It just could not exist without plastic.
I think this article was great. I hate single use plastic and styrofoam. I love when places have compostable take out containers and I can actually compost them at home or throw them in a commercial compost bin.
How about that, an unemotional piece highlighting that provocative claims about plastics in the environment are emotional plays lacking in scientific study. If only this simple, rational mindset could be spread like a fog over half the population who believe in dumb ideas. Intellectually stunted claims of heteronormative patriarchy, social identity, institutional racism, climate catastrophism, modern colonial imperialism, trans adolescents, and a host of other supposed ills could disappear in a moment.
Thanks for the post. Alarmism in general is not helpful. The great Pacific Garbage patches have been the subject of many alarmist articles. Although I deplore garbage flotsam and dirty waters in general, but the press is all "the sky is falling" which is off-putting and generally false. Keep up the good work, Doc!
Thank you, Dr. Matthew Wielicki.
Your article was truly eye-opening. I'm reassessing my stance on plastics—I still see some serious issues, but I appreciate how science is helping me view things more calmly. The idea that "plastics are criticized both for being too inert to break down and for being toxic" really made me think. It’s good to know they’re generally non-reactive and pose less of a chemical threat compared to other pollutants, although I'm still concerned about the plastics in my garden since I’m an organic farmers' market regular.
I agree with you on their usefulness for safely storing food, medicines, and other products, and it's reassuring to hear that plastics themselves aren’t inherently toxic. However, I still have reservations about the chemicals used in their production.
When it comes to microplastics, there’s clearly still a concern, even if the debate is ongoing. They’re already in our food chain, which is unsettling—especially the thought of them in our fish. The iconic image of birds with plastic in their stomachs has always been a powerful symbol in environmental activism. As someone who, like Patrick Moore, advocates for birds, it pains me to see this—even if it’s just one bird. While I align with much of your article, I’m also critical of the CO2 narrative and concerned about wind farms harming birds. The issue of large quantities of plastic blocking digestive tracts is still worrying.
Do the benefits of plastics outweigh the potential side effects? It’s a tough question. I completely support the use of sterile, single-use plastics to reduce infection risks and their vital role in medical devices and patient care. I also recognize how plastics contribute to fuel-efficient vehicles, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and enhancing vehicle safety. And I agree that plastics are crucial in building materials, offering durability, corrosion resistance, and reducing maintenance costs.
However, I believe we should continue exploring better alternatives—like Earthship building, which could revolutionize energy use and offer sustainable solutions. Bioplastics might be a better avenue, but that remains to be seen. It would be great to see you explore these topics further, especially the effects of our enormous waste on the environment.
The full impact of microplastics on ecosystems and human health isn’t fully understood, but the potential risks—like ingestion by wildlife and their entry into the food chain—are real. I’ve read that we already have plastics in our systems, and we even expel them, though I’m not sure how true that is. While your article offers some relief, my concerns remain. It would be worth delving deeper into how plastics are made, the chemicals involved, and how effectively they’re recycled. I do know a significant portion of plastic waste isn’t recycled, often due to the complexity of sorting different types and the degradation of quality during the process. And even when they are recycled, it’s often into lower-quality products that eventually end up as waste hugh piles of land fill.
Finally, it would be wonderful to see more discussion on bioplastics and other alternatives. While they offer promising solutions, they aren’t a cure-all. A combination of reducing plastic use, improving recycling systems, and developing new materials seems necessary for a more sustainable future it a hugh topic.
Thank you for your insights. Many blessings,
John W. R.
So, discarded plastic waste is unsightly and unwelcome but maybe not as dangerous as we thought. Maybe the alarmism on greenhouse gases and carbon emissions is similarly overdone.
I appreciate you making this point, and am glad to hear there is an alternative narrative on "microplastics" which seem to be the latest scare. But without plastics, we essentially would not have anything that is electrical. Plastics are not only essential parts of high-voltage electrical transformers that are part of the grid, they are an essential part of the "last mile" where they insulate electrical conductors from shorting out. Virtually any electrical device depends on plastics to keep the electricity within its circuits. This includes computers. If we went back to the days of electrical wires in "post-and-tube" or cloth/rubber insulated systems as in the 1880's, where wires in buildings were suspended on wood posts with ceramic tubes holding the bare wires where they might touch something, we would have many fewer electrical devices, and we would have many more house fires where electrical shorts cause fatal fires. We simply could not use electricity for much without plastic, and this includes using solar and wind, and other alternative electrical generation. It just could not exist without plastic.
I might add, we also would have no internet, no television, and no radio.
Another case of good news doesn’t sell newspapers as they used to say back in the day.
Thanks for this. Basically what I've thought on the topic since this is clearly becoming the next crusade for activists.
Thank you for the additional information.
Unfortunately too many media reports only give one side.
I think this article was great. I hate single use plastic and styrofoam. I love when places have compostable take out containers and I can actually compost them at home or throw them in a commercial compost bin.
I takes a long time for rocks to breakdown in the environment also
How about that, an unemotional piece highlighting that provocative claims about plastics in the environment are emotional plays lacking in scientific study. If only this simple, rational mindset could be spread like a fog over half the population who believe in dumb ideas. Intellectually stunted claims of heteronormative patriarchy, social identity, institutional racism, climate catastrophism, modern colonial imperialism, trans adolescents, and a host of other supposed ills could disappear in a moment.