A short, quick, debunk of Guardian scaremongering over microplastics, written by New Lede.
- Plastics are macro-molecules which are NOT digested. So even were one to eat it, it'd pass throught the gut undigested, and out the other end.
- Microplastics cannot be a threat because there are no mechanisms to get them into human "lungs, placentas, reproductive organs, livers, kidneys, knee and elbow joints, blood vessels and bone marrow" - where The Guardian imply they threaten us.
- Fake health threats
- obscure actual health issues,
- needlessly scare people to makes us irrational, and
- misdirects our resources and attention away from actual health issues.
- If the claims came from empirical studies then what were those studies? Especially any studies which claim microplastics are present inside people, and are evidentially harmful. The Guardian will never tell you.
- One of the scientists quoted did:
- not report any microplastics inside people
- no toxicology studies
- There are no toxicology studies reported in this inquiry. No study shows commonly used plastics to be harmful. In reality, harmful plastics would be instantly banned.
- Instead of actual toxicology studies, the scientist quoted by The Guardian claim hypothetical harms from microplatics.
It seems to me they want to make us paranoid, and to redirect our attention away from the real health issues to hypothetical ones. They could make people prey to demagogues.
Maybe they believe what they write? I don't know one way nor the other since they will rationally debate with no one. It's typical of fanatical & primitivist environmental activism we've had from the Guardian for many decades. It's cultish.
No comments:
Post a Comment