#391

Cotton is considered dangerous to wear in hiking situations or similar as there’s no wicking.

#392

You’ve heard of plastic polluting oceans. But what if it’s polluting you—your brain, your reproductive system, even your unborn children?

In this eye-opening episode, we speak with Prof. Matthew Campen, a scientist at the University of New Mexico, whose latest studies have uncovered evidence of microplastics in placentas, reproductive organs and brains of humans—particularly in the frontal cortex, where decision-making and personality live.

We explore how these plastic particles are entering our bodies (hint: it’s not just your water bottle), what they might be doing to us, and why scientists are just beginning to understand the true scope of the issue. From declining sperm counts to potential links with dementia, this episode asks a critical question: Are microplastics the next big public health crisis?

Transcript below at link:

3 Likes
#393

eiderdown: Eiderdown, the world’s most expensive feathers

expensive, but if you can get it, it’s the best cruelty-free plastic-free alternative

1 Like
#394

Years ago there was a Nebraska farmer that believed the fuzz from the milkweed seed was going to replace plastic and down. He bred better milkweed, built machinery to harvest, got publicity and I don’t know what happened, but I’ve heard nothing since. It was a hollow fiber and he claimed it was superior in every way.

#395

@AlexKChen I put my money where my cruelty-free mouth is and bought an eiderdown duvet and pillow decades ago. They are still perfection and I imagine I’ll never have to replace them (and this is even after they took an unfortunate beating after a pet had an accident and I panicked and threw them in the tub and stomped on the delicate soaking wet feathers like I was Lucy Ricardo stomping grapes.

@Bicep I’d be all over that!

I walked into the Save The Duck store when I was in NYC and was blown away by the quality of the non-down. I see no reason why anyone would buy anything different when that stuff is available… but alas, I live in CA and don’t need anything. My real down coat from 20 years ago will last me for the rest of my life (wish there had been better options at the time). My friend’s friend is an actual mountain climbing Sherpa and chooses Save the Duck :wink:

1 Like
#396

Chemicals in home tap water linked to a 33% increase in cancer rates

"A recent and disturbing analysis links polyfluoroalkyl substances(PFAS) detections in public drinking water to higher cancer rates in certain parts of the United States.

The headline number is blunt: exposure to these chemicals in tap water is associated with up to a 33 percent higher cancer risk. That statistic sets off alarms, as it should, but the details matter for what we do next."

3 Likes
#397

^these are not plastics…

====

recently i noticed in portugal that ALL restaurant foods in a food court have to be served in non-plastic

Yes — France is making substantial efforts to reduce plastic use — including in takeout / food service contexts. It has passed laws and regulations aiming to phase out single-use plastics, push reusable serviceware, and require compostable/biodegradable replacements. Here are some of the key points:

What France is Doing

  1. Anti-Waste & Circular Economy Law (Loi AGEC / Loi anti-gaspillage pour une économie circulaire)
  • Passed in 2020, this law is central to France’s efforts. (Zero Waste Europe)
  • It aims to phase out single-use plastic packaging by 2040. (CMS Law)
  • It also sets reduction, reuse, and recycling targets (for example, reusable packaging targets, bans on certain plastic items, etc.). (Zero Waste Europe)
  1. Bans on Specific Single-Use Items
    Some examples:
  1. Reusable Tableware & Reusable Containers
  • As of January 2023, restaurants (including fast food) are required to provide reusable tableware for meals served on site. (Fern)
  • For take-away, they must shift toward compostable or justified reusable alternatives rather than purely disposable plastic. (Frontier Group)
  1. Packaging Regulation
  • Fresh fruits and vegetables: many cannot be sold wrapped in plastic (unless in bigger batches, or under certain exceptions). (SGSCorp)
  • Laws require that packaging used for food contact must meet stricter environmental standards — for example phasing out certain substances, requiring compostability, etc. (DLA Piper)
  1. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) and Other Incentives
  • Producers (companies that make, import or use packaging) are held more accountable: costs, design requirements, waste/disposal targets. (Zero Waste Europe)
  • There are funds or supports especially for smaller food service businesses to transition to greener packaging. (Fern)

What It Means for Take-Out / Bolt / Delivery Services

For a service like Bolt & food takeout:

  • Takeout containers, cutlery, cups have to comply with the law. Plastic ones either need to be phased out, or replaced with compostable or reusable options where possible.
  • Styrofoam-type packaging is banned. • Compostable or biodegradable alternatives are mandatory in many cases.
  • There’s incentive (or legal requirement) for restaurants/fast-food outlets to offer reusable options and discourage single-use plastic.
  • Deliveries / takeout may also be impacted via the requirement for packaging to meet environmental standards and be labelled (if needed).

If you want, I can check the latest status (2025/2026) to see how fully enforced it is, or what remaining exemptions exist, especially for takeout/delivery. Do you want me to pull that info?

NOT IN SPAIN HOWEVER, Portugal is way better than Spain on this

#398

https://x.com/PlanktonPundit/status/1741846575947645360?s=19

https://goesfoundation.com/

#399

Short version: both rapamycin and spermidine look mechanistically protective against micro/nanoplastic (MNP) injury because they push cells toward “clean up your mess” mode. The catch is that direct, gold-standard in vivo proof for either drug against MNPs is thin. So this is plausibly good biochemistry, not a prescription. Try not to mainline glitter.

What MNPs break

MNPs jam autophagy and lysosomes, stir up ROS, and trip inflammasomes. Multiple studies report blocked autophagic flux and lysosomal stress; some show the PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway turned on, others show lysosome stress turning mTOR off. Either way, the autophagy–lysosome system is the battlefield. (PMC)

Rapamycin: likely to help when mTOR is the choke point

  • Why it could work: Rapamycin inhibits mTORC1, which generally restores autophagic flux and also tones down NLRP3 inflammasome output in macrophages. That maps cleanly onto two big MNP damage pathways. (MDPI)

  • Where it fits the data:

    • When MNPs activate PI3K/Akt/mTOR and suppress autophagy, rapamycin should relieve the brake. (ACS Publications)
    • When MNPs cause lysosomal stress that already shuts off mTOR and pushes TFEB to the nucleus, rapamycin won’t fix fusion problems; it’s not duct tape for broken lysosomes. In those cases you need lysosome/autophagosome fusion rescue, not just more TFEB. (考研)

  • Inflammation angle: Rapamycin curbs NLRP3-driven IL-1β signaling, which MNPs can aggravate. So even if autophagy is messy, it may still blunt the cytokine storm. (BioMed Central)

Net on rapa: Potentially protective in subsets of MNP injury where mTOR-high, autophagy-low is the pattern. Not a magic eraser when the primary issue is lysosomal fusion failure. Evidence is mechanistic plus analogs; I can’t point you to a definitive “rapamycin rescues MNP-exposed mice” paper yet.

Spermidine: autophagy, epigenetics, gut

  • Why it could work: Dietary spermidine induces autophagy (partly by inhibiting the acetyltransferase EP300), improves mitophagy, and generally pushes proteostasis in a youthful direction. (PMC)

  • Systems it supports that MNPs wreck:

    • Autophagy: broad induction across species; it’s essential for fasting-induced autophagy too. If MNPs stall flux, spermidine can raise the drive, though again it won’t fix a broken fusion step by itself. (Nature)
    • Barrier/microbiome: spermidine improves gut morphology and microbial diversity in mice. Given MNPs often injure gut epithelium and shift microbiota, that’s a plausible buffer. (MDPI)

  • Evidence near the target: We already have direct reports of MNPs deranging autophagy in reproductive, renal, and neural tissues; compounds that restore autophagy (e.g., nobiletin) mitigate NP toxicity in models. That’s circumstantial but supportive for spermidine’s class effect. (考研)

Net on spermidine: Likely helpful for baseline cellular housekeeping and gut barrier health under MNP stress. Again, no clean, large in vivo “spermidine rescues MNP toxicity” trial yet.

Where the field is heading

  • mTOR–TFEB–lysosome is the hub. PS-nanoplastics can accelerate neurotoxicity by derailing autophagosome–lysosome fusion through the TSC2–mTOR–TFEB axis; interventions that restore flux look best. (BioMed Central)
  • Inflammasome matters. NLRP3 is a recurring sensor for particulates including MNPs; anything that damps it without torpedoing host defense is a win. Rapamycin fits this profile. (Frontiers)

Practical, not-reckless takeaways

  • If you’re thinking bench science: test both compounds in parallel with readouts for autophagic flux (LC3-II turnover, p62 degradation), lysosomal acidity, TFEB nuclear localization, and IL-1β maturation. Include conditions where you intentionally block fusion to see when these agents fail. Use PS-NPs with and without co-pollutants. (PMC)
  • If you’re thinking humans: neither is an approved treatment for “plastic exposure.” Rapamycin can immunosuppress and mess with wound healing. Spermidine is generally dietary-level safe but still not a shield. File under “promising adjuncts to reduce cellular sulking,” not “force field.”

If you want the dreamy one-liner: rapamycin = turn down mTOR, calm the inflammasome, maybe restore flux; spermidine = turn up housekeeping and shore up the gut. Just remember the fine print: if the lysosome itself is toast, both are polishing the hood while the engine’s seized.

1 Like
#400

https://x.com/PlanktonPundit/status/1741846575947645360

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935125019395?via%3Dihub

=====

Alright, here’s your “who on the right actually cared about microplastics” cheat-sheet. Yes, some did. No, they didn’t suddenly become tree spirits. Most framed it as a fertility/health problem, not a polar-bears problem.

Politicians and policy folks

  • Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) — co-introduced the Microplastics Safety Act in the Senate to have FDA study health impacts of microplastics in food and water. That’s… literal concern codified as a bill. (Congress.gov)
  • Rep. Greg Steube (R-FL) — House co-lead on the same bill; his office’s release calls microplastics a threat to human health. (Congressman Steube)
  • Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK) — acknowledged the problem in hearings while urging regulatory caution. Translation: “yes, tiny plastics exist; don’t nuke the economy over it.” (E&E News by POLITICO)

Media and influencers on the right

  • Jordan Peterson — explicitly frets about “all the microplastics” and “messing with hormones” in water. On-brand endocrine panic, but it’s still concern. (脸书)
  • National Review (Michael Brendan Dougherty) — ran a column calling microplastics “the new toxins,” linking them to endocrine disruption, infertility, lung inflammation, etc. That’s not subtle. (National Review)
  • Fox News Health — regular segments/articles warning about microplastics and nanoplastics in bottled water and potential long-term risks. If your aunt shared it on Facebook, you’ve seen it. (Fox News)

The “manosphere” current

Not a formal caucus, but lots of right-leaning male-health spaces harp on microplastics as testosterone killers and fertility wreckers. They share studies on semen quality, placentas, and arterial plaque loaded with micro/nanoplastics, then sermonize about glass bottles and cotton shirts. The science they cite is real even if the vibes are melodramatic. (The Lancet)

Complicated edge case

  • RFK Jr. — ideologically eclectic but pitched to right-leaning audiences lately; he’s repeatedly called microplastics a human-health crisis (brains, antibiotics, crops). If you’re counting “right wing,” he arguably belongs on the list. (The New Republic)

Honorable mention outside the U.S.

  • Nigel Farage — not microplastics per se, but he’s on record as hating plastics/pollution in rivers and seas while being hostile to Net Zero. Classic “pollution bad, climate regs overblown” stance. (DeSmog)

What they’re actually reacting to

A lot of this right-side attention maps to fertility and endocrine disruption papers making headlines the past couple years: human ovarian follicular fluid, semen, even artery plaques showing micro/nanoplastics, with associated risk signals. These studies gave conservative media and men’s-health influencers ammo to worry about bodies rather than ecosystems. (The Guardian)

Bottom line: yes, the right has real, named figures concerned about microplastics. They just package it as “protect our hormones and babies” instead of “save the oceans.” Same polymers, different nightmares.

You’re right. Tucker belongs on the list. He’s been hammering the “chemicals + declining fertility/testosterone” drum for years, and Fox’s ecosystem around him has pushed microplastics content nonstop.

  • Tucker Carlson — framed a broader “chemical war on men” in his Fox Nation special The End of Men, explicitly tying environmental contaminants to falling testosterone and fertility. Not a lab coat, but very much Concerned. (Fox News)
  • Fox platforms around Tucker — regular health hits about microplastics in food, bottled water, organs and even brain tissue, which is the exact “toxic modernity” storyline he amplifies. Yes, it’s often breathless; yes, it’s still concern. (Fox News)
  • On-air fertility segments — his show repeatedly hosted guests on plummeting sperm counts and a “toxic” environment for reproductive health, which slots microplastics right into the frame even when the specific segment title isn’t “MICROPLASTICS BAD.” (Fox News)
  • Culture-war packaging — media coverage of End of Men even name-checks microplastics when describing the premise, which tells you how tightly the topic is tied to his brand. (Rolling Stone)

So yes: Tucker’s concern is real, just filtered through the usual masculinity-in-decline narrative. Same polymers, different boogeyman.

1 Like