[ssnistfajen]

If microplastics are directly causing illnesses and birth defects then we would've found out already. Past cases of mass illness caused by pollutants (lead gasoline, asbestos, minamata disease, thalidomide, chimney sweep's carcinoma, etc.) were uncovered quickly and usually addressed not long after. The fact we still can't pinpoint exactly how microplastics are harming us beyond that they are in places where they are not supposed to be, The one reassuring thing about this whole ordeal is plastics are largely inert, that's why they take forever to degrade.

[chemicalnovae]

I didn't go and look up the others but this argument by similarity, at least when applied to asbestos says the exact opposite to the claim you're trying to make. It's generally considered that industry/government was aware of the issues relating to asbestos in the '30s (and _started_ doing things about it then) but it wasn't until the 70's/80's (depending on the country) that its use was mostly stopped (and in places like Australia it wasn't outright banned until 2003).

[ssnistfajen]

And? That span is within an individual's lifetime, which is not very long in the context of human history. As of now there's zero sign any entity with regulatory power is doing anything about microplastics.

Also, why are you trying to deliver a point without looking up most of the examples I've listed? Do you expect that to be a convincing argument?