[cmuguythrow]

I have often wondered why the government doesn't do anything about this. Is the science not clear enough yet?

Quick search shows that we knew about lead hazards as early as the 1920s/1930s, but it took until the 1970s to get regulation about lead paint and gas - hoping we don't repeat that in this case

[raincole]

> Is the science not clear enough yet

No.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00405-8

(https://web.archive.org/web/20250211144614/https://www.natur... if you need)

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39900298/

[ibbih]

Are the mouse studies not worrying enough for you to change your behaviour?

[rocqua]

How well does the link need to be proven before we act?

The fact that we haven't found the causal link yet is not proof that there isn't one. And a whole lot of correlation suggests that there is. Why should we not take this as yet another reason to regulate throwaway plastic?

[goelbab]

It’s hard for science to prove because there’s no control group - everyone is exposed.

There’s also no clear definition of microplastics that I’ve seen. Different plastics have different toxicitiy

[tshaddox]

For what it’s worth, you don’t need a randomized controlled trial if you can offer an explanation for how microplastics affect human health.

Hence the classic joke “As with many interventions intended to prevent ill health, the effectiveness of parachutes has not been subjected to rigorous evaluation by using randomised controlled trials. Advocates of evidence based medicine have criticised the adoption of interventions evaluated by using only observational data.”

[ibbih]

It's a bit too much of an umbrella term for regulation to fix in one swoop, but if i were alive in the 50s and had the internet i simply would not buy lead-paint.

[SeanAppleby]

Animal studies seem like the best tool for untangling this, and they indicate that high plastic doses cause a variety of health effects, some of which seem to align with broad health trends we see in our population over time, like in fertility.

It's not like there's zero data to inform the risk calculation.

[coldtea]

Science works with cases with no control groups all the time

[pohl]

Plastics are largely a petroleum product, right? That particular resource extraction industry pretty much has a lock on public policy.

[113]

Governments aren't doing much about climate change and the science is very clear on that.

[p1necone]

The science is very clear on microplastics existing and being in our bodies.

The science linking that to specific outcomes/harm is almost non existent from what I understand.

Edit: to those downvoting - I'm not downplaying anything here, I agree they're concerning and we should be worried - just stating the fact that as far as I know the research on outcomes is very inconclusive at this point.

[rose-knuckle17]

If the current US government started doing anything about it right now, i would immediately regard it as 100% horseshit. America won't be in any position to lead ... anything scientific, medical or even thoughtful for a generation or two, at least.

I know there are still people hanging on in their fields trying to do the right things, but the bullshit engine in DC is so strong now that nothing is believable. If you are working in scientific research in America today, your only career goal needs to be emigration.

[nullorempty]

>I have often wondered why the government doesn't do anything about this. Is the science not clear enough yet?

Government is always on your side!