Don’t many medications and medical devices contain microplastics either on purpose (fillers) or un-avoidable (plasticizers in IV tubing). Unless the FDA has an existing microplastics policy, it would be weird to inconsistently apply it.
Lots of dental stuff like Invisalign or even regular braces involve keeping plastic and adhesives in the mouth for long periods of time. I think even some gum (non-nicotine or otherwise) contain plastics technically.
This whole issue around microplastics has just become another grift for the health and wellness industry. The supplements industry is worth over $150B dollars.
The main contributor to microplastic ingestion is in the water you drink, this water is contaminated with either parts of your car tire or the synthetic clothes you wear
>What does the second line have to do with the first?
The fact that like damn near ever regulated issue of the 20th century some big moneyed interests will leverage that concern to create a regulatory moat for themselves, drive business to themselves by force of law, etc, etc. The bone the public will be thrown will consist of making the regulated problem some trivial amount less worse for a little while before the Nt order consequences screw us harder than the original problem in a few decades.
The claim is that the industry is chomping at the bit to have microplastics declared some sort of problem or otherwise regulated or subject to artificial pressure so they can make money over-selling (or having people be forced to buy) solutions to a problem that's over-hyped.
The paper industry people are salivating over it too so they can sell paper bags and paper filter media and cardboard packaging, etc, etc.
Basically they see what the "green grift" people have going on and they want a copy for themselves.
This doesn't actually explain what the second line of the aforementioned comment has to do with the first.
If you're so certain the microplastic threat is overhyped, I would encourage you to publish a paper explaining and evidencing your rationale! As you mention, the ground is ripe for some controversy on this topic.
Are you suggesting that all the scientists studying microplastics and papers about microplastics are just grifting for the health and wellness industry?
Also, are you suggesting that a pharma company like Philip Morris, with a yearly revenue of $40 billion, part of the TRILLION dollar pharma industry, is somehow less influential than the health and wellness industry?
There's a grift alright, and it's not some former FDA scientist selling it.
Critically nicotine pouches are a recreational drug rather than a medication or medical device. If you're exposed to microplastics from your dialysis then that's just a tradeoff to remain above the ground. Most people using Zyn never smoked, it isn't a lifesaving or even improving measure, it's just big tobacco doing what big tobacco does.
I think this is silly. This is a product designed to deliver nicotine, and that's going to continue to be the important part for health considerations. Had the FDA become concerned about the pouch material, and a different pouch material had been swapped in, it would still be a product designed to deliver nicotine.
If it's used in a way that gets people away from smoking, maybe it can have an impact of decreased cancer risk. If used by people who weren't going to smoke, then maybe the impacts to blood pressure, heart rate, and heart disease risk are going to dominate.
The "maybe you accumulate more microplastics" impact is a rounding error.
That's been the pitch from "harm reduction" activists who didn't bother to check on the reality, and the pitch from Phillip Morris.
The reality is that products like Zyn are most popular in a young demographic that's not only NOT using it to quit smoking, it's actually just a supplement to their smoking. In many cases Zyn and Vaping lead to smoking, not the other way around.
Finally lets remember that safer means of delivering nicotine to the system exist, they simply aren't addictive, marketable, or profitable.
The US approves and allows many things haphazardly because there's a lack of regulatory consistency, integrity, enforcement, and application of the precautionary principle. This plays Russian roulette with the public in the name of money.
Don’t many medications and medical devices contain microplastics either on purpose (fillers) or un-avoidable (plasticizers in IV tubing). Unless the FDA has an existing microplastics policy, it would be weird to inconsistently apply it.
Lots of dental stuff like Invisalign or even regular braces involve keeping plastic and adhesives in the mouth for long periods of time. I think even some gum (non-nicotine or otherwise) contain plastics technically.
This whole issue around microplastics has just become another grift for the health and wellness industry. The supplements industry is worth over $150B dollars.
The main contributor to microplastic ingestion is in the water you drink, this water is contaminated with either parts of your car tire or the synthetic clothes you wear
What does the second line have to do with the first?
Anyone I know who is concerned about microplastics is worried about food packaging, water contamination, and clothing.
>What does the second line have to do with the first?
The fact that like damn near ever regulated issue of the 20th century some big moneyed interests will leverage that concern to create a regulatory moat for themselves, drive business to themselves by force of law, etc, etc. The bone the public will be thrown will consist of making the regulated problem some trivial amount less worse for a little while before the Nt order consequences screw us harder than the original problem in a few decades.
So the claim is that the supplement industry is involved in some type of regulatory capture that pertains to microplastics?
I don't think that's true, nor is it the claim being made.
The claim is that the industry is chomping at the bit to have microplastics declared some sort of problem or otherwise regulated or subject to artificial pressure so they can make money over-selling (or having people be forced to buy) solutions to a problem that's over-hyped.
The paper industry people are salivating over it too so they can sell paper bags and paper filter media and cardboard packaging, etc, etc.
Basically they see what the "green grift" people have going on and they want a copy for themselves.
This doesn't actually explain what the second line of the aforementioned comment has to do with the first.
If you're so certain the microplastic threat is overhyped, I would encourage you to publish a paper explaining and evidencing your rationale! As you mention, the ground is ripe for some controversy on this topic.
like unleaded gasoline?
Under sink reverse osmosis filter for the win.
Are you suggesting that all the scientists studying microplastics and papers about microplastics are just grifting for the health and wellness industry?
Also, are you suggesting that a pharma company like Philip Morris, with a yearly revenue of $40 billion, part of the TRILLION dollar pharma industry, is somehow less influential than the health and wellness industry?
There's a grift alright, and it's not some former FDA scientist selling it.
Critically nicotine pouches are a recreational drug rather than a medication or medical device. If you're exposed to microplastics from your dialysis then that's just a tradeoff to remain above the ground. Most people using Zyn never smoked, it isn't a lifesaving or even improving measure, it's just big tobacco doing what big tobacco does.
I think this is silly. This is a product designed to deliver nicotine, and that's going to continue to be the important part for health considerations. Had the FDA become concerned about the pouch material, and a different pouch material had been swapped in, it would still be a product designed to deliver nicotine.
If it's used in a way that gets people away from smoking, maybe it can have an impact of decreased cancer risk. If used by people who weren't going to smoke, then maybe the impacts to blood pressure, heart rate, and heart disease risk are going to dominate.
The "maybe you accumulate more microplastics" impact is a rounding error.
There are advertisements from the 1950s for asbestos-filtered cigarettes. How many of those cancer cases are you counting against nicotine?
That's been the pitch from "harm reduction" activists who didn't bother to check on the reality, and the pitch from Phillip Morris.
The reality is that products like Zyn are most popular in a young demographic that's not only NOT using it to quit smoking, it's actually just a supplement to their smoking. In many cases Zyn and Vaping lead to smoking, not the other way around.
Finally lets remember that safer means of delivering nicotine to the system exist, they simply aren't addictive, marketable, or profitable.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10203764/
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10203764/
The US approves and allows many things haphazardly because there's a lack of regulatory consistency, integrity, enforcement, and application of the precautionary principle. This plays Russian roulette with the public in the name of money.