More microplastics in glass bottles than plastic ones
A team of investigators at France's national food agency Anses has discovered that some glass bottles have more microplastics in them than other containers, including those made of plastic.
The 'surprising finding' came about in tests carried out by the Anses Laboratory for Food Safety, whose researchers fingered paint on bottle caps as the likeliest culprit for the counterintuitive outcome.
'The level of microplastics was found to be higher in glass bottles than in other containers,' the team said, with glass bottles of cola, lemonade, iced tea and beer having at least five times the amount of particles than plastic bottles or cans.
'We were expecting the opposite result when we compared the level of microplastics in different drinks sold in France,' said Iseline Chaïb of the Aquatic Food Safety Unit in Boulogne-sur-Mer, which carried out the study.
The researchers aimed to figure the levels of 'microplastic contamination' in drinks and to assess the effects of container or bottle type on the amount of pollution.
The team said they did not look into 'toxicological reference data', meaning that they could not determine any health risk related to the amounts of plastics found in the bottles.
But they advised people to reduce the amount of plastic being washed into a drink by rinsing the caps before putting them back on a bottle.
The team said that during their research, they hit upon clues such as the microplastics found in drinks being 'mostly the same colour and had the same composition as the paint on the caps'.
'Caps were suspected to be the main source of contamination, as the majority of particles isolated in beverages were identical to the colour of caps and shared the composition of the outer paint,' the team explained in a paper published by Anses. – dpa
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Star
7 hours ago
- The Star
AI-dependent doctors risk losing their skill to detect colon cancer
Doctors who depend on regular AI assistance during colonoscopies are at risk of losing their ability to pick up on precancerous lesions during this procedure. — dpa Doctors and other medical professionals who lean on 'routine assistance' from artificial intelligence (AI) to carry out colonoscopies are at risk of losing the life-saving skills they have developed over years of on-the-job training. A study taking in over 1,400 colonoscopies at four Polish hospitals found a 20% decrease in the ability of 'experienced health professionals' to detect precancerous colon growths following the introduction of AI to the process. 'Continuous exposure to AI in colonoscopy' might reduce the effectiveness of 'standard, non-AI assisted colonoscopy,' the researchers warned. 'Our results are concerning given the adoption of AI in medicine is rapidly spreading,' says Assistant Prof Dr Marcin Romanczyk of the Academy of Silesia in Poland. 'These findings temper the current enthusiasm for rapid adoption of AI-based technologies... and highlight the importance of carefully considering possible unintended clinical consequences,' says consultant gastroenterologist and interventional endoscopist Dr Omer Ahmad of University College London in Britain, who was not involved in the study. Featured in The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology medical journal, the paper is the first 'to suggest the implementation of AI could lead to a reduction in the ability of medical professionals and impact health outcomes which are important to patients', according to the publisher. The findings follow the publication of 'several studies' that have suggested AI could help doctors identify cancers, according to The Lancet medical journal. 'We urgently need more research into the impact of AI on health professional's skills across different medical fields,' says Asst Prof Romanczyk. In their paper, Asst Prof Romanczyk and colleagues called for more 'behavioural research' to look into 'the currently under-investigated mechanisms of how AI affects physician capability.' – dpa
The Star
a day ago
- The Star
Did you know that it's dangerous to give slushies to kids?
Glycerine is added to some slush ice to give it a smoother texture. Photo: CHRISTOPH SOEDER/dpa It doesn't take much to make children happy: A cup of crushed ice, sugar and food colouring is often enough, especially on hot days. However, some slush ice drinks contain an additive that is not without risks, particularly for children: glycerine, which sometimes appears in ingredients lists as E422. 'It's added to some slush ice drinks to make them smoother,' says nutritional health specialist Katharina Holthausen. It has a slightly sweet taste and is also used in medicine to reduce a condition in the skull called elevated intracranial pressure. However, large amounts of glycerine can cause headaches, nausea and dizziness, she says. Such unwanted effects are particularly likely in children, as they have a lower body weight. In large quantities, glycerine can lead to headaches, nausea and drowsiness in children. Photo: CHRISTOPH SOEDER/dpa Health experts believe the likelihood of health impairments from drinking a slushy depends on the concentration of glycerine in the drink and the amount consumed. There is no legally defined maximum limit for glycerine in beverages, however. Germany's Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) authority has measured levels of glycerine in slushy drinks and calculated, based on products available in Europe, that a child aged five years and weighing 20 kilograms would need just under 200 millilitres of slushy to reach a glycerine dose with a 'therapeutic effect'. When it comes to slushies, parents are advised to allow children to try some 'only occasionally and in small amounts,' says Holthausen. She also advises parents to ask when buying the drink whether it contains glycerine. Parents who want to be completely safe can offer their children a homemade version. All that is needed is crushed ice and fruit juice or pureed fruit. – dpa
Barnama
a day ago
- Barnama
Rare Genetic Mutation Could Enable Near-Universal Virus Immunity, Study Finds
A polio virus vaccine vial placed on a table at Deir El Balah Health Centre on Sept 1, 2024. The Palestinian Ministry of Health announced late Tuesday that a new shipment of polio vaccines totaling 350,000 doses had arrived in Gaza. -- Photo by Abed Rahim Khatib/dpa ISTANBUL, Aug 20 (Bernama-Anadolu) -- A recent study published in the Science Translational Medicine journal revealed that the recreation of a rare genetic mutation could enable near-universal virus immunity, Science Alert reported Tuesday, Anadolu Ajansi (AA) reported. A rare genetic mutation, a deficiency in interferon-stimulated gene 15 (ISG15) that appears to render people nearly invulnerable to viruses, has been recreated in laboratory animals, raising hopes that it could one day be harnessed as a therapeutic approach. People with ISG15 deficiency experience mild, ongoing inflammation, but their virus-fighting proteins remain constantly active. Despite exposure to common infections like the flu, measles and chickenpox, they report only minor symptoms. bootstrap slideshow "In the back of my mind, I kept thinking that if we could produce this type of light immune activation in other people, we could protect them from just about any virus," said Columbia University immunologist Dusan Bogunovic, who first discovered the phenomenon 13 years ago. Bogunovic and colleagues have used technology similar to mRNA vaccines to provide a temporary ISG15 deficiency in lab animals. Bodies of mice and hamsters given the treatment created 10 key proteins with antiviral effects that blocked infections at multiple stages. Further challenged with SARS-CoV-2, proteins of the vaccinated animals restricted the infection but did not interfere with the rest of the animals' immune systems. "We only generate a small amount of these 10 proteins, for a very short time, and that leads to much less inflammation than what we see in ISG15-deficient individuals," Bogunovic explained, underlining that the inflammation is "enough" to prevent viral diseases. Although the protective effect lasted up to four days, it can potentially provide short-term protection for health care workers before specific vaccines are available.
