
Plastic shopping bag policies are actually working, a new study suggests
That extra fee at the grocery store for a plastic shopping bag isn't just an inconvenience –– it is actually making a difference for marine ecosystems, according to a new study.
Policies that ban or impose fees on plastic bags are associated with a 25% to 47% decrease in plastic bag litter in shoreline cleanups, according to a study published Thursday in the journal Science.
Plastic litter is a big risk to the health of marine ecosystems, and the problem is growing, said lead study author Dr. Anna Papp, an environmental economist and incoming postdoctoral researcher at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
The United States has no federal-level policy on plastic bags, so researchers analyzed 180 local programs, including full bans, fees on shopping bags and partial bans –– which sometimes have special regulations such as requiring thicker plastics to make shopping bags reusable.
Researchers then analyzed data from more than 45,000 US shoreline cleanups to compare the litter before and after the policy was passed as well as the differences between areas with and without a policy, Papp said.
'The main finding is that these policies led to a decrease in plastic bags as a share of total items collected,' she said.
Other studies have shown that plastic bag policies affect how many bags consumers use, said Dr. Erin Murphy, manager of Ocean Plastics Research for the Ocean Conservancy.
But this most recent research 'really takes it to the next level, showing it's not only reducing the amount of bags we're using, but it's actually achieving our broader objectives of environmental cleanliness,' she said.
Plastic bag pollution is harmful to both animals and humans.
On beaches or other outdoor spaces, plastic pollution can have a negative impact on tourism or the value of spending time in nature, Papp said.
Plastic bag litter is particularly dangerous to marine animals for two reasons, Murphy said. First, they enter the environment more easily than other types of plastic.
'They're hard to recycle, they're single-use, and they're lightweight, and so they blow very easily in the wind. Even if we're trying to properly manage them, it's easy for them to escape waste management systems and get into the environment,' she said.
Second, once they enter the environment, plastic bags can lead to population-level effects on marine species, Murphy said.
Many species, including marine mammals and sea turtles, will eat the plastic bags, obstructing the gastrointestinal tract and preventing them from eating until they die, she said. Plastic bags can also entangle wildlife, keeping hatchling sea turtles from reaching the ocean and shading coral reefs, all of which can lead to disease and death for marine species.
'In 2024 alone, our International Coastal Cleanup volunteers cleaned up over 500,000 grocery bags from the environment and 500,000 other plastic bags, totaling more than a million different plastic bag types from the environment,' Murphy said. 'They're always in our top 10 items found in the environment, and that alone is an issue.'
While bans and fees on plastic bags are helping, they are not eradicating the problem, Papp said.
'Plastic pollution is a growing global problem,' she said. 'The overall percentage of plastic bags is still increasing … This increase is just slower in places with policies.'
The evidence suggests some policies are more effective than others: Full bans made a bigger impact than partial bans, and fees seemed better than bans, said study coauthor Dr. Kimberly Oremus, an associate professor at the University of Delaware School of Marine Science and Policy.
'One hypothesis is that in at least some cases, the revenue from fees is being used to further reduce litter. In Washington, DC, for example, they use the revenue from plastic bag fees to clean up river shorelines,' Oremus said.
However, the hypothesis has not been investigated, and there is not yet enough data to say for sure that fees are more effective than bans, she said.
More must likely be done outside of these policies as well, Papp said. The United States needs regulations not just on the consumption of plastic bags but also on the production and supply of them, she added.
There are also steps you can take so your plastic shopping bag doesn't end up in the environment, Papp said.
For one, if you do use a plastic bag, don't let it fly away and create litter. Then, properly dispose of it — for example, you can take it to a plastic bag recycling station, she said.
And you can always go back to the three R's, said Dr. Rebecca Taylor, an assistant professor of agricultural and consumer economics at the University of Illinois Urbana–Champaign.
Reduce the number of plastic bags you use, reuse them when you can and recycle them when you must.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Medscape
17 minutes ago
- Medscape
Cefazolin Best for Cesarean Infection Prevention
TOPLINE: In planned cesarean deliveries, cefazolin demonstrates superior infection prevention compared with clindamycin plus gentamicin, with significantly lower rates of inpatient antibiotic use (5.9% vs 15.2%) and readmissions (1.8% vs 3.8%). METHODOLOGY: Researchers conducted a retrospective cohort study at a university-affiliated tertiary medical center between 2012 and 2023, including women undergoing planned cesarean delivery. Analysis included 11,246 eligible women with 10,588 receiving cefazolin (standard regimen) and 658 receiving clindamycin plus gentamicin (alternative regimen) because of severe penicillin or cephalosporin allergies. Prophylactic antibiotics were administered within 30 minutes before incision with cefazolin dosing at 2 g (3 g for women weighing ≥ 120 kg) and the alternative regimen consisting of clindamycin 600 mg plus gentamycin 5 mg/kg. Primary outcome measures included the need for inpatient antibiotic treatment, and secondary outcomes included readmission for obstetric or gynecologic complications. TAKEAWAY: Infectious complications occurred less frequently in the cefazolin group with inpatient antibiotic treatment rates of 5.9% compared with 15.2% in the clindamycin plus gentamicin group (P < .001). Readmission rates were significantly lower in the cefazolin group at 1.8% vs 3.8% in the alternative regimen group (P = .001). Multivariate analysis revealed the alternative regimen group had higher odds of requiring inpatient antibiotics (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.1; 95% CI, 1.54-2.80; P < .001) and readmission (aOR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.19-3.18; P = .008). IN PRACTICE: 'Cefazolin may be more effective than clindamycin plus gentamicin in preventing infectious complications after planned cesarean delivery. This study emphasizes the importance of careful assessment of β-lactam allergies to guide optimal antibiotic choices. For women allergic to standard regimens, alternative strategies should be considered to reduce postoperative infections and complications,' the authors of the study wrote. SOURCE: This study was led by Daniel Gabbai, MD, MPH, Lis Hospital for Women's Health, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center in Tel Aviv, Israel, and published in O&G Open. LIMITATIONS: According to the authors, this study used indirect indicators of infectious complications rather than direct diagnoses of endometritis or surgical site infections. The retrospective design introduced potential selection bias, particularly due to missing data on prophylactic antibiotic use in some patients. The researchers noted that while major confounders were controlled for, unmeasured factors might have influenced the observed differences between antibiotic groups. Additionally, data on prenatal antibiotic use were not consistently available, and the 12-year study period at a single tertiary care center may limit the generalizability of findings to other institutions with different patient populations and care practices. DISCLOSURES: The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest. This study was approved by the Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center Institutional Review Board (No. TLV-0284-08, July 10, 2024). This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.


Medscape
an hour ago
- Medscape
FDA Warns of Future Action on Animal-Derived Thyroid Drugs
The top US regulator of medicines this week said he wants to officially approve an animal-derived thyroid drug, seemingly addressing concerns sparked by a press release from his own agency. On August 6, the FDA sent letters to manufacturers, importers, and distributors of animal-derived thyroid medications, stating that the agency 'intends to take action against marketed unapproved animal-derived thyroid (ADT) products (sometimes described as desiccated thyroid extract [DTE] products).' 'Due to their complex biological origin, these medications contain many compounds that are uncharacterized for safety and effectiveness,' the FDA said, noting that it could take as long as '12 months to safely transition patients to an FDA-approved thyroid hormone replacement product.' 'FDA is not taking immediate action against manufacturers who make unapproved animal-derived thyroid medication to give patients time to transition to an FDA-approved medication to treat their hypothyroidism,' the agency said. Following this announcement, in an August 13 post on his verified account on X, FDA Commissioner Marty Makary wrote that his agency 'is committed to pursuing the first-ever approval of desiccated thyroid extract, pending results of the ongoing clinical trials' and 'will in the meantime ensure access for all Americans,' without specifying what kind of thyroid medications would be available. The X post came after considerable social media backlash to the FDA's plans to shift patients toward synthetic thyroid medications and away from animal-derived versions. FDA-approved laboratory-made, or synthetic, thyroid medications currently dominate the US market. About 22 million people received prescriptions for levothyroxine through outpatient retail pharmacies in 2024 compared to an estimated 1.5 million patients who received prescriptions for animal-derived versions, the FDA said. Marketed under names such as Armour Thyroid, NP Thyroid, Nature-Thyroid, and Natural Thyroid, these medications are produced from dried, ground animal thyroid glands, usually those of pigs. Complex History The FDA has had a long and challenging history with regulating thyroid medicines. These drugs were first sold in the US well before federal laws gave the FDA the regulatory powers it now has, Antonio Bianco, MD, PhD, of the University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, Texas, and former president of the American Thyroid Association, told Medscape Medical News . 'Because they existed before the FDA, their regulatory pathway is really complicated,' Bianco said. In 1965, four of every five prescriptions for thyroid hormone were for natural thyroid preparations, as pharmacologic authorities confirmed that these were highly effective, well-absorbed, and produced clinically predictable outcomes, wrote Roselyn Cristelle Mateo-Collado, MD, of Rush University, Chicago, and James V. Hennessey, MD, of Harvard Medical School, Boston, in a 2019 review in Endocrine . But reports of patients not responding to desiccated thyroid triggered concerns about inconsistencies in the potency of these tablets, they added. Over time, a newer synthetic version, levothyroxine, became more widely used, even with concerns arising as well about inconsistent potency. Between 1987 and 1994, the FDA received 58 adverse experience reports associated with the potency of orally administered levothyroxine products. In 1997, the FDA mandated that any company wishing to market levothyroxine must first secure agency approval. In 2002, Abbott Laboratories received approval to keep selling its levothyroxine drug, Synthroid, which had been on the market for more than 40 years and was being taken by about 8 million people in the US, Abbott said at the time. In 2013, Abbott spun off its drug business as AbbVie. AbbVie now markets both Synthroid and Armour Thyroid, a desiccated thyroid drug. What's Next? In his X post, the FDA chief Makary did not mention any specific studies that he expects to lead to approval of a desiccated thyroid drug. AbbVie is sponsoring a phase 2/3 study examining the safety of its Armour Thyroid against the synthetic thyroid medicine, according to the website. AbbVie declined to comment on this story. Other companies also are working on research studies for their animal-derived thyroid drugs, so the FDA's August 7 announcement came as an unwelcome surprise for many people, Bianco said. Makary's X post this week likely was meant to respond to pushback from supporters of the animal-derived drugs, he added, noting that the commissioner's tone may signal that the agency is 'correcting course' and minimizing the impact of the agency's announcement. 'The manufacturers are working very hard' on large-scale trials, Bianco said. 'They require money and time to be done properly, and I think that's what the FDA should be stimulating.' Bianco reported being a consultant for AbbVie, Acella, Aligos, and Synthonics.


Medscape
an hour ago
- Medscape
Difficulty Playing Music Follows Treatment for BC
TOPLINE: Over a quarter of musicians experienced difficulty with musical endeavors during or after the breast cancer treatment with 57% reporting unresolved issues at survey time. Chemotherapy emerged as the most impactful treatment with 71% of recipients citing it as most detrimental to musical ability. METHODOLOGY: Playing instruments and singing require high levels of fine sensorimotor control, making musicians potentially vulnerable to unique manifestations of breast cancer treatment toxicities. These include chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, upper-extremity dysfunction after surgery and radiation, and joint pain associated with aromatase inhibitors. A nine-item Musical Toxicity Questionnaire was distributed to 4075 participants in the Mayo Clinic Breast Cancer Registry, achieving a 46% response rate with 1871 respondents. Researchers identified musicians by asking if participants played an instrument or sang in the last 10 years with 535 qualifying respondents reporting 802 unique musical endeavors. Analysis included assessment of acute musical toxicity during or after the treatment with participants detailing specific symptoms, affected musical attributes, and timeline of resolution. Multivariable logistic regression and classification tree analyses were conducted to evaluate relationships between acute musical toxicity and treatment characteristics. TAKEAWAY: Among 535 self-identified musicians, 27% (144/535) reported acute musical toxicity with decreased endurance being the most common difficulty (64%, 92/144) followed by 'decreased accuracy' (44%, 64/144). Younger patients reported significantly more acute musical toxicity (P =.005), with 34% (14/41) of those younger than 40 years and 36% (42/117) of those aged 40-49 years affected. Multivariable analysis revealed that the receipt of chemotherapy (P <.001) and comprehensive regional nodal irradiation vs no radiation (P =.023) were significantly associated with acute musical toxicity. Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System scores at 1 year post-diagnosis showed that each additional point in mental and physical health scores decreased acute musical toxicity odds by 8.6% and 14%, respectively. IN PRACTICE: 'These results will help oncology care teams counsel musicians, answer questions about impacts on musicality, and provide a timeline for resolution of musical symptoms,' the authors of the study wrote. SOURCE: This study was led by Jessica F. Burlile, MD, Mayo Clinic in Rochester, New York. It was published online in JCO Oncology Practice. LIMITATIONS: According to the authors, this study faced several limitations including recall bias with a median time of 5.3 years from diagnosis to survey completion. The researchers noted that musical abilities may have declined due to lack of practice, injuries, or natural aging during this period, which was not accounted for. Additionally, the survey did not include items specific to neurocognitive function, though multiple respondents noted difficulty with processing music or sight reading in free response areas. DISCLOSURES: This study received support from Department of Radiation Oncology Innovation Funds, Mayo Clinic, and a grant from the Mayo Fellows Association. Additional disclosures are noted in the original article. This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.