Latest news with #MartinWagner
Yahoo
11-07-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Alarming new study prompts call to ban 4,200 chemicals 'of concern' found in common products
More than 4,000 chemicals used in plastics should be banned, according to the authors of a new report published in the prestigious journal Nature. Its lead author Professor Martin Wagner is concerned that most easily leach into food because they're not actually bound to the plastic. He spoke with Yahoo News on Thursday night, just after many of us had put our children to bed, sparking worry in at least one journalist. 'Pacifiers (dummies) are another good example, because they are the most direct and intimate contact you can have with plastics. By chewing on them, the chemicals would just leach into saliva and then be ingested by the baby,' he explained. 'But then you want them to sleep, right? It's a trade-off you have to make.' Wagner, a biologist with expertise in endocrine-disrupting chemicals at Norwegian University of Science and Technology, highlighted how people in modern societies like Australia are constantly coming into contact with plastic. Our lips touch the lids of plastic take-away coffee cups or water bottles in the morning, we put plastic headphones in our ears, we buy vegetables, fruit, bread, cheese, and snacks all wrapped in it. Related: 🚨 Disturbing problem caused by placing five common items in dishwasher The study revealed there are more chemicals present in plastics than was previously thought. They identified a staggering 16,325 chemicals, of which 4,200 were deemed 'of concern' because they threaten human health or the environment. On average the researchers found 800 chemicals in each plastic item, but some contain as few as 20. The worst examples were polyethylenes which often contained thousands. New 'chemical cocktails' are constantly being created in plastics, and Wagner said responding to and investigating these additions is like playing the game whack-a-mole. For instance, after concerns were raised about the use of Bisphenol A (BPA) in receipts and food packaging, most manufacturers shifted to using a similar compound, Bisphenol S (BPS), of which very little is known about its human health impacts. 'We call it regrettable substitutions… Just replacing BPA with BPS or BPF doesn't make a difference in terms of the health risks that these chemicals have,' Wagner said. Because of this behaviour by plastic manufacturers, the report calls for chemicals to be regulated not as individuals, but as groups. This would force them to remove all Bisphenols from plastics, not just BPA. 'That's of course economically much more costly, but it's more efficient in protecting public health,' Wagner said. Well-known additives used in plastics include colouring and UV resistance chemicals, but processing aids like foaming agents and lubricants are often used, so they don't stick during moulding, but residue often survives the manufacturing process and this can also leach into food and the environment. 'We have this broad universe of chemicals in plastics. There is so much complexity and so many chemicals in plastics that they are outpacing our ability to make sure they are safe,' Wagner said. 'This is compounded by industry in general not disclosing which chemicals are being used in plastics. So we have to reverse engineer and try to figure out which chemicals are actually in everyday plastic items, which is absurd to the public.' Increased temperature is known to increase the release of chemicals. So not leaving plastic in the sun, and keeping it out of the microwave is a 'common sense approach', according to Wagner. 'But of course, plastics will degrade over time, even if they're just sitting in the cupboard. So they're releasing micro and nanoplastics, but also chemicals in the process,' he said. From the time plastic is created from fossil fuels like oil and gas, it's harming the environment as a carbon pollutant. During the manufacturing process, it can harm worker health, and when it's used by consumers, it can poison them. Once plastic enters the environment, it just continues to break down into smaller and smaller pieces, which are commonly found in the soil, air and ocean. These fragments can then accumulate organic pollutants, heavy metals and bacteria. They are consumed by plants, fish and terrestrial animals and are absorbed into humans. Plastic has been found in breast milk, male genitalia, our blood and brains. 🐟 Detail in beach photo proves $17 billion issue 🚚 Simple bin mistake forces entire truckload of recycling to be dumped in landfill 🏡 Dangerous plastic discovery made 30cm under garden It's hard to avoid plastics. Silicone has been marketed as an alternative, but Wagner describes this as 'greenwashing' because it's also a plastic of which very little is known. Even when we buy canned food or drinks, the inside is lined with a thin layer of plastic. The same goes for many cardboard takeaway food containers, so when hot, fatty and oily food is placed inside, it can increase the leaching of chemicals. It can be difficult for consumers to make changes to their lifestyle, but Wagner said simple changes like no longer using plastic cutlery and other single-use items can reduce exposure. Plastic use is predicted to increase in the coming decades, so he argues it's necessary for regulators to urgently act. 'We need to increase transparency around chemical composition in plastics. I would argue the public deserves to know which chemicals they're involuntarily exposed to via all the plastic products we use,' Wagner said. Love Australia's weird and wonderful environment? 🐊🦘😳 Get our new newsletter showcasing the week's best stories.
Russia Today
26-05-2025
- Politics
- Russia Today
EU could end protections for Ukrainian immigrants
EU member states are reportedly preparing to reevaluate the legal status of Ukrainian refugees who live in the bloc, Euractiv reported on Monday, citing an EU diplomat. Discussions on a potential exit from the Temporary Protection Directive (TPD) may begin as early as June. Brussels invoked the TPD shortly after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in early 2022. Originally established in 2001, the directive offers a broad array of benefits, including residence permits, housing, access to employment, education, healthcare, financial benefits and social services. While the program was initially set to expire in March 2025, it has recently been extended until March 2026. Talks around 'exit strategies' are intensifying behind the scenes amid a 'shifting geopolitical landscape,' the unnamed diplomat told Euractiv. The issue is expected to be a central focus at the bloc's upcoming Justice and Home Affairs Council meeting scheduled for June 12–13. Although most member states support continuing the program for now, Euractiv noted, legal experts warn that further extensions may stretch the directive's original intent. 'We're already on thin ice with the last prolongation,' Martin Wagner, a senior policy adviser at the International Centre for Migration Policy Development, told the outlet. 'A straightforward reading of the directive would mean that after three years, it's over.' Wagner stressed the need for 'a real discussion about alternatives and how to exit temporary protection in one way or another,' pointing out that the directive was never intended as a long-term solution. Another anonymous diplomat warned that the EU risks 'overwhelming national asylum systems — exactly what the TPD was meant to prevent.' According to Wagner the current number of beneficiaries is 'multiple times more than what countries usually handle,' calling the status quo 'an incredible burden.' The debate comes amid growing challenges faced by member states in managing the large-scale influx of Ukrainian refugees. As of March 2025, over 4.3 million Ukrainians had been granted temporary protection in the EU, according to Eurostat data. While Brussels has maintained that continued support is essential, several governments are reconsidering the level of assistance they can provide. Germany, currently hosting more than 1.2 million Ukrainian refugees, has begun scaling back welfare benefits due to sustainability concerns. Meanwhile, Poland has opposed taking in additional migrants under the EU's newly proposed migration pact. More Ukrainians fleeing the conflict have reportedly migrated to Russia than any there country. According to a law enforcement official as cited by TASS, 5.5 million people had migrated as of 2023.
Yahoo
26-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
EU to decide on next steps regarding temporary protection for Ukrainians in June, Euractiv reports
The European Union is planning to consider further steps concerning the temporary protection status granted to Ukrainian citizens who were forced to flee the country due to the war. Relevant proposals are expected to emerge in June. Source: European Pravda, citing Euractiv Details: When the EU activated the Temporary Protection Directive in March 2022, it was a provisional measure: an immediate collective response to people fleeing Russia's war against Ukraine. Initially, the directive allowed only two extensions, capping protection at three years until March 2025. The European Commission later extended this to March 2026 by adopting a more lenient interpretation. Now, discussions behind closed doors regarding possible "exit strategies" are gaining momentum, one EU diplomat said, referring to the shifting geopolitical landscape. Euractiv has learned that ministers are considering a one-year extension of temporary protection, likely to be accompanied by a non-legislative statement from member states outlining a phased withdrawal of the protection. Member states may discuss the issue as early as 12-13 June during the Justice and Home Affairs Council meeting, where it is expected to be on the agenda. Most member states support the extension, but experts warn that there are limited legal options for going further. Martin Wagner, senior policy advisor at the International Centre for Migration Policy Development, said that the EU is already on "thin ice" with the last extension, adding that a strict interpretation of the directive would mean it expires after three years. Wagner noted that since this has not happened, "a serious conversation is needed about alternatives and how to exit from temporary protection one way or another". Without a clear exit plan, the directive could backfire, another EU diplomat warned. The official said that if a way out of the protection system is not provided, the risk of overloading national asylum systems will emerge – the very thing the directive was meant to prevent. The EU must now develop a transition strategy for those wishing to stay and those wanting to return, Wagner said, noting that some recommendations from the Commission and the Council will be needed to help member states manage this transition. One scenario could involve narrowing the scope of the protection. This may mean excluding individuals who have returned to Ukraine permanently from re-entering the programme after a few months, or barring newly arrived individuals from receiving benefits under the current rules. Another option under discussion is simply doing nothing – a risky move, as experts warn it could prove costly. A further, albeit unlikely, scenario would be the creation of a new legal instrument. This idea was first proposed by Lodewijk Asscher, former Dutch minister and special advisor to the Commission on Ukraine, who suggested a so-called "reconstruction permit" – a temporary residence permit valid for up to 10 years. However, every option – whether narrowing eligibility or introducing a new legal tool, mandatory or not – comes with its own complexities. Wagner said that interpretation of these measures will not be easy. Background: It was recently reported that as of 1 May, Ukrainian war refugees who are not registered residents of Tallinn are no longer eligible for free public transport in the Estonian capital. Meanwhile, the Romanian government has extended its humanitarian support and assistance for vulnerable groups displaced from the conflict zone in Ukraine until 31 December 2025. Support Ukrainska Pravda on Patreon!
The Guardian
09-05-2025
- Health
- The Guardian
Plastics in everyday objects may disrupt sleep in same way as caffeine, study finds
Chemicals in everyday plastics may disrupt the body's natural 24-hour sleep-wake cycle and circadian rhythm in a way similar to coffee, which increases the risk of sleep disorders, diabetes, immune problems, and cancer, new in vitro research shows. The study looked at chemicals extracted from a PVC medical feeding tube and a polyurethane hydration pouch, like those used by long distance runners. PVC and polyurethanes are also used in everything from kids toys to food packaging to furniture. The findings showed for the first time how plastic chemicals likely wreak havoc on cell signals that regulate the body's internal clock, throwing it off by up to 17 minutes. The internal clock is 'incredibly important for physiology and overall health', though more research is needed to know the precise consequences of exposure, said Martin Wagner, a study co-author and plastic chemical researcher with the Norwegian Institute of Science and Technology. 'This study adds to the increasing body of evidence that plastics contain compounds that cause a wide range of toxic effects,' the authors wrote in the peer-reviewed study published in Environmental International. 'A fundamental shift in the design and production of plastics is essential to ensure their safety.' The circadian rhythm is the molecular clock that regulates alertness and tiredness in relation to daylight and the dark. Shifting rhythms are linked to increases in the risk of obesity, dementia, and cardiovascular disease, among other issues. Research into plastic chemicals' toxicity most often focuses on how chemicals like phthalates and bisphenol impact the endocrine system and hormone-related effects, which can take years to manifest. The new paper looked for an impact through a different biological pathway: cells. It checked for adverse effects on the adenosine receptor, which is a key component in cellular control of the internal cock that takes part in relaying signals that regulate circadian rhythm. The biological process of how the plastic chemicals impact the body is similar to caffeine in its effects on the circadian rhythm and adenosine receptor. Caffeine deactivates the adenosine receptor, thus increasing the circadian rhythm and keeping us awake. The plastic chemicals activate the adenosine receptor, but also to have a similar effect in keeping us awake. The receptor is in the brain and 'sends signals to the body that say 'the sun is coming up – let's start the day',' Wagner said. But when the adenosine receptor is activated by the chemicals, it may not relay the message, delaying the body's natural physiological processes. While the chemicals aren't as potent as caffeine, their impact on the cellular processes happens much more quickly than plastics' impacts on hormones, Wagner said. What this means for the body is unclear, but it's probably not good, Wagner said. 'We don't know the significance of it and you could say 'Oh it's just 15 minutes so it's not a big deal', but it's such a tightly controlled clock that it's a significant shift,' he added. The study was done in vitro, meaning on human cells in a lab, and Wagner said the next step is to look at how the chemicals affect zebrafish, which have some similar physiological processes in their brains to humans. Future research will also look into which chemicals in plastic and PVC are impacting the sleep-wake cycle. PVC can contain any of 8,000 chemicals, some of which aren't intentionally added but are by-products of the production process, so the material is incredibly complex and difficult to manage. The findings of each new study will be used to pressure lawmakers to enact regulations, and to try to convince industry to remove the chemicals from the plastic, Wagner said.
