How much plastic do you want to swallow?

Not long ago, the news broke that we could be drinking close to a quarter of a million nanoplastics in the average liter of plastic-bottled water. Hard news to swallow, at least for people who expect high quality drinking water when they buy bottled water. It was worse than I had expected too.

When news like that breaks, scientists like me are interviewed. Immediately, the how-bad-is it question arises. Is it healthy to keep buying water in plastic bottles? Is it perhaps, toxicologically speaking, risky? The answer to that question is the exclusive terrain of science, which is delivered to us by our media. And our government has the responsibility to do something about it. Right?

Of course science is important. I spent the last two decades measuring environmental pollution in both nature and in us. We published the first evidence that bits of plastic are flowing in the human bloodstream, polluting the river of life in 2022.

Laboratory tests had already showed that immune system cells which stand guard in our bloodstreams are triggered by plastic particles when they're added experimentally to a blood sample. Under a microscope, immune cells can be seen eagerly attempting to clean up particles.

But thanks to plastic’s strong resistance to biodegradation and other factors, our cells fail to keep the bloodstream plastic free. Inflammation may result. These are important scientific insights, and the research in this field continues.

No paralysis by analysis

As much as I do love and appreciate the science I practice, I’d rather not lose myself in a dogmatic belief in science as the only source of knowledge. It is not the sole lens to see things through. Some things that are worthwhile knowing cannot even be readily measured by the scientific method.

Answers from science take a long time to form due to the rigorous testing that it requires. And the answers are also subject to change, as history shows. The first comprehensive human risk assessment for nanoplastic will take thousands if not millions of manhours to complete, all told. There is no ‘maximum daily intake’ of nanoplastic to cite yet, and that is another reason to consider other sources of knowledge. And to take action to reduce potential harm as soon as the signals start flying that we might have a problem on our hands. That is what is known as the precautionary principle. It allows for action without long delays, avoiding ‘paralysis by analysis’.

Nobody’s buying water to boost their nanoplastic exposure

While we are waiting for the full analysis of risk, people are still buying bottled water for all sorts of reasons. Because it is refreshing, healthy, convenient, and well-advertised. Nobody’s buying water to boost their nanoplastic exposure. People who drink bottled water are going along, trusting the science, the regulatory bodies, and the producers.

Voltaire might not have chosen bottled water

Regarding the question, Do I want to swallow 50 thousand nanoplastics every time I drink a glass of bottled water, do we really need to ask a toxicologist to help us answer that? Could we decide that that is too much for us, even without input from the experts? Does the maximum daily intake of nanoplastic that science will eventually deliver in the future matter? Maybe our knowledge about what we ourselves find acceptable is enough.

In our busy lives and complex world, we run the risk of deferring to experts while dialing down our own thinking. Yet who better to decide than the very person who has their best interests at heart?

Voltaire challenged us to ‘dare to think for ourselves.’ Could it be time that we start to think about scrapping any lifestyle elements that we find that we simply don’t want anymore?

Starting to shift

It is possible to take steps in a different direction, one that is in alignment with our tastes and values. That is how a shift starts. Luckily it is not about waiting for one of our vintage government structures to make another policy that has dubious impact. It is about a personal decision. Anyone can step out of the convenience-oriented, instant gratification society and stop supporting the bottled water companies with their purchases. Instead, it is within our realm of possibilities to increasingly drink water that we have filtered ourselves at home, and stored in non-plastic containers like teapots, pitchers, glass bottles, and stainless steel. It immediately lowers our dependence on bottled water companies and saves a lot of money. And it shows a clear intention to take responsibility for ourselves, and act in accordance with our individual unwillingness to drink nanoplastic, and pay beverage companies for it to boot! This is the kind of intention that can be applied to other lifestyle choices as well.

The satirical Onion News Network reported, ‘Experts agree the only way to avoid harmful microplastics is to be born, live, and die before the invention of plastic in 1862.’ Time travel options aside, it is going to be interesting to see how each of us responds to the challenge of choice in the years to come.

© 2025 Heather Leslie 2025