In a recent revelation, a comprehensive study has brought to light the profound economic burden imposed by hormone-disruptive plastic chemicals on the U.S. healthcare system, with costs exceeding a staggering $249 billion in 2018 alone. These chemicals, renowned for their endocrine-disrupting properties, are alarmingly linked to chronic diseases and premature deaths, sparking a call for a more extensive societal discourse on the genuine costs of plastic use and its far-reaching impact on public health.
The lead author of the study, Dr. Leonardo Trasande, a distinguished professor at NYU Langone Health, underscores the critical health threats posed by these chemicals. From cancer to brain damage in children, obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and premature deaths in adults, the study paints a stark picture of the interconnectedness between plastics and endocrine-disrupting chemicals. This prompts a compelling reconsideration of the societal costs borne due to the continued production and consumption of plastics in the United States.
The study delves into the various phases of exposure to these chemicals, emphasizing acute, continuation, and maintenance phases. It draws an analogy to the discontinuation of antidepressants during specific phases, potentially leading to antidepressant discontinuation syndrome and resulting in uncomfortable symptoms. The research encourages individuals to carefully evaluate their readiness, engage in thorough consultations with healthcare professionals, and remain mindful of potential stressors before deciding to halt antidepressant use.
Identifying four prominent groups of chemicals used in plastic production – flame retardants (PBDE), phthalates, bisphenols (BPA and BPS), and per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) – the study sheds light on their extensively studied endocrine-disrupting properties. These chemicals are known to wreak havoc on developmental, reproductive, immune, and cognitive systems, contributing to significant health costs. The expenses associated with neurobehavioral effects, reproductive problems, and increased risks of cancer, cardiovascular issues, and premature deaths form a substantial portion of the economic burden highlighted by the study.
While the study primarily focuses on a subset of plastic-related chemicals, it doesn’t overlook the staggering diversity within the realm of plastic production. There are over 16,000 different types of chemicals utilized in plastics production, with more than 13,000 identified in a United Nations report. The dearth of data on many of these chemicals raises concerns about unknown health implications, underlining the urgency for a comprehensive understanding of the risks associated with plastic use.
The overarching aim of the study is to kickstart a societal discussion about the pervasive use of plastics and the accompanying health risks. It advocates for a paradigm shift in perspective, urging policymakers, businesses, and consumers alike to recognize the significance of regulating these chemicals and mitigating their adverse impact on public health. The study’s emphasis on a true cost accounting model, aligning with the “polluter pays” principle, seeks to revolutionize how we approach the economic aspects of plastic production.
As the study highlights the substantial economic burden of plastic-related health costs, it catalyzes a reevaluation of the prevailing approach to plastic production and consumption. The ensuing discussion has the potential to serve as a catalyst for heightened awareness, policy alterations, and the adoption of sustainable practices aimed at minimizing the adverse health effects of plastics on both individuals and society as a whole. The study serves as a clarion call, urging collective action to address the hidden costs and health repercussions of our reliance on plastic in the modern world.
Are you aware of the issues presented by dietary microplastics? Leave your thoughts in the comments below.