I've spent years drumming on about microplastics, and I've just learned the research is flawed in a critical way that invalidates the research. I KNOW it sounds insane, but read the research I link.

Before you continue, read the studies

1. Explaining risk perception of microplastics: Results from a representative survey in Germany - An initial warning, telling researchers to be careful because their gloves shed microplastics contaminating samples.

Still, in all but two microplastics studies, these gloves were used.

2. Nitrile and latex gloves may cause overestimation of microplastics, U-M study reveals

It turns out that most microplastics research is wrong. You can test anything for microplastics and get a positive result. The longer you spend manipulating the sample with gloves, the worst the risk.

This is why microplastics research had such high margins or uncertainty.

Note: This does not invalidate all microplastics research.

Research into hormone disruption is valid. Research into effects on animals, that consume plastic, is valid. But studies into microplastics in the air, body, and more? Some may be wrong.

Related to AI because we need to be able to trust that what we are learning is true. We cannot do this without access to information that invalidates previous assumptions. Learning how our world is changing is important, and this includes learning how we were wrong.

Microplastics are still a risk, but this just means climate science and pollutants like forever chemicals move up the list.