54 minutes ago, CharonY said:

While there are animal and in vitro studies, reproducible harmful effects are to my knowledge mostly on the high but are also difficult to distinguish from, e.g. general inflammatory responses (e.g. induced by diet). I have not doubt that less exposure is better (as always) but not certain how high I would rank it in terms of stuff we are exposed to every day. I would put home air quality higher, for example.

Me, too, but I'm curious about foreign materials that don't seem to depart tissues once lodged in them. Diesel exhaust of the sub-micron variety is one, plastics another. Many things that are nasty can be expelled after a time, like chelation of heavy metals or flushing out of toxic chemicals. Submicron particulates raise questions of where they go after passing through alveolar membranes or intestinal villi, and how long they stay. That seems like an area for further research, given that the plastic nanoparticles just keep coming no matter where you live. Antarctic samples have this stuff.

1 hour ago, exchemist said:

Yes, it takes longer than a teabag to brew, as the leaves are whole or in big pieces rather than "dust". But then tea is meant to be something relaxing, that you stop what you are doing to enjoy, so a few minutes to get it right should not be an issue. Same general idea as pouring Irish stout, I suppose.

Just a thought - not all teabag teas are leaf teas. Some are made from ground seeds e.g.—> anise, fennel, fenugreek. Quite a few are made from rhizomes/roots such as —> burdock, dandelion, ginger, ginseng, licorice, marshmallow, turmeric and valerian. While others are made from tree-barks e.g.—> birch, cinammon, pine. A few are made from both the bark and roots of a particular plant —> e.g sassafras.

My wife told me that she recently went out for a coffee with a friend who got herself a Turmeric Latte - It’s a brave new world out there !

Edited May 17May 17 by toucana
typo - 'others' p.2

3 minutes ago, toucana said:

Just a thought - not all teabag teas are leaf teas. Some are made from ground seeds e.g.—> anise, fennel, fenugreek. Quite a few are made from rhizomes/roots such as —> burdock, dandelion, ginger, ginseng, licorice, marshmallow, turmeric and valerian. While other are made from tree-barks e.g.—> birch, cinammon, pine. A few are made from both the bark and roots of a particular plant —> e.g sassafras.

My wife told me that she recently went out for a coffee with a friend who got herself a Turmeric Latte - It’s a brave new world out there !

Yeah but none of those is actually tea. They are infusions that are called “tea” colloquially and for marketing purposes but they are not real tea. The French call them tisanes, but in English we don’t seem to have a name that does them justice.

5 minutes ago, exchemist said:

Yeah but none of those is actually tea. They are infusions that are called “tea” colloquially and for marketing purposes but they are not real tea. The French call them tisanes, but in English we don’t seem to have a name that does them justice.

Yes - strictly speaking the word 'tea' should refer to infusions made with camellia sinensis, and those made with any other plant should be called 'herbal teas' or 'tisanes'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea

Many of those I mentioned are however sold in teabag form in our local supermarkets here in UK.

5 hours ago, TheVat said:

Me, too, but I'm curious about foreign materials that don't seem to depart tissues once lodged in them. Diesel exhaust of the sub-micron variety is one, plastics another. Many things that are nasty can be expelled after a time, like chelation of heavy metals or flushing out of toxic chemicals. Submicron particulates raise questions of where they go after passing through alveolar membranes or intestinal villi, and how long they stay. That seems like an area for further research, given that the plastic nanoparticles just keep coming no matter where you live. Antarctic samples have this stuff.

Yes, the bioaccumulation is pretty much the main thing that creates concerns, mostly related to long-term exposure. Plastics are not the only example, but essentially all non-biodegradable products, like PFAS fall into that category. I have worked on the latter and it took many years to accumulate enough evidence to link them to unfavorable outcomes. For plastics we are still fairly far away though right now the hype is a bit outpacing the evidence. That being said, it might chance in a decade. However, a bit of a difference to me is that while plastics and PFAS have gained use since the 50s the evidence we have seems to suggest that PFAS exposure increased since the 70s markedly, especially among higher income folks.

While we lack the historic data on nanoplastics, there is good reason to believe that our exposure was higher for a longer time, considering all the routine contact with plastics we have. It is possible that there is also an accelerated exposure, but AFAIK there is no longitudinal data. The reason why that is relevant is that in the PFAS study we were able to identify groups of folks who had overall lower exposure, even when accounting for age and other factors. With plastics my suspicion is that it is going to be very difficult. Folks with low plastic exposure are likely going to have a fairly radically different lifestyle, as it is just so unavoidable. It is then difficult to assess if any differences in health are due to plastic exposure or something else. The main toxicity that was found are leachates from the particulates though it is unclear of small particulates are an issue in itself. In that regard one should highlight that we got a lot of debris in our bodies at any given time and I don't think that we have good information of how problematic they are and how much plastics would add on top.

For other chemicals in homes, like certain VOCs, we do know that while they may be less bioaccumulative, they can be present in homes at rather high concentrations (most homes are very good at concentrating volatile toxins). The same goes for particulates that are getting inhaled and there is pretty strong evidence and knowledge regarding mechanisms of harm for those issues.

12 hours ago, CharonY said:

Folks with low plastic exposure are likely going to have a fairly radically different lifestyle, as it is just so unavoidable. It is then difficult to assess if any differences in health are due to plastic exposure or something else.

Yep, whenever I try to formulate some idea of a long running cohort study, it crashes into the massively multiple vectors for plastics exposure and difficulty of clearly identifying a cohort. Say one looked at people who had copper plumbing (and drank tap water ) and another group that had PVC or PEX plumbing - well, people in N America move around and live in several dwellings, so they may get their water through various kinds of piping over a lifetime. And some drink bottled water, some eat and drink in restaurants more frequently, some heat microwave dinners that come in plastic trays subjected to heat as they contain the food, some cook only in steel or glass, etc.

And as you note, the lifestyle purity would be rare and it would be hard to find willing participation. How many people live in cabins in backwoods Montana, growing their own food in low-plastic residue soil, using copper/steel plumbing, buy no groceries with plastic packaging, and of course get no more exercise and have no other healthy habits that stand out from a more conventional cohort? It would be hopeless, a mess of cause and effect, a Gordian knot.

12 hours ago, CharonY said:

For other chemicals in homes, like certain VOCs, we do know that while they may be less bioaccumulative, they can be present in homes at rather high concentrations (most homes are very good at concentrating volatile toxins).

Formaldehyde off-gassing really grew into a problem in the eighties and nineties here, as new houses were better sealed and more pressed or composite wood products were used. At this point, my partner and I are outliers, living in a 1906 house that is inherently leaky to outside air no matter how much I do. (well I guess I could tear it down to just studs and rafters, and then rebuild all the walls and foundation and replace all the windows, but it might be cheaper just to buy a newer house with better sealing) So we have little concern about VOCs, but also more vulnerable to smoke infiltration from wildfires. And wildfires are proving to be a hell brew of PM 2.5 particulates. Again, discerning causes and effects is quite the challenge.

Appreciate your post - if you've done work on PFAS, then you've really grappled with all these issues.

18 hours ago, toucana said:

Quite a few are made from rhizomes/roots such as —> burdock, dandelion, ginger, ginseng, licorice, marshmallow, turmeric and valerian.

If anyone hasn't tried valerian root infusions, please be sure to blend only small proportion of valerian with other herbs that are flavorful. By itself, valerian tastes like s-t scraped off sweaty feet. And it is quite potent. Small proportions, unless you like waking up on the floor.

1 hour ago, TheVat said:

Appreciate your post - if you've done work on PFAS, then you've really grappled with all these issues.

Yeah my lab was too ahead of the curve and funding dried up. Now it is an issue everywhere...

1 hour ago, TheVat said:

Formaldehyde off-gassing really grew into a problem in the eighties and nineties here, as new houses were better sealed and more pressed or composite wood products were used. At this point, my partner and I are outliers, living in a 1906 house that is inherently leaky to outside air no matter how much I do.

There are also concerns like air contaminants from roads and traffic or volatiles generated by cooking. It is one of the issues where the concentrations and levels are of concern, but solutions are difficult as they very much cut into lifestyles or are simply not addressible. A recent issue in the news were gas stoves, for example. Then you got the ongoing release of particulates including from mud or other building materials as well as carpet, or textiles. Luckily I don't work in this field, but I helped out a colleague in biological interpretation of data many years back and, well, homes are filthy. I try not to think too much about it.

Checked my own favourite brand. Interesting FAQ that has a ring of honesty about it.

Taylors Impact

Progress on our plant-based tea bags

We're working towards removing all oil-based plastic from our tea bags, moving towards plant based alternatives.

Obviously a bit of a dilemma as to the biodegradability of PLA. I have to admit to a leaning towards pyrolysis as the most credible disposal route (short of a simple ban on manufacture/ import) for all persistent polymers.

https://www.taylorsimpact.com/environmental-footprint/products-packaging/products-and-plastics/plastic-in-tea-bags