Problem number one: plasticizers
Every human consumes about 24 kilograms of plastic per year (which, as I said, cannot be dismantled). This is not only a huge ecological problem (in the truest sense of the word) but also extremely harmful to health.
Gradually, more and more influences that plastic and the partial and additional components it contains have on the human body are coming to light.
So-called plasticizers play an essential role in these increasingly numerous findings.
These substances ensure that the plastic parts that we want to use in everyday life remain soft, supple and malleable. The majority of these plasticizers are phthalates.
There are more than 600 known plasticizers, more than 200 of which are considered to be harmful to health.
Plasticizers are an essential part of the plastics industry - the market is coming: for the year 2018 alone, an estimated 7.6 million tons of plasticizers will be produced; the rapidly growing demand must be met.
The problem with plasticizers: We don't see them. At least not immediately - they don't laugh at us in the form of a giant skull on the respective object. We may have a subliminal idea - but let's use the plastic bowl anyway. It is just practical.
In the process, plasticizers reach our direct environment - and our body - unnoticed by us. Because many of our everyday products are mixed with phthalates to make the plastics last longer: Flip-flops, floor coverings, shower curtains, children's toys, shoe soles, textiles, lacquers, paints, cosmetics, tablet capsules...
The dangerous thing about plasticizers is that they have a hormone-like structure, which is related to the female sex hormone estrogen - which the human body perceives as its own sex hormone.
The body - and in particular the male - reacts immediately: sperm production decreases significantly, which can lead to infertility. The film "Plastic Planet" vividly depicts a certain type of fish that suddenly produced a new genus in a river enriched with plasticizers: Intersex fish, fish on which the plastics had had such an effect that they no longer had a clearly identifiable sex. We can consider what this could mean for humans.
It has also long been proven that plasticizers can be absorbed through the skin - and stored in body fat. The result: we become fat. And we can't even do anything about it, at least not in the classic sense of wrong eating habits and lack of exercise.
It becomes particularly problematic when it comes to our offspring - who are already in close exchange and contact with the mother's fatty tissue at the earliest stage of development: Any phthalates that have accumulated in the mother's fatty tissue are transferred to the child in the course of pregnancy and have ample opportunity to accumulate there before the child even had its first plastic toy in its hand.
Also included in the baggage of the softeners: Promoting cancer risk, suspected alteration of human DNA, promotion of diabetes, lack of concentration, drop in IQ, asthma and allergies.
On the one hand, only a fraction of the previously known phthalates have undergone in-depth chemical testing - and on the other hand, only a fraction of the plasticizers used in the plastics industry are known. The responsible companies do not disclose their recipes - they argue here with trade and industry secrets.
So it is still completely unclear what effects these plastics actually have on our health - but the little we know so far does not give us a good idea.
The following should also be essential for our consumer behavior: in different countries, there are different strict criteria with regard to the threshold value and the use of plasticizers - an important aspect in times of globalization.
In particular, when it comes to the preserves: until 2007, a large part of the burden of a particular plasticizer (DEHP) could also be absorbed through diet: High-fat, industrially processed foods were preferably packaged in packaging containing this substance. After it had been investigated that people who preferred to eat these foods had an increased exposure to plasticizers, a corresponding law was passed and politically counteracted. (4) If, however, imported products are then contaminated to a much higher value, the company's own stricter regulations are of little use.
Problem number 2: BPA
BPA is the abbreviation for Bisphenol A - one of the most discussed plastics on the market. And rightly so: it is one of the most widely produced industrial chemicals in the world - 3.8 million tons of it are produced every year.
BPA is often referred to as a plasticizer for plastic products, but strictly speaking it is simply a basic building block of the plastic polycarbonate.
BPA intervenes extremely strongly and quickly in the hormone balance - even the smallest amounts are sufficient to strain the sensitive balance in the human body. This is especially true for the little ones among us: BPA has been and is particularly popular in children's toys, baby drinking bottles and kitchen utensils - in objects that are always and permanently in contact with the mouth and/or the intake of food (we only think of how often everything that does not belong in our eyes ends up in the baby's mouth).
If BPA enters our body (our blood circulation, our fat cells), it causes, according to previous findings, similar harm to that caused by plasticizers: it promotes obesity, increases the risk of cancer and is suspected of causing damage to the central nervous system. Since 2010, at least the use of BPA in baby drinking bottles has therefore been prohibited in Germany - other EU member states, including Denmark and Sweden, are currently pushing for a comprehensive ban on this plastic.
Important: As is always the case with studies, those who deal with the effects of BPA and plasticizers, in general, are also highly controversial. Much of the data collected has been targeted at environmental organizations that are directly suspected of overinterpreting results. In general, skeptics cautiously speak of a "possible link" between BPA and phthalates and various adverse effects on human health. One is not sure whether corresponding experiments/observations on animals can also be transferred to humans - and in general, the data situation is very poor. However, I am of the opinion that suspicion alone is terrible, that the possibility alone should make us think a lot - because too much is at stake here.
The reason why BPA is still not banned, despite all concerns, is that the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has set a higher limit for BPA-contaminated products than many studies have already shown to be questionable. The opinion that the dose makes the poison still seems to prevail here - although the opposite has long been suspected.
How can you protect yourself?
The bad news first of all: There is no comprehensive protection.
In a world that is literally flooded with plastic, which is a plastic planet, we cannot escape the effects of these plastics - as much as we would like to and as much as we strive.
But we can be vigilant in our daily lives, detect possible plastic traps and avoid those elements for which there are alternatives and/or which - if we are honest - we actually don't need at all.
Here are some suggestions:
- Replaced the plastic toothbrush with a degradable alternative - there are now many suppliers where you can buy bamboo toothbrushes.
- Changing from plastic bottles to water bottles - has there ever been a nicer bottle than the Soulbottle?
- Leave the plastic bag at the supermarket and switch to the super-cool, sustainable hipster jute bag.
- To avoid materials that smell of "chemical" or "plastic" - softeners have already begun to dissolve!
- Do not use plastic kitchen utensils - how quickly did a scratch get in? And any damage makes it easier for unwanted materials to come off the material...
- Do without plastic toys - there are beautiful toys made of wood!
- Buy unpacked, if possible. Fruit and vegetables can also be found without packaging in the supermarket or even better: on the regional market. For other foods and things of everyday use, unpackaged shops help out. (Note: Of course, as a consumer you can't control the extent to which the unpackaged goods you buy have not come into contact with plastic during transport - but the probability is high that these products have not spent as much time in plastic containers as the conventionally shrink-wrapped ones.)
Apart from the many small individual things that you can do to reduce plastic consumption, there is a whole new keyword in circulation in industrial circles: Bioplastics.
This refers to plastics made from "natural materials" - those that are produced on a plant-based basis. Among the materials under discussion are succinic acid and - in general - maize. The packaging industry senses a gap in the market - and a business worth billions. Some garbage bag manufacturers are already advertising 100% bioplastics, as are packaging companies that now offer their plastic pellets made from corn starch.
The fundamental question is whether switching to a different raw material solves the problem - or whether it combats symptoms rather than the root of the problem.
Because - and this is something we urgently need to bear in mind: Maize is actually a foodstuff. If it is now cultivated just so that we in the western industrial nations have a clear conscience when throwing away and consuming, then that is wrong and wrong. People on the other side of the world suffer as a result - the same amount of corn that has to be used for the production of "sustainable" packaging pellets could theoretically also be used for food production - and thus in practice feed people.
If we switch to bioplastics, we just postpone the problem, but we don't solve it. The problem is also called plastic waste and the associated health hazard - but at its core, it is actually consumer madness.
I hope you've gotten a small impression by now that the plastic thing has become a serious problem for us - and will continue to be.