Almanac A1C

Microplastics and Nanoplastics in the Brain: A Pathway to Chronic Disease and Accelerated Aging

Posted

by

dr. Karunia Valeriani Japar

Table of Contents
Keywords: , , , ,

Introduction

Microplastics and nanoplastics are typically defined as solid plastic particles that are not biodegradable, with microplastics generally considered to range up to 5 mm in size and nanoplastics occupying the much smaller, submicrometre range. Although exact cut-offs vary between agencies and research groups, a commonly used working definition places microplastics between roughly 1-5,000 mm and nanoplastics below 1mm, sometimes further restricted to the 1-1,000 nm nanoscale interval to align with definitions used for engineered nanomaterials. These particles are composed of conventional polymers such as polyethylene, polypropylene, polystyrene, polyvinyl chloride, and polyethylene terephthalate, and can be either intentionally manufactured at small sizes (primary microplastics, such as resin pellets or cosmetic microbeads) or generated through fragmentation, abrasion, and weathering of larger plastic items (secondary microplastics). Their environmental persistence arises from the intrinsic chemical stability and hydrophobicity of polymer chains, the incorporation of additives that resist degradation, and the fact that physical fragmentation usually produces ever-smaller particles rather than complete mineralization, allowing them to accumulate across terrestrial, freshwater, and marine ecosystems over decades to centuries.

From a historical perspective, the current “invisible” microplastic burden is the downstream consequence of a rapid plastic revolution that began in the mid-20th century. Global plastic production has risen from well under 2 million metric tons annually in the 1950s to hundreds of millions of tons per year in the 21st century, driven by packaging, textiles, construction, automotive, and medical applications that prize plastics for being lightweight, durable, and inexpensive. For several decades, this expansion was accompanied by linear “take-make-dispose” waste management, limited recycling capacity and widespread leakage of plastic items into the environment, particularly into rivers and oceans. As these macroplastics are exposed to ultraviolet radiation, mechanical abrasion, temperature fluctuations, and biological activity, they progressively fragment into microplastics and eventually nanoplastics, which are now detected in sea ice, deep-sea sediments, agricultural soils, indoor and outdoor air, and diverse food and water matrices. This transition from visible litter to microscopic particles has effectively transformed plastic pollution into a diffuse, chronic exposure scenario: plastics are no longer only a coastal or waste-management issue but a pervasive component of the global exposome that intersects with human health, ecosystem function, and, increasingly, discussions of healthy longevity.

Types, Sources, and Pathways

Primary microplastics are typically defined as plastic particles that are intentionally manufactured at small sizes or released directly into the environment in microscopic form, whereas secondary microplastics originate from the breakdown of larger plastic items. Primary particles include industrial resin pellets (nurdles) used as feedstock in plastic manufacturing, microbeads formerly used in personal care products, and microfibers shed from synthetic textiles during washing and wear. These particles enter wastewater streams through household drains, industrial effluents, and stormwater, and many pass through conventional treatment system to reach rivers, coastal waters, and soils. Secondary microplastics are generated when largest plastic objects such as packaging, bottles, fishing gear, bags, and household goods fragment under the combined influence of ultraviolet radiation, mechanical abrasion, temperature fluctuations, and biological activity. Rather than fully degrading, macroplastics gradually disintegrate into progressively smaller fragments, resulting in heterogeneous mixtures of shapes (fibres, films, fragments, foams, rubbery particles) and sizes that are now ubiquitous in marine, freshwater, terrestrial, and atmospheric compartments [1,2,3,4].

Environmental and consumer sources of microplastics can be grouped into several dominant categories with quantifiable contributions. Synthetic textiles are a major source: washing a single synthetic garment can release thousands of microfibres, and laundry effluent has been identified as a significant pathway for microplastics into aquatic environments. Vehicle tyres and associated road wear particles represent another large source, as abrasion of tyre treads and road markings continually generates rubber and polymer-rich particles that accumulate in road dust and are transported via runoff and atmospheric dispersion. Packaging and single-use plastics, including bags, bottles, food containers, and films, contribute both primary pellet losses along supply chains and secondary fragments as discarded items weather in the environment. Personal care product and cosmetics containing microbeads of polymer-based abrasives, marine and antifouling coatings that shed particles from ship hulls and offshore structures, and general “city dust” from building materials, paints, and urban infrastructure further increase the microplastic load in air, soil, and water. Degraded microplastic waste from unmanaged landfills, open dumping, riverine litter, and mismanaged coastal waste provides a continuous reservoir for secondary microplastic generation, particularly in densely populated and rapidly urbanizing regions [1,2,3,4,5].

In daily life, microplastics are now detected across multiple exposure media, highlighting the transition from localized pollution to a diffuse, chronic background contaminant. Airborne microplastics, especially fibres from textiles, tyre wear, and construction materials, have been measured in both outdoor urban air and indoor environments, with indoor concentrations often higher due to limited ventilation and continuous shedding from furnishings, carpets, clothing, and household dust. Indoor dust itself can contain substantial microplastic loads, reflecting contributions from synthetic textiles, plastics in electronics and furniture, and fragmentation of household items. Drinking water has been shown to contain microplastic particles in both tap and bottled sources; multiple surveys reviewed by the World Health Organization report microplastics in treated drinking water and its sources, as well as generally higher and more variable concentrations in bottled water, presumably due to contamination from bottling processes, caps, and packaging. Food represents another important route of exposure: microplastics have ben documented in commercial seafood species, table salt, honey, and various agricultural products, and can be further introduced during food processing and preparation through contact with plastic packaging, cutting boards, and cooking utensils. Household products and food-contact materials, including plastic containers, films, single-use packaging, and kitchenware, can release significant number of microplastic particles, particularly under mechanical stress, heat, or contact with acidic or fatty foods, thereby integrating microplastics into routine domestic practices around food storage, cooking and serving [2,5,6,7,8,9,10,11].

Human Exposure and Internal Distribution

Human exposure to microplastics and nanoplastics occurs through three principal routes: ingestion, inhalation, and dermal contact, with ingestion and inhalation regarded as quantitatively dominant pathways and dermal absorption recognized as an emerging concern requiring further investigation. Ingestion represents the primary route, driven by widespread contamination of the food chain and drinking water; estimates suggest that Americans consume between 39,000 and 52,000 microplastics particles annually through diet alone, and this figure rises to 74,000-113,000 particles when bottled water consumption is factored in. contaminated seafood, table salt, honey, beverages, and agricultural produce constitute major dietary sources, while microplastics are also introduced during food preparation and packaging through contact with plastic cutting boards, containers, and films, particularly under conditions of heat, mechanical stress, or contact with acidic or fatty foods. Inhalation is another significant exposure pathway, as microplastics, especially fibres from synthetic textiles, tyre wear particles, and fragments from building materials are prevalent in both indoor and outdoor air, with indoor concentrations often exceeding outdoor levels due to limited ventilation, continuous shedding from carpets, furnishing, and clothing, and resuspension of settled dust. Particles smaller than 5 mm in aerodynamic diameter and less than 3 mm in width are particularly likely to evade mucociliary clearance in the upper respiratory tract and deposit in the alveolar regions of the lungs, enabling deeper penetration and potential systemic translocation. Dermal contact with microplastics occurs through the use of cosmetics, personal care products, topical medications, and occupational or recreational exposure to contaminated water, soil, and indoor dust, though the intact stratum corneum generally restricts penetration to nanoplastics smaller than approximately 100nm, with additional routes possible via hair follicles, sweat glands, or compromised skin barrier integrity. Medical procedures involving injections, implants, and prosthetic devices have also been identified as emerging routes of direct introduction [10,12,13,14,15,16,17,18].

Once microplastics and nanoplastics breach epithelial barriers in the gastrointestinal tract, respiratory system, or skin, they undergo translocation through the circulatory and lymphatic systems, leading to bioaccumulation in multiple organs and tissues. Detection methods employing pyrolysis gas chromatography, mass spectrometry, attenuated total reflectance Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, and electron microscopy with energy-dispersive spectroscopy have confirmed the presence of microplastics and nanoplastics in human blood, placenta, lungs, liver, kidneys, reproductive organs, and most strikingly, brain tissue. lood samples have revealed microplastics in approximately 77% of tested individuals, confirming systemic circulation of these particles and supporting the hypothesis that nanoscale plastics can cross cellular membranes and enter the bloodstream after bypassing epithelial and endothelial barriers. Placental tissue has been documented to contain median concentrations of approximately 63–126 μg/g, indicating transplacental passage and potential fetal exposure during gestation. Lung tissue contains microplastic fibres and fragments consistent with inhalation exposure, and particles have been identified in sputum and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid, underscoring respiratory deposition and limited clearance. Liver and kidney samples from autopsy studies show concentrations in the range of several hundred micrograms per gram, with liver samples from 2024 exhibiting significantly higher burdens than those from 2016, suggesting temporal increases in environmental exposure and bioaccumulation. Reproductive organs, including testes, have yielded median concentrations of approximately 299–329 μg/g, raising concerns about potential impacts on fertility and endocrine function. Most notably, recent postmortem analyses of human brain tissue, specifically frontal cortex samples, have revealed substantially higher concentrations than any other organ, with levels reaching 3,057 μg/g in 2016 samples and 4,806 μg/g (approximately 0.5% by weight) in 2024 samples, and individual samples as high as 8,861 μg/g; these concentrations are 7–30 times greater than those observed in liver or kidney tissue from the same individuals. Polyethylene was the predominant polymer across all tissues, and brain tissue exhibited a higher relative proportion of polyethylene (approximately 74%) compared to liver and kidney (44–71%), with scanning electron microscopy confirming that brain microplastics and nanoplastics largely present as nanoscale shard-like fragments, possibly reflecting selective uptake or retention of smaller, lipophilic particles that can traverse the blood–brain barrier. Temporal trends between 2016 and 2024 show significant increases in microplastic and nanoplastic concentrations in both liver and brain, independent of age, sex, race, ethnicity, or cause of death, strongly suggesting escalating environmental exposure over recent years [12,19,20,21,22,23].

Mechanisms of Biological Impact

The biological impact of microplastics and nanoplastics is mediated by a complex interplay of physical particle characteristics and chemical constituents, both intrinsic to the polymer matrix and acquired through environmental adsorption. Particle size, shape, and surface area are critical determinants of toxicity: smaller particles, particularly those in the nanoscale range below 1 μm, exhibit higher surface-area-to-volume ratios, increased cellular uptake efficiency, enhanced capacity for reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation, and greater potential for translocation across epithelial and endothelial barriers into systemic circulation and distant organs. Studies in both aquatic organisms and mammalian cell lines consistently demonstrate that nanoplastics induce more severe oxidative stress and activate mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signalling pathways to a greater degree than microplastics, with 50 nm polystyrene particles producing significantly higher ROS levels and phosphorylation of p38 MAPK compared to 6 μm particles. Particle shape also influences biological interactions, with fibres more likely to cause mechanical irritation and chronic inflammation in lung tissue, while sharp-edged fragments may directly compromise cell membrane integrity, forming pores that permit intracellular ROS accumulation, lipid bilayer disruption, and loss of ion homeostasis. Beyond their physical properties, microplastics and nanoplastics function as vectors for chemical stressors, including polymer additives such as plasticizers (phthalates, bisphenols), flame retardants (polybrominated diphenyl ethers), stabilizers, and colorants, as well as environmental pollutants adsorbed onto particle surfaces, including persistent organic pollutants, heavy metals, and pathogenic microorganisms. When ingested or inhaled, these particle-bound chemicals can leach into surrounding tissues, potentiating endocrine disruption, genotoxicity, immune dysregulation, and metabolic disturbances independent of the physical particle effects [24,25,26,27,28,29].

Figure 1. Effects of microplastics on cells via OS [24]

At the cellular and tissue level, microplastic and nanoplastic exposure initiates cascades of oxidative stress, inflammation, and barrier dysfunction through several interrelated mechanisms. The generation of ROS represents a molecular initiating event common to most microplastic exposures: following cellular internalization via endocytosis or phagocytosis, particles compromise mitochondrial membrane potential, increase electron leakage from the respiratory chain, and directly catalyze free radical formation, resulting in lipid peroxidation, DNA strand breaks, protein carbonylation, and activation of redox-sensitive transcription factors such as nuclear factor-κB (NF-κB) and activator protein-1 (AP-1). This oxidative burden activates a branching cascade of inflammatory responses, including upregulation of pro-inflammatory cytokines such as interleukin-1β (IL-1β), IL-6, and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), recruitment of neutrophils and macrophages, and chronic low-grade inflammation that can persist after the initial exposure has ceased. In epithelial barriers, microplastics disrupt tight junction proteins, increase paracellular permeability, and promote epithelial detachment and mucus hypersecretion, resulting in compromised barrier integrity in both the gastrointestinal tract and respiratory epithelium. Gut barrier dysfunction, often termed “leaky gut” allows translocation of commensal bacteria, bacterial metabolites such as lipopolysaccharides, and pro-inflammatory antigens from the lumen into the bloodstream, triggering systemic immune activation and potentially contributing to metabolic endotoxemia. Microplastic exposure also induces significant dysbiosis of the gut microbiome, with shifts in microbial composition characterized by increased abundance of pro-inflammatory taxa such as Staphylococcus, reduced production of short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs) that normally support epithelial barrier function and immune homeostasis, and enhanced biofilm formation by pathogenic bacteria such as Helicobacter pylori, which can accelerate gastric and intestinal inflammation. In the lungs, inhaled microplastics are internalized by alveolar epithelial cells and macrophages, where they inhibit cell cycle progression, induce apoptosis, upregulate inflammatory gene expression, cause lysosomal dysfunction by disrupting acidic pH maintenance, and impair phagocytic clearance, collectively contributing to chronic respiratory inflammation and potential fibrosis. Immune cell interactions with microplastics are size- and polymer-dependent, with smaller nanoplastics more readily internalized by macrophages, dendritic cells, and lymphocytes, leading to altered cytokine profiles, impaired T cell differentiation via inhibition of PKCθ/NF-κB and IL-2 receptor/STAT5 signalling, and potential increases in susceptibility to infection and malignancy [25,28,30,31,32].

Certain populations and life stages exhibit heightened vulnerability to microplastic-induced biological impacts due to unique physiological, immunological, and developmental characteristics. Pregnancy represents a critical window of susceptibility: microplastics detected in placental tissue at concentrations ranging from 63 to 126 μg/g can induce oxidative stress and inflammation in placental cells, impair nutrient and oxygen exchange, disrupt endocrine signaling essential for fetal development, and have been associated with adverse outcomes including reduced birth weight, shortened gestational age, intrauterine growth restriction, and preeclampsia. Maternal exposure to polystyrene microplastics in animal models results in fetal growth restriction, placental inflammation, altered macrophage polarization, disrupted immune balance, reduced umbilical cord length, and transgenerational metabolic and endocrine abnormalities in offspring, underscoring both direct fetal toxicity and long-term programming effects. Infants and young children are particularly vulnerable due to their rapid growth and development, immature detoxification systems, higher food and water intake per unit body weight, hand-to-mouth exploratory behaviors that increase ingestion of household dust and plastic toys, and critical windows for organogenesis, neurodevelopment, and immune system maturation during which environmental insults can have disproportionate and lasting impacts. Older adults may experience increased susceptibility due to age-related decline in antioxidant capacity, chronic low-grade inflammation (inflammaging), comorbid conditions that compromise epithelial barrier integrity, polypharmacy involving plastic-packaged medications, and cumulative lifetime exposure burdens. Individuals with pre-existing chronic cardiometabolic diseases including obesity, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, atherosclerosis and heart failure may be at elevated risk because microplastic-induced oxidative stress, systemic inflammation, endothelial dysfunction, and metabolic dysregulation can exacerbate underlying pathophysiology, as evidenced by associations between microplastic burden in atherosclerotic plaques and increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events. Similarly, patients with chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and pulmonary fibrosis may experience worsened outcomes due to impaired mucociliary clearance, heightened inflammatory responses to inhaled particles, and pre-existing epithelial barrier compromise [24,26,28,33,34,35].

Evidence on Health Outcomes

Emerging epidemiological evidence suggests that microplastic and nanoplastic exposure may contribute to cardiometabolic disease and adverse vascular events, though current data are largely observational and mechanistic causality remains incompletely established. A landmark study in the New England Journal of Medicine (2024) examined atherosclerotic plaques from approximately 300 patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy and found that microplastics were detected in 58% of excised plaques. Patients with microplastics in plaques exhibited a 4.5-fold higher risk of myocardial infarction, stroke, or death from any cause compared to those with plastic-free plaques, with microplastic quantity correlating positively with inflammatory biomarkers including interleukin-6 and tumor necrosis factor-α. A subsequent study in acute coronary syndrome patients reported that blood microplastic concentrations increased progressively from stable patients to those with acute myocardial infarction, correlating with vascular complexity and immune activation markers. However, these studies are inherently limited by their observational design, small sample sizes, and inability to exclude confounding and reverse causality. Preclinical evidence demonstrates that microplastics induce oxidative stress, endothelial dysfunction, and inflammatory responses in vascular cells, lending biological plausibility to observed associations [34,36,37,38].

Reproductive and endocrine health represent emerging domains of concern, with evidence indicating that microplastic exposure may impair fertility and disrupt hormone-dependent processes. Microplastics have been detected in testicular tissue at concentrations of approximately 299–329 μg/g, and animal studies demonstrate that chronic exposure induces reduced sperm count, decreased motility, morphological abnormalities, lower testosterone levels, and oxidative stress-mediated germ cell apoptosis. A multi-site human epidemiological study of over 1,000 men reported significant inverse associations between urinary microplastic biomarkers and sperm concentration, total count, progressive motility, and normal morphology. Microplastics and their additives, particularly phthalates and bisphenol A, function as endocrine-disrupting chemicals hat interfere with steroidogenesis and androgen receptor signalling. In females, animal models demonstrate that microplastic exposure disrupts estrous cycling, reduces ovarian reserve, and decreases implantation rates, primarily through oxidative stress-mediated ovarian damage. Placental accumulation of microplastics is associated with impaired placental development, immune cell imbalances, and adverse pregnancy outcomes including intrauterine growth restriction and preeclampsia [19,23,26,39,40].

Figure 2. Summary of evidence of micro-nanoplastics (MNPs) exposure and impacts on reproduction and development in humans and mammals [40]

Neurocognitive impacts are supported by converging evidence: postmortem analyses document unprecedented brain accumulation reaching up to 0.5% by weight in the frontal cortex, approximately 7–30 times higher than in liver or kidney. Animal studies consistently report that microplastic exposure impairs spatial learning and memory, with deficits linked to hippocampal dysfunction, neuronal degeneration, reduced dendritic spine density, and inhibition of CREB/BDNF signalling pathways essential for synaptic plasticity. Chronic microplastic exposure induces hippocampal oxidative stress, mitochondrial dysfunction, microglial activation, and disrupted neurotransmitter systems; antioxidant interventions successfully reverse both oxidative biomarkers and cognitive deficits. Nanoplastics promote aggregation of alpha-synuclein and amyloid-beta proteins implicated in Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s disease, and developmental exposure produces long-term neurodevelopmental deficits and persistent behavioural abnormalities. Limited human data suggest correlations between environmental plastic exposure and increased prevalence of mild cognitive impairment in older adults, though prospective validation is needed [19,23,41,42,43].

Despite accumulating evidence of microplastic bioaccumulation and plausible biological mechanisms, substantial methodological challenges constrain definitive conclusions. Exposure assessment lacks standardization: different analytical techniques yield inconsistent results, certified reference materials are absent, and interlaboratory comparisons are limited. Human epidemiological studies are predominantly cross-sectional or retrospective, precluding causal inference; confounding by socioeconomic status, dietary patterns, occupational exposures, and comorbidities is pervasive and rarely adequately controlled. Reverse causality cannot be excluded, dose–response relationships and threshold effects remain unclear, and the relative contributions of particle physical properties versus leached chemical additives to toxicity are unknown. Animal studies typically employ exposure doses orders of magnitude higher than estimated human environmental exposures, raising questions about real-world relevance. Key research priorities include development of harmonized analytical methods, establishment of large-scale prospective cohorts with standardized exposure assessment, mechanistic toxicological studies employing environmentally relevant doses, investigation of critical windows and life-stage susceptibility, elucidation of pharmacokinetics in humans, and integration of findings to inform evidence-based risk assessment and public health guidelines [19,23,24,29,30,36,37,38,40,41,42].

Microplastics, Aging, and Wellness

Microplastics and nanoplastics represent a novel and pervasive component of the environmental exposome, the cumulative measure of environmental exposures across the lifespan that may fundamentally interact with biological aging processes through mechanisms involving oxidative stress, chronic inflammation, and cellular senescence. The exposome framework recognizes that human health is shaped not only by genetic factors but also by the complex interplay of chemical, physical, and biological environmental exposures encountered from conception through old age, and microplastics now constitute an unavoidable exposure present in air, water, food, soil, and indoor environments worldwide. Emerging experimental evidence demonstrates that microplastic exposure induces cellular senescence, a hallmark of biological aging characterized by irreversible cell cycle arrest, resistance to apoptosis, altered cellular metabolism, and secretion of pro-inflammatory factors collectively termed the senescence-associated secretory phenotype (SASP). In both in vivo murine models and in vitro human adipose-derived stem cells, microplastic exposure increases senescence-associated β-galactosidase activity, a classical biomarker of senescent cells and upregulates key senescence markers including 16, p21, matrix metalloproteinase 3, high mobility group box 1, and histone H2A.X phosphorylation, alongside markers of DNA damage, nuclear structure compromise, and extracellular matrix remodeling. These cellular aging responses are mechanistically driven by reactive oxygen species generation, which compromises mitochondrial membrane integrity, increases electron leakage from the respiratory chain, triggers lipid peroxidation and DNA strand breaks, and activates redox-sensitive transcription factors such as nuclear factor-κB and activator protein-1. Chronic oxidative stress not only accelerates cellular senescence but also impairs endogenous antioxidant defense systems including superoxide dismutase, catalase, and glutathione creating a positive feedback loop that amplifies oxidative damage and accelerates biological aging. This oxidative burden is compounded by the physical characteristics of microplastics, with smaller nanoplastics exhibiting higher surface-area-to-volume ratios, greater cellular uptake efficiency, and more pronounced induction of mitogen-activated protein kinase signaling pathways that mediate stress responses and inflammatory cascades. The concept of “inflammaging” which include chronic, low-grade, sterile inflammation that accumulates with drives age-related disease is central to understanding how microplastic exposure may interface with biological aging: microplastics activate pro-inflammatory cytokines such as interleukin-6, umor necrosis factor-α, and interleukin-1β, increase macrophage infiltration into tissues, and promote the SASP phenotype in senescent cells, thereby establishing a state of persistent systemic inflammation that accelerates tissue dysfunction, metabolic dysregulation, and multisystem aging [24,25,44,45,46,47].

Figure 3. MNP weathering process, cellular uptake, and consequent oxidative stress in cells [25]

The intersection of microplastic exposure with metabolic and immune health represents a critical frontier in understanding how environmental pollutants may compromise healthy aging and promote age-related chronic diseases. Adipose tissue, a key regulator of energy homeostasis, endocrine function, and systemic metabolism, is particularly vulnerable to microplastic-induced aging: experimental studies reveal that microplastics accumulate in epididymal and inguinal white adipose tissue, where they induce cellular senescence, amplify inflammatory responses, and impair adipogenic differentiation by reducing lipid droplet formation and downregulating critical adipogenic transcription factors including peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPARγ), CCAAT/enhancer-binding protein alpha (C/EBPα), and adiponectin. These microplastic-induced alterations in adipose tissue structure and function contribute to systemic metabolic consequences including dyslipidemia, chronic systemic inflammation, insulin resistance, obesity, type 2 diabetes, and cardiovascular disease, conditions that are themselves hallmarks of accelerated biological aging. Mechanistically, microplastics disrupt gut barrier integrity, promote intestinal dysbiosis characterized by reduced abundance of beneficial short-chain fatty acid-producing bacteria and increased pro-inflammatory taxa, and trigger translocation of bacterial lipopolysaccharides from the gut lumen into systemic circulation, thereby activating immune responses that impair insulin signaling pathways and promote metabolic endotoxemia. Studies in animal models demonstrate that chronic microplastic exposure induces impaired glucose tolerance, hepatic lipid deposition, increased blood insulin concentrations, and dose-dependent dysregulation of pancreatic lipase, cholesterol, and calcium levels, collectively suggesting that microplastics increase the risk of insulin resistance and pancreatitis through metabolic reprogramming of the gut-liver-pancreas axis. Immune system dysregulation induced by microplastics extends beyond metabolic inflammation: microplastic exposure alters macrophage polarization, impairs T cell differentiation and function, increases circulating inflammatory markers, and promotes chronic low-grade inflammation that is strongly associated with aging and age-related diseases including cancer, cardiovascular illness, and diabetes. Importantly, microplastics induce oxidative stress and mitochondrial dysfunction not only in adipose tissue but also in vascular cells, where they upregulate inflammatory factors, decrease lamin A (a key factor in vascular cell senescence), and activate cyclin-dependent kinase 5 (CDK5) in a reactive oxygen species-dependent manner, thereby accelerating vascular aging and potentially contributing to atherosclerosis and cardiovascular events. The convergence of microplastic-induced oxidative stress, inflammaging, cellular senescence, metabolic dysregulation, and immune dysfunction suggests that chronic exposure to these environmental pollutants may fundamentally accelerate biological aging processes and compress the health span, the period of life spent in good health free of chronic disease, thereby positioning microplastic exposure as an emerging public health threat to healthy longevity and wellness aging [25,28,37,44,47,48,49].

Figure 4. In vitro model of macrophage priming and innate immune functions in human monocytes and monocyte-derived macrophages by nanoparticles or MPs [28]

Mitigation: Individual-Level Strategies

Meaningful reduction of microplastic exposure is possible at the individual level by targeting diet, drinking water, indoor air, and consumer choices, while recognizing that complete avoidance is neither realistic nor necessary for risk reduction. The emphasis in a healthy aging and wellness framework is on lowering cumulative burden from high-yield sources (bottled water, heated plastic food contact, synthetic textiles, indoor dust), integrated into broader lifestyle and environmental hygiene practices [50,51,52].

Reducing Dietary and Water Exposure

Evidence indicates that both tap and bottled water contain microplastics, but concentrations are typically higher and more variable in bottled water, especially in single-use polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles. Tap water that meets regulatory standards and has undergone conventional treatment, and ideally point-of-use filtration (e.g., reverse osmosis or fine-pore filters), generally yields lower microplastic loads and simultaneously reduces plastic waste. Practical strategies include [52,53]:

  • Prefer regulated tap water where microbiologically safe; where feasible, use a certified point-of-use filter (e.g., reverse osmosis or fine-pore cartridge) and store water in glass or stainless steel rather than plastic bottles [52,53].
  • Minimize consumption of beverages in single-use plastic bottles and cups; when on the go, choose glass or metal-packaged options or refillable non-plastic bottles [54].
  • Avoid heating food in plastic (microwaving, pouring boiling liquids into plastic, or storing hot/acidic/fatty foods in plastic containers), as heat and mechanical stress accelerate polymer degradation and microplastic release [54,55].
  • Use glass, stainless steel, or ceramic for food storage and reheating, and keep plastic wraps from direct contact with food, especially hot dishes [55].
  • When possible, choose less-processed, minimally packaged foods (fresh produce, grains, legumes) and reduce reliance on ultra-processed, heavily packaged products that involve multiple plastic contact points along the supply chain [9].

Reducing Inhalation and Indoor Exposure

Indoor environments are a major source of inhaled microplastics, largely from synthetic textiles, carpets, upholstery, and dust resuspension. Because adults spend most of their time indoors, targeted changes in ventilation, cleaning habits, and material choices can substantially lower exposure. Key measures include [55,56,57]:

  • Improve ventilation (regularly opening windows when outdoor air quality permits, using exhaust fans in kitchens and bathrooms) to dilute indoor microplastic and particulate concentrations [56,58].
  • Use vacuum cleaners with a HEPA or equivalent high-efficiency filter and a sealed system to capture fine fibres and particulates; supplement with damp mopping and wet-dusting rather than dry dusting, which re-suspends particles into the air [55,56].
  • Consider a room air purifier with a true HEPA filter in bedrooms and main living areas, particularly in homes with significant synthetic textiles, carpets, or high traffic [55,56]
  • Choose home textiles and furnishings made from natural fibres (cotton, linen, wool, hemp, jute) when replacing clothing, rugs, curtains, or upholstery, as synthetic fabrics such as polyester and nylon shed persistent plastic microfibres [59,60].
  • Reduce microfiber shedding from existing synthetic garments by washing full loads at lower temperatures, shortening wash cycles, using front-loading machines when possible, and installing external laundry filters or using in-drum microfiber-capture devices [59,60].

Lifestyle Choices and Consumer Behavior

Individual purchasing and usage patterns strongly influence microplastic exposure, and incremental shifts in consumer behaviour can align environmental sustainability with healthy aging goals. Priorities include [50,55]:

  • Avoid rinse-off cosmetics and personal care products that contain intentionally added microbeads or polymer exfoliants; choose formulations labelled microplastic-free or relying on salt, sugar, or other biodegradable abrasives [6,55].
  • Limit single-use plastics such as bags, straws, cutlery, plates, cups, and small-format packaging; carry reusable bags and food containers made of glass, stainless steel, or high-quality, durable materials that show minimal wear [55].
  • Replace heavily scratched or degraded plastic kitchenware and non-stick cookware (which can release polymer fragments and added chemicals as coatings wear) with more inert options such as stainless steel, cast iron, or high-quality ceramic, and use wooden or metal utensils instead of plastic ones [51,55].
  • When purchasing clothing and household textiles, prioritize durable, natural fibres and avoid highly shedding items such as cheap fleece, brushed polyester blankets, and low-quality fast-fashion garments that release large amounts of microfibres in early wash cycles [60].
  • Integrate microplastic-aware choices into broader lifestyle and wellness strategies such as dietary patterns rich in whole foods and antioxidants, regular physical activity, and sleep hygiene which may help buffer oxidative stress and inflammation associated with cumulative environmental exposures [24,50].

While these strategies cannot eliminate exposure, they can materially reduce microplastic burden from the highest-contribution sources and can be framed within a preventive, exposome-oriented approach to healthy longevity and wellness aging [50].

Clinical and Public Health Practice

Clinical engagement with microplastics fits best within a cautious, exposome-oriented preventive framework rather than as a stand‑alone crisis message. Clinicians can explain that microplastics are ubiquitous, biologically plausible contributors to chronic disease via oxidative stress and inflammation, but that human data are still limited and largely observational, and major agencies currently judge microplastics in drinking water to be a comparatively low concern next to microbial risks. Risk communication should therefore use balanced language like “emerging evidence,” “possible but not proven risks,” “reasonable precaution” and emphasize that many exposure‑reduction steps overlap with core health advice such as improving diet quality, air quality, and physical activity, to avoid both alarmism and false reassurance [7,61,62,63].

In lifestyle and preventive care programs, microplastic counselling can be integrated briefly into existing nutrition, respiratory, and environmental health assessments. For nutrition, clinicians can recommend favouring safe tap or filtered water over routine bottled water, minimizing heating food in plastic, and emphasizing minimally processed, less‑packaged foods, steps that simultaneously improve cardiometabolic risk and reduce plastic contact. For respiratory and indoor environment, suggestions can be bundled with standard particulate/allergen advice: improve ventilation when outdoor air is acceptable, use HEPA‑filter vacuuming and damp‑dusting, and gradually shift toward natural‑fibre textiles to reduce microfiber shedding. In wellness and longevity settings, brief checklists covering water source, plastic food contact, indoor cleaning patterns, and reliance on synthetic “fast fashion” can identify high‑yield changes, while reinforcing that microplastic mitigation complements, rather than replaces, foundational longevity strategies such as blood pressure and glucose control, sleep, movement, and smoking cessation [49,50,51,62,63].

Future Directions and Conclusion

Emerging technological and biomedical responses to microplastic pollution are beginning to appear along the entire source‑to‑body continuum, but most remain at proof‑of‑concept stage and require rigorous validation before widespread adoption. Advanced filtration strategies include upgrades to drinking‑water and wastewater treatment (e.g., membrane bioreactors, ultrafiltration, nanofiltration, activated carbon, electrocoagulation) that can capture a substantial fraction of microplastics, especially larger particles, while raising questions about energy use, cost, and management of captured waste. Material science approaches aim to redesign plastics themselves through genuinely biodegradable polymers, reduced additive complexity, and coatings or manufacturing methods that limit fibre shedding and fragmentation, coupled with innovations in textile engineering (e.g., low‑shed yarns, surface treatments) and product design to reduce mechanical wear over the life cycle. On the biomedical side, early-stage work explores whether targeted antioxidants, anti‑inflammatory strategies, microbiome‑supporting interventions (dietary fibre, polyphenols, probiotic or postbiotic approaches), or enhanced mucociliary and gut‑barrier support might mitigate some downstream impacts of unavoidable exposure, but these concepts remain speculative and should not yet be framed as specific “microplastic therapies.” Across all these domains, there is a pressing need for standardized analytical methods, robust in vitro and in vivo toxicology using environmentally relevant doses and realistic polymer mixtures, and well‑designed clinical and epidemiologic studies to evaluate safety, efficacy, and unintended consequences.

From a healthy aging perspective, microplastics are best understood as one pervasive component of the modern exposome that interacts with established drivers of oxidative stress, low‑grade inflammation, and cardiometabolic dysfunction rather than as a singular, isolated hazard. Microplastics are now ubiquitous in air, water, food, soil, and indoor dust; complete avoidance is neither feasible nor necessary to achieve meaningful risk reduction and support healthy longevity. Instead, the most defensible strategy is dual: at the individual level, embed pragmatic exposure‑reduction behaviours like safer water choices, less heating food in plastic, improved indoor air and dust control, more durable and less synthetic textiles within broader ifestyle programs that optimize metabolic, cardiovascular, and immune health; and at the societal level, advocate for upstream policy measures that address plastic production, product and textile design, waste management, and environmental standards. This framing aligns microplastics with other chronic, low‑dose environmental risks: the goal is not perfection, but progressive reduction of avoidable exposures, prioritizing high‑yield sources, while research clarifies dose–response relationships and mechanisms. For clinicians, public health practitioners, and longevity programs, microplastics become part of a wider prevention narrative, one that integrates environmental hygiene with nutrition, movement, sleep, stress, and social determinants to extend not only lifespan, but the proportion of life lived in robust health in an increasingly plasticized world.

Reference

  1. Periyasamy AP, Tehrani-Bagha A. A review on microplastic emission from textile materials and its reduction techniques. Polymer Degradation and Stability. 2022 May;199:109901.
  2. Ziani K, Ioniță-Mîndrican CB, Mititelu M, Neacșu SM, Negrei C, Moroșan E, et al. Microplastics: A Real Global Threat for Environment and Food Safety: A State of the Art Review. Nutrients [Internet]. 2023 Jan 25;15(3):617. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/15/3/617
  3. Influence of Microplastics in Environmental Contamination and Human Health: An Analytical and Statistical Approach – International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation (IJRSI) [Internet]. International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation (IJRSI). 2025. Available from: https://rsisinternational.org/journals/ijrsi/articles/influence-of-microplastics-in-environmental-contamination-and-human-health-an-analytical-and-statistical-approach/
  4. Sources of microplastics and their distribution in the environment [Internet]. www.firstsentier-mufg-sustainability.com. Available from: https://www.firstsentier-mufg-sustainability.com/insight/sources-of-microplastics-and-their-distribution-in-the-environment.html
  5. Baseline Study on Microplastics in ASEAN [Internet]. Available from: https://www.giz.de/en/downloads/giz2024-en-baseline-study-on-microplastics.pdf
  6. Akbari A, Taghavi K, Jalil Jaafari. Sources of Microplastics in the Environment and Human Exposure Routes: A Review. Caspian Journal of Health Research. 2024 Jul 1;9(3):163–76.
  7. Microplastics in drinking-water [Internet]. www.who.int. 2019. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241516198
  8. World Health Organization. Dietary and inhalation exposure to nano- and microplastic particles and potential implications for human health [Internet]. www.who.int. 2022. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240054608
  9. Henriques M. Your kitchen is full of microplastics. Here’s how to eat less of them [Internet]. Bbc.com. BBC; 2025. Available from: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20250919-how-to-eat-less-plastic
  10. Snekkevik VK, Cole M, Alessio Gomiero, Haave M, Khan FR, Lusher AL. Beyond the Food on Your Plate: Investigating sources of microplastic contamination in home kitchens. Heliyon. 2024 Aug 1;10(15):e35022–2.
  11. Hazlegreaves S. WHO report on microplastics in drinking-water [Internet]. Open Access Government. 2020. Available from: https://www.openaccessgovernment.org/who-report-on-microplastics-in-drinking-water/89136/
  12. Jahedi F, Jaafarzadeh Haghighi Fard N. Micro- and nanoplastic toxicity in humans: Exposure pathways, cellular effects, and mitigation strategies. Toxicology Reports. 2025 Jun;14:102043.
  13. Sun A, Wang WX. Human Exposure to Microplastics and Its Associated Health Risks. ACS Publications [Internet]. 2023 Aug 2;1(3). Available from: https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/envhealth.3c00053
  14. Ageel HK, Harrad S, Abdallah MAE. Occurrence, human exposure, and risk of microplastics in the indoor environment. Environmental Science: Processes & Impacts. 2021;24(1):17–31.
  15. Zhang X, Yu C, Wang P, Yang C. Microplastics and human health: unraveling the toxicological pathways and implications for public health. Frontiers in Public Health. 2025 Jun 18;13.
  16. Lett Z, Hall A, Skidmore S, Alves NJ. Environmental microplastic and nanoplastic: Exposure routes and effects on coagulation and the cardiovascular system. Environmental Pollution [Internet]. 2021 Dec 15;291:118190. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0269749121017723?casa_token=AVc4vEsvuKEAAAAA:4wQb1vzdy0DDwAiBsP_BKbD_fAMhqJEYfGFHzqTvbYO7eVs-lefP-ItANVUumjbB0aR9V3n5cg
  17. Enyoh CE, Shafea L, Verla AW, Verla EN, Qingyue W, Chowdhury T, et al. Microplastics Exposure Routes and Toxicity Studies to Ecosystems: An Overview. Environmental Analysis, Health and Toxicology [Internet]. 2020 Mar 31;35(1). Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7308665/
  18. Wang Z, Li N, Ding Y, Li N, Su M, Zhang C, et al. Microplastics and human health: Exposure pathways, toxicity mechanisms, and future research challenges. Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering [Internet]. 2025 Aug 20;13(5):118807. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213343725035031
  19. Nihart AJ, Garcia MA, El Hayek E, Liu R, Olewine M, Kingston JD, et al. Bioaccumulation of microplastics in decedent human brains. Nature Medicine [Internet]. 2025 Feb 3;31(31). Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-024-03453-1
  20. Tran L. Microplastics Build Up in Human Organs, Especially the Brain [Internet]. The Scientist. The Scientist Magazine; 2025. Available from: https://www.the-scientist.com/microplastics-build-up-in-human-organs-especially-the-brain-72541
  21. Human in. Microplastics Found in Human Brains [Internet]. Yale E360. 2024. Available from: https://e360.yale.edu/digest/microplastics-human-brains
  22. Henry Ford Health Staff. Microplastics Have Been Found In The Human Bloodstream [Internet]. www.henryford.com. 2022. Available from: https://www.henryford.com/blog/2022/04/microplastics-in-human-bloodstream
  23. Campen M, Nihart A, Garcia M, Liu R, Olewine M, Castillo E, et al. Bioaccumulation of Microplastics in Decedent Human Brains Assessed by Pyrolysis Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry. Research Square [Internet]. 2024 May 6;rs.3.rs4345687. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38765967/
  24. Kornelia Kadac-Czapska, Justyna Ośko, Knez E, Małgorzata Grembecka. Microplastics and Oxidative Stress—Current Problems and Prospects. Antioxidants [Internet]. 2024 May 8;13(5):579–9. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11117644/
  25. Mahmud F, Sarker DB, Jocelyn JA, Sang QXA. Molecular and Cellular Effects of Microplastics and Nanoplastics: Focus on Inflammation and Senescence. Cells. 2024 Oct 29;13(21):1788–8.
  26. Sandhya Jinesh, Prerana Aditi. Health Implications of Microplastic Exposure in Pregnancy and Early Childhood: A Systematic Review. International Journal of Women s Health. 2025 Sep 1;Volume 17:2805–18.
  27. Hu M, Palić D. Micro- and nano-plastics activation of oxidative and inflammatory adverse outcome pathways. Redox Biology [Internet]. 2020 Oct 1;37:101620. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213231720308259
  28. Yang W, Jannatun N, Zeng Y, Liu T, Zhang G, Chen C, et al. Impacts of microplastics on immunity. Frontiers in Toxicology. 2022 Sep 27;4.
  29. Li Y, Tao L, Wang Q, Wang F, Li G, Song M. Potential Health Impact of Microplastics: A Review of Environmental Distribution, Human Exposure, and Toxic Effects. Environment & Health [Internet]. 2023 Aug 10;1(4):249–57. Available from: https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/envhealth.3c00052
  30. Hu M, Palić D. Micro- and nano-plastics activation of oxidative and inflammatory adverse outcome pathways. Redox Biology [Internet]. 2020 Oct 1;37:101620. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213231720308259
  31. Kornelia Kadac-Czapska, Justyna Ośko, Knez E, Małgorzata Grembecka. Microplastics and Oxidative Stress—Current Problems and Prospects. Antioxidants [Internet]. 2024 May 8;13(5):579–9. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11117644/
  32. Bora SS, Rahul Gogoi, Sharma MR, None Anshu, Borah MP, Deka P, et al. Microplastics and human health: unveiling the gut microbiome disruption and chronic disease risks. Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology. 2024 Nov 25;14.
  33. Zheng H, Vidili G, Casu G, Navarese EP, Sechi LA, Chen Y. Microplastics and nanoplastics in cardiovascular disease—a narrative review with worrying links. Frontiers in Toxicology. 2024 Oct 10;6.
  34. Goldsworthy A, O’Callaghan LA, Blum C, Horobin J, Lotti Tajouri, Olsen M, et al. Micro-nanoplastic induced cardiovascular disease and dysfunction: a scoping review. Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology [Internet]. 2025 Apr 1; Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41370-025-00766-2
  35. Nihart AJ, Garcia MA, El Hayek E, Liu R, Olewine M, Kingston JD, et al. Bioaccumulation of microplastics in decedent human brains. Nature Medicine [Internet]. 2025 Feb 3;31(31). Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-024-03453-1
  36. Chen E. Microplastics found in blood vessels linked to greater risk of heart problems, study finds [Internet]. STAT. 2024. Available from: https://www.statnews.com/2024/03/06/nejm-microplastics-blood-vessels-plaque-heart-attack-stroke-death/
  37. Yang Y, Zhang F, Jiang Z, Du Z, Liu S, Zhang M, et al. Microplastics are associated with elevated atherosclerotic risk and increased vascular complexity in acute coronary syndrome patients. Particle and Fibre Toxicology. 2024 Aug 21;21(1).
  38. Raffaele Marfella, Prattichizzo F, Celestino Sardu, Fulgenzi G, Graciotti L, Spadoni T, et al. Microplastics and Nanoplastics in Atheromas and Cardiovascular Events. The New England Journal of Medicine [Internet]. 2024 Mar 7;390(10):900–10. Available from: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2309822
  39. Liu W, Qu Z, Wang X, Feng H, Ma S, Zheng Y, et al. Microplastic exposure is associated with male reproductive health. Medical Review [Internet]. 2024 Oct 16;4(6):549–52. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11629307/
  40. Zhang C, Zhang G, Sun K, Ren J, Zhou J, Liu X, et al. Association of mixed exposure to microplastics with sperm dysfunction: a multi-site study in China. EBioMedicine. 2024 Sep 28;108:105369–9.
  41. Gecegelen E, Ucdal M, Dogu BB. A novel risk factor for dementia: chronic microplastic exposure. Frontiers in Neurology. 2025 May 30;16.
  42. Fang S, Yin Z, Li L, Cai Q, Zheng P, Chen L. Overall effects of microplastics on brain. Frontiers in Toxicology. 2025 Nov 20;7.
  43. Tran L. Microplastics Build Up in Human Organs, Especially the Brain [Internet]. The Scientist. The Scientist Magazine; 2025. Available from: https://www.the-scientist.com/microplastics-build-up-in-human-organs-especially-the-brain-72541
  44. Moon H, Jeong D, Choi JW, Jeong S, Kim H, Song BW, et al. Microplastic exposure linked to accelerated aging and impaired adipogenesis in fat cells. Scientific Reports [Internet]. 2024 Oct 13;14(1). Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-74892-6
  45. Francisco H. News-Medical [Internet]. News-Medical. 2024. Available from: https://www.news-medical.net/news/20241016/Microplastics-accelerate-aging-and-inflammation-in-fat-tissue-increasing-risk-of-chronic-disease.aspx
  46. Gaspar L, Bartman S, Coppotelli G, Ross JM. Acute Exposure to Microplastics Induced Changes in Behavior and Inflammation in Young and Old Mice. International Journal of Molecular Sciences [Internet]. 2023 Jan 1;24(15):12308. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/24/15/12308
  47. Shiwakoti S, Dhakal B, Ok Y, Gong DS, Ko JY, Kim PG, et al. Nanoplastics: An emerging environmental concern in age-related diseases. Environmental pollution (Barking, Essex : 1987) [Internet]. 2025 Jan;384:126972. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40784478/
  48. Xu M, Niu H, Wu L, Xing M, Mo Z, Chen Z, et al. Impact of Microplastic Exposure on Blood Glucose Levels and Gut Microbiota: Differential Effects under Normal or High-Fat Diet Conditions. Metabolites [Internet]. 2024 Sep;14(9):504. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2218-1989/14/9/504
  49. Sandhu MK, Singla C, Prashasti, Oruganti MS, Kaur H, Kaur H, et al. Chronic microplastic exposure: a growing threat to metabolic health in India. International Journal of Research in Medical Sciences. 2025 Oct 30;13(11):5090–6.
  50. Lopez Gonzalez L. I’m a Microplastics Researcher. Here’s How To Limit Their Dangers | UC San Francisco [Internet]. University of California San Francisco. 2024. Available from: https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2024/02/427161/how-to-limit-microplastics-dangers
  51. How to Reduce Your Exposure to Microplastics [Internet]. Bluecrossvt.org. 2025. Available from: https://www.bluecrossvt.org/health-community/blog/listing/how-reduce-your-exposure-microplastics
  52. Microplastics in drinking-water [Internet]. www.who.int. 2019. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241516198
  53. Gambino I, Bagordo F, Grassi T, Panico A, De Donno A. Occurrence of Microplastics in Tap and Bottled Water: Current Knowledge. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health [Internet]. 2022 Apr 26;19(9):5283. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9103198/
  54. Abraham A, Cheema S, Chaabna K, Lowenfels AB, Ravinder Mamtani. Rethinking bottled water in public health discourse. BMJ Global Health. 2024 Aug 1;9(8):e015226–6.
  55. Beyond Plastics – Working To End Single-Use Plastic Pollution [Internet]. Beyond Plastics – Working To End Single-Use Plastic Pollution. 2025. Available from: https://www.beyondplastics.org/fact-sheets/microplastics-exposure
  56. Ageel HK, Harrad S, Abdallah MAE. Occurrence, human exposure, and risk of microplastics in the indoor environment. Environmental Science: Processes & Impacts. 2021;24(1):17–31.
  57. Reducing Laundry Microfibers (U.S. National Park Service) [Internet]. www.nps.gov. Available from: https://www.nps.gov/articles/000/laundry_microplastics.htm
  58. Hobson K. 9 Ways to Trim Microplastics from Your Life [Internet]. AARP. 2025 [cited 2026 Jan 8]. Available from: https://www.aarp.org/health/healthy-living/how-to-reduce-microplastics/
  59. What You Should Know About Microfiber Pollution [Internet]. Available from: https://19january2021snapshot.epa.gov/sites/static/files/2020-07/documents/article_2_microfibers.pdf
  60. Reducing Laundry Microfibers (U.S. National Park Service) [Internet]. www.nps.gov. Available from: https://www.nps.gov/articles/000/laundry_microplastics.htm
  61. Morgan SE, Romanick SS, DeLouise L, McGrath J, Elder A. Understanding Human Health Impacts Following Microplastic Exposure Necessitates Standardized Protocols. Current Protocols. 2024 Jul 1;4(7).
  62. Viale A. Understanding microplastics: Exposure, health and prevention [Internet]. MD Anderson Cancer Center. 2025. Available from: https://www.mdanderson.org/cancerwise/understanding-microplastics-exposure-health-and-prevention.h00-159778023.html
  63. Nyoni H. Microplastics: Sources, health risks, and how to protect yourself [Internet]. Institute of Energy and the Environment. 2025. Available from: https://iee.psu.edu/news/blog/microplastics-sources-health-risks-and-how-protect-yourself