Level of microplastics in seafood ‘overstated’, study suggests

Researchers from Heriot-Watt University in Edinburgh and international partners analysed how plastic contamination in food is studied and reported – and they have found that seafood of all types is not the main source of exposure to microplastics.

 

More than 70% of scientific and media coverage on microplastics in food has focused on seafood, contributing to the public perception that eating fish is the biggest risk.

 

This misperception has real consequences, as some consumers report reducing consumption of seafood because of concerns over microplastics exposure, and thereby miss out on the health benefits of seafood can bring.

 

The findings are reported in the journal Environmental Science & Technology Letters. 

 

Professor Ted Henry from Heriot-Watt’s School of Energy, Geoscience, Infrastructure and Society, said: “In reality, people are far more exposed to microplastics from indoor air and dust. 

 

“A previous study reported that the presence of microplastics in mussels collected from the environment was lower than the amount of microplastics that falls on a plate of mussels during dinner time in a typical household.”

 

“We looked at reports of plastic particle exposure from different sources.”

 

Asked whether he eats seafood, Professor Henry, author of the report, replied: “Yes, several times a week and without any concern about the presence of plastic particles.”

 

He explained: “Seafood, including mussels and oysters and finfish like salmon and cod, may contribute 1-10 microplastic particles per day, which is consistent with other foods, like salt, honey and chicken.

 

“Ingestion from bottled water is estimated at 10-100 particles per day, and exposure from indoor air accounts for considerably higher exposure - 100-1000 particles per day. 

 

“There is minimal evidence that they pose a health risk. The evidence we do have indicates that plastic particles readily pass through the digestive tract and exit the body. 

 

“While there are perceptions that toxic substances associated with plastic particles may pose health risks, evidence indicates concentrations are actually exceedingly low compared to other sources of exposure.”

 

Professor Henry said: “The way microplastics in food have been reported, in the media and in scientific publications, has created biased perceptions of health risks. 

 

“It has also put some people off consuming seafood altogether, causing them to miss out on the beneficial health effects of seafood consumption. 

 

“Seafood was one of the first foods tested for microplastics, partly because of assumptions that marine species would be most exposed and partly because it was easier to analyse. 

 

“That early focus created an impression that fish and shellfish are uniquely risky, but we now know other foods and drinks also contain microplastics.”

 

Fiona Wright, Head of Regulatory Affairs at UK national body Seafish commented: “Seafood is a healthy and nutritious choice for mealtimes and plays an important role in a balanced diet.  

 

“As the public body that supports the UK seafood sector, Seafish welcomes rigorous, evidence-based research that strengthens consumer confidence in seafood and ensures accurate public understanding of the science. 

 

“We will continue to work with scientists, regulators and industry to ensure that consumers have access to clear, reliable information about the safety and benefits of eating seafood.” 

 

Examining Misconceptions about Plastic-Particle Exposure from Ingestion of Seafood and Risk to Human Health, Theodore B.Henry et al Environmental Science & Technology Letters