Light has played a crucial role in shaping the behavior and physiology of most species on Earth. For diurnal animals, including humans, natural daylight has been a key regulator of wakefulness, while the onset of darkness signals the time for sleep. This light–dark cycle has been a constant throughout most of our evolutionary history. However, the advent of artificial light has dramatically altered these natural patterns, extending human activity into the night and giving us control over when and how we engage with our environment. While these advancements have brought about numerous benefits, they have also introduced significant challenges to our health.
​
One of the most critical issues arising from the use of artificial light is its impact on sleep and circadian rhythms. The human circadian rhythm, which regulates our sleep-wake cycle, is highly sensitive to light. Disruptions in this rhythm due to irregular light exposure have been linked to various health problems, including sleep disturbances and an increased risk for obesity and metabolic disorders. These conditions have been on the rise globally, partly due to our altered light exposure patterns.

Light is detected by specialized photoreceptors in the retina, including rods, cones, and intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells (ipRGCs). While rods and cones are primarily responsible for image formation, ipRGCs play a crucial role in non-visual responses to light, such as circadian entrainment and sleep regulation. These cells are particularly sensitive to light at around 480 nm (blue light), which is known to have strong effects on circadian rhythms. The ipRGCs transmit light information to the brain's central circadian pacemaker, the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN), which regulates the release of melatonin from the pineal gland. Melatonin is a key hormone that promotes sleep and helps maintain the circadian rhythm by signaling the body when it’s time to sleep.

Beyond sleep regulation, light exposure also influences energy metabolism. During the deepest stage of non-rapid eye movement (NREM) sleep, known as slow-wave sleep (SWS), energy expenditure is at its lowest, indicating that sleep serves as a period of energy conservation. The SCN also drives daily rhythms in the concentrations of various hormones linked to metabolism, such as insulin, glucagon, and corticosterone, which in turn influence energy balance and substrate utilization in the body.
​
The disruption of natural light cycles, particularly through exposure to artificial light at night, can therefore have wide-ranging effects on both sleep and metabolic health. Understanding these mechanisms is critical as we navigate the modern world, where artificial light is ubiquitous and often unavoidable. Balancing our exposure to natural and artificial light may be key to maintaining optimal health and well-being.

The central circadian clock in the SCN is highly sensitive to external light cues, with characteristics such as intensity, duration, timing, and wavelength playing critical roles in regulating sleep and circadian rhythms. Each of these light properties has specific effects on human physiology, with varying degrees of influence depending on their combination and context.

Natural light intensities can range dramatically, from the intense midday sunlight of 20,000 to 100,000 lux to the much dimmer artificial indoor light, which typically ranges between 14 and 430 lux. Human exposure to these varying light levels can significantly influence physiological processes, especially when these exposures occur at night.

Studies have shown that increased light intensity at night can disrupt sleep and shift circadian rhythms. For example, continuous illumination during the dark phase in mice has been linked to increased body mass and reduced glucose processing, even without changes in food intake or activity levels. Similarly, in humans, increasing light intensity at night can lead to melatonin suppression and increased alertness, indicating a phase shift in the circadian rhythm. Epidemiological studies have also documented a relationship between light intensity at night and metabolic health. For instance, brighter bedroom environments have been associated with a higher risk of obesity and metabolic disorders, such as diabetes.

Moreover, even low levels of light at night (as low as 5 lux) can disrupt sleep architecture, leading to changes in sleep stages and a decrease in total sleep time. This disruption in sleep has secondary effects on metabolism, potentially increasing the risk for insulin resistance and other metabolic issues.

In addition to intensity, the duration and timing of light exposure are crucial. Prolonged exposure to artificial light at night can exacerbate its disruptive effects on sleep and circadian rhythms. The timing of light exposure is equally important, with evening exposure being particularly detrimental. Late-day light exposure can delay the onset of melatonin secretion, shifting the circadian rhythm and leading to difficulties in falling asleep and maintaining sleep.

Furthermore, light exposure in the evening has been shown to increase the risk of metabolic disorders. For instance, studies have found that individuals exposed to light in the evening are more likely to develop insulin resistance, which can lead to type 2 diabetes. This effect is partly mediated by the impact of light on the sympathetic nervous system, which regulates glucose metabolism.

While intensity and duration are significant, the wavelength or spectral composition of light also plays a critical role. Blue light, with a wavelength around 480 nm, is particularly effective at suppressing melatonin and disrupting sleep. This has implications for the use of screens and devices that emit blue light, especially in the hours leading up to bedtime.
​
Other characteristics, such as the color temperature of light, flickering, and the type of light source (e.g., LED vs. OLED), also influence physiological responses. For instance, light-emitting diodes (LEDs) often have higher blue light content compared to organic light-emitting diodes (OLEDs), making them more likely to disrupt sleep and circadian rhythms.

The duration of light exposure significantly affects sleep and circadian rhythms in a dose-dependent manner. Research has shown that even a single session of high-intensity light exposure can have profound effects. In a study involving 39 healthy young adults, exposure to 10,000 lux light for varying durations (ranging from 0.2 to 4.0 hours) led to dose-dependent suppression of melatonin and shifts in circadian rhythm. This finding underscores the sensitivity of the circadian system to prolonged light exposure, particularly at high intensities.

The effects of light exposure duration extend beyond circadian disruption and impact metabolic health as well. For instance, in a study of 48 young children, prolonged exposure to light above 200 lux was associated with increased body mass index (BMI), even when controlling for sleep duration, timing, and activity levels. Additionally, observational studies have linked extended screen time, a form of prolonged light exposure, to an increased risk of overweight and obesity in children and adolescents. A meta-analysis further supported this association, highlighting the metabolic consequences of extended exposure to light from electronic devices.

The nature of light exposure, however, is complex. Circadian phase shifts can occur even with brief, intermittent light exposure. In one study, as little as 60 minutes of 2-millisecond light pulses in the evening led to significant phase delays in the circadian rhythm of participants. This finding suggests that not only continuous light exposure but also intermittent light patterns can disrupt circadian timing and potentially affect metabolism.

The timing of light exposure plays a crucial role in determining its impact on the circadian system. Depending on whether light exposure occurs in the early or late evening, the circadian rhythm may either advance or delay. This has important implications for sleep quality and metabolic regulation. For example, exposure to light in the late evening is more likely to phase delay the circadian system, leading to difficulties in falling asleep and potential metabolic disruptions.
​
In summary, both the duration and timing of light exposure are critical determinants of their effects on sleep and metabolism. Prolonged and mistimed light exposure, whether continuous or intermittent, can lead to circadian misalignment and adverse metabolic outcomes. Understanding these dynamics is essential for mitigating the potential negative health effects of artificial light in modern environments.

​Morning bright light exposure is widely recognized as an effective treatment for individuals with Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD) and winter depression, helping to shift the circadian rhythm and potentially improve metabolic states. Research has shown that such exposure can lower the resting metabolic rate (RMR) in SAD patients and may lead to reductions in body weight and depressive symptoms. Studies also indicate a potential influence on glycemic control, as observed in diabetic patients with winter depression, though the effects on metabolism in individuals without depression are less consistent. The combination of morning light therapy and exercise has shown promise in reducing body fat among overweight individuals. Additionally, morning bright light is effective in improving sleep, making it a viable non-invasive treatment for circadian rhythm and metabolic disorders. Further research is needed to explore these benefits across different populations.

Daytime light exposure in animals is often considered a “dead zone” in the circadian phase-response curve, where light does not significantly reset the circadian rhythm. The presence of this "dead zone" in humans remains uncertain due to differences in activity patterns between diurnal and nocturnal species. Few studies have explored how daytime light exposure impacts human metabolism.

Research shows mixed results: 14 hours of daytime light exposure did not significantly affect 24-hour energy expenditure or fat and carbohydrate oxidation in healthy individuals. However, dim daytime light combined with bright evening light reduced the usual rise in postprandial glucose in insulin-resistant older adults. Additionally, daytime light treatment in individuals with SAD led to weight loss and increased oxygen consumption. Dim light during the day also affected digestion, leading to signs of carbohydrate malabsorption and reduced gastric activity.
​
Daytime light exposure can also influence metabolism during sleep, with studies indicating that dim daytime light and bright evening light may decrease the sleeping metabolic rate. These findings highlight the significant role of daytime light conditions in sleep and overall energy metabolism, warranting further investigation into their long-term health implications.

Extended light exposure during the dark phase can significantly disrupt metabolism. In animals, constant light exposure reduces the amplitude of the circadian rhythm in the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN), increases food intake, decreases energy expenditure, and leads to weight gain and reduced insulin sensitivity. This exposure disrupts the regular circadian rhythm and peripheral clocks, contributing to metabolic imbalances.
​
In humans, evening and prolonged light exposure are linked to higher body weight, increased BMI, and a greater risk of obesity. Actigraphy studies have shown a positive correlation between mean light exposure timing, BMI, and sleep midpoint, indicating the role of light in metabolic regulation.
Shift workers, who are exposed to light during atypical hours, consistently show higher risks of metabolic disorders, including overweight, obesity, diabetes, and metabolic syndrome. This population often faces circadian disruption, sleep deprivation, and irregular eating patterns due to their work schedules, further complicating metabolic health.

Evening light exposure also affects energy metabolism during sleep. Studies have shown that exposure to bright light before sleep increases respiratory quotient and decreases fat oxidation, suggesting a shift towards carbohydrate metabolism. This is accompanied by a suppression of melatonin, a hormone crucial for regulating sleep and metabolic processes.

Furthermore, evening light exposure can impair carbohydrate digestion and increase glucose intolerance and insulin insensitivity, especially when combined with disrupted sleep and circadian misalignment. Shift workers and individuals with night eating syndrome are particularly vulnerable to these metabolic disturbances, often showing a preference for high-fat foods and altered dietary intake patterns.

Understanding the timing and intensity of light exposure, along with dietary habits, is essential for minimizing metabolic consequences, particularly in populations with atypical light exposure, such as shift workers. Proper management of light exposure and food intake timing can help maintain circadian rhythm and support healthier metabolic outcomes.

In humans, the activity of the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN) is often gauged through endogenous melatonin levels, with nighttime production typically ranging from 10 to 80 μg in young adults. Peak melatonin concentrations vary widely, with one study reporting levels between 2 and 84 pg/mL among a group of 170 individuals. Although melatonin secretion is primarily driven by photic input, its receptors are distributed throughout the body in areas beyond the pineal gland, such as the retina, gastrointestinal tract, bone marrow, skin, and lymphocytes. This widespread distribution means that melatonin’s influence extends beyond regulating sleep and circadian rhythms, playing significant roles in thermoregulation and energy metabolism.
​
Research has demonstrated the critical role of melatonin in metabolic processes. Animal studies involving pinealectomy, which removes the source of melatonin, have shown that the absence of melatonin leads to metabolic abnormalities, including diminished glucose tolerance, reduced glycogen storage in the liver and muscles, and insulin resistance—conditions that mirror those found in diabetogenic syndrome. In humans, similar findings have been observed, with reduced melatonin amplitude and blunted rhythms reported in individuals with type 2 diabetes. Additionally, melatonin interacts with insulin, particularly in individuals with metabolic syndrome, highlighting its vital role in maintaining energy balance and metabolic health.

Exogenous melatonin has been widely studied for its effectiveness in managing sleep disorders and circadian rhythm disruptions, particularly in individuals experiencing jet lag, shift work, or visual impairments. Earlier research has established its role in improving sleep quality and aligning circadian rhythms in these populations. Beyond its influence on sleep, melatonin has garnered attention for its potential effects on human metabolism, particularly in the regulation of lipid and glucose metabolism.

In women with obesity, studies have highlighted a negative correlation between melatonin supplementation and BMI, suggesting potential benefits for weight management. For instance, a three-week randomized crossover trial involving individuals with type 2 diabetes and insomnia revealed that melatonin treatment improved sleep efficiency and reduced wakefulness after sleep onset, though it did not significantly impact glucose or lipid metabolism. Another study focusing on normolipidemic postmenopausal women found that a two-week course of melatonin (6 mg nightly) led to an increase in plasma triglyceride and VLDL cholesterol levels, underscoring the hormone's complex metabolic effects.

The benefits of melatonin extend to the shift-working population, where its administration has been shown to alleviate circadian misalignment and enhance sleep quality, alertness, and energy intake. Notably, a randomized crossover trial demonstrated that melatonin (3 mg) reduced body weight, BMI, waist circumference, and hip circumference in shift workers without altering caloric intake, alongside a significant reduction in circadian misalignment. Another trial over 12 weeks in female shift workers with elevated BMI reported that melatonin administration did not significantly affect energy intake or food choices, indicating that melatonin's effects on weight may be independent of dietary factors.

Interestingly, the interaction between melatonin and light exposure has also been explored, revealing varying effects on metabolism. For example, in a study involving healthy males, nighttime melatonin administration under bright light conditions increased leptin levels and reduced hunger, along with improvements in glucose tolerance and insulin sensitivity. However, contrasting findings were observed in healthy females, where melatonin impaired glucose tolerance, suggesting a potential decrease in insulin sensitivity. These mixed results, likely influenced by differing light conditions across studies, highlight the need for future research to clarify the interplay between melatonin and environmental light.

In summary, while exogenous melatonin shows promise in improving sleep and potentially influencing metabolic outcomes, its effects are nuanced and may vary based on individual factors such as light exposure and underlying metabolic conditions.

Melatonin, a hormone that follows a daily rhythm in vertebrates, also exists in various non-animal sources, such as unicellular algae, food plants, and medicinal herbs. This naturally occurring melatonin can be found in fruits, vegetables, grains, and beverages like coffee, tea, beer, and wine. Some foods, particularly cranberries, coffee, and certain herbs, are known to contain high levels of melatonin. Additionally, melatonin is present in meats like lamb, beef, pork, chicken, and fish. However, the impact of melatonin from these food sources on human physiology, particularly sleep, remains an area of ongoing research, as the concentration of melatonin in foods can vary significantly.

Fruits such as sour cherry, also known as Montmorency cherry, are particularly noted for their high melatonin and tryptophan content, both of which are linked to improved sleep. In studies involving healthy adults, consuming tart cherry juice for a week significantly increased melatonin levels and improved sleep parameters, including total sleep time and sleep efficiency. The sleep-promoting effects of cherry-based products have been further explored in older adults and individuals with insomnia, where improvements in sleep duration, sleep quality, and reduced wakefulness after sleep onset were observed. Moreover, studies on fruits like pineapple, oranges, and bananas have demonstrated elevated serum melatonin concentrations following their consumption, suggesting a potential role in sleep enhancement.

Milk, which naturally contains both tryptophan and melatonin, has also been investigated for its potential to improve sleep. However, the melatonin content in milk can vary widely, making it challenging to measure its exact impact on sleep. Research involving melatonin-enriched milk has shown promising results, particularly in young adults, where significant improvements in sleep satisfaction and reductions in daytime sleepiness were noted. In children, while milk-based evening drinks did not significantly affect overall sleep time, they did reduce nocturnal awakenings and improved memory recall, indicating some benefits. The use of fermented milk with probiotics, such as Lactobacillus casei strain Shirota (LcS), has also shown to improve subjective sleep quality and reduce sleep latency under stressful conditions.

​Grains, including rice, corn, barley, and whole grains, have been identified as high in melatonin, and their consumption has been associated with better sleep quality. For example, a study on cereal enriched with tryptophan demonstrated improvements in sleep efficiency and total sleep time in older adults. The potential hypnotic effects of food-derived tryptophan have also been explored, with evidence suggesting that tryptophan-rich foods, such as de-oiled gourd seeds, can improve insomnia when combined with carbohydrates. Additionally, tryptophan supplementation, particularly when paired with daytime light exposure, has been shown to promote evening melatonin secretion and enhance sleep.

In summary, while melatonin is present in a wide variety of foods, its effectiveness in improving sleep and metabolism requires further investigation. The interaction between melatonin and other nutrients within these foods, as well as the role of environmental factors like light exposure, is complex and necessitates well-controlled studies to fully understand its impact on human health.

Ishihara, Asuka, et al. “The Complex Effects of Light on Metabolism in Humans.” Nutrients, vol. 15, no. 6, 14 Mar. 2023, pp. 1391–1391, https://doi.org/10.3390/nu15061391. 

Microplastics and nanoplastics are small plastic particles that have significant environmental and health impacts, but they differ in size and behavior.

• Microplastics: There is no officially published definition of microplastics, but in general they are plastic particles that range in size from 1 micrometer (µm) to 5 millimeters (mm). They can be primary microplastics, like microbeads used in cosmetics, or secondary microplastics, which result from the breakdown of larger plastic items. Microplastics are large enough to be seen with the naked eye and can accumulate in various ecosystems, leading to potential ingestion by marine life and humans.
• Nanoplastics: Nanoplastics are much smaller, typically less than 1 µm in size, often in the nanometer scale (1 nm = 0.001 µm). Due to their tiny size, they can penetrate biological membranes more easily, potentially causing more significant health effects. Nanoplastics are challenging to detect and study, making their impact less understood but potentially more hazardous than microplastics.

Microplastics and nanoplastics are pervasive in the environment, originating from a variety of sources that are broadly categorized as primary or secondary.

• Primary Sources: These are plastics intentionally manufactured at a small size. Common examples include microbeads used in cosmetics and personal care products, microfibers from synthetic clothing, and plastic pellets or "nurdles" used in industrial manufacturing. These particles are released directly into the environment through product use or industrial processes.
• Secondary Sources: These originate from the breakdown of larger plastic items such as bottles, bags, and fishing nets. Over time, exposure to sunlight, wind, and water causes these larger plastics to fragment into smaller particles. Secondary microplastics are not intentionally manufactured at their small size but result from the degradation of larger plastic debris.

Mechanisms of Harm to Aquatic Wildlife

1. Physical Impacts:
   • Ingestion and Blockage: Marine animals often mistake microplastics for food, leading to ingestion. Once ingested, these plastics can cause physical blockages in the digestive systems of animals, reducing their ability to absorb nutrients and leading to starvation or malnutrition. For example, sea turtles, fish, and seabirds have been found with stomachs full of plastic, unable to process actual food.
   • Bioaccumulation: Microplastics can accumulate within the bodies of aquatic organisms over time. As these plastics move up the food chain, from prey to predator, they can reach concentrations that are harmful to larger species, including humans who consume seafood.
2. Biological Impacts:
   • Genotoxicity and Cytotoxicity: Microplastics have been shown to cause genetic damage (genotoxicity) and cellular toxicity (cytotoxicity) in aquatic organisms. The physical presence of these particles can disrupt normal cell functions, leading to mutations, cancer, or cell death. Studies have documented DNA damage in fish and invertebrates exposed to microplastics.
   • Oxidative Damage: Microplastics can induce oxidative stress by generating reactive oxygen species (ROS) within cells. This oxidative damage can lead to inflammation, impaired cellular functions, and even apoptosis (programmed cell death). Oxidative stress is a common pathway for toxicity in aquatic organisms exposed to environmental pollutants, including microplastics.
3. Chemical Impacts:
   • Toxicity Pathways: Microplastics often carry harmful chemical additives, such as plasticizers, flame retardants, and heavy metals, which can leach out and enter the tissues of marine animals. These chemicals can disrupt lipid metabolism, leading to energy imbalances and affecting growth and reproduction.
   • Neurotoxicity: The chemicals associated with microplastics can have neurotoxic effects, impairing the nervous system functions of marine animals. This can lead to behavioral changes, such as altered feeding habits, impaired predator-prey responses, and disorientation.

Specific Effects on Aquatic Wildlife

• Reduction of Feeding Activity: Ingestion of microplastics can reduce the feeding activity of marine animals, as their digestive systems become clogged with indigestible particles. This can lead to a decline in energy levels, growth rates, and reproductive success.
• Intestinal Damage: The sharp edges of microplastics can cause physical damage to the intestinal linings of marine organisms, leading to internal injuries, infections, and impaired nutrient absorption.
• Growth Delay: The energy required to process and expel ingested microplastics can detract from the energy available for growth. This results in stunted growth and developmental delays in juvenile marine species.
• Embryotoxicity: Microplastics have been found to impact the development of embryos in marine animals, leading to deformities, reduced hatching success, and impaired survival rates. Embryotoxicity is a critical concern for species with vulnerable early life stages.
• Behavioral Changes: Exposure to microplastics can lead to behavioral changes in marine animals, such as reduced feeding efficiency, altered swimming behavior, and impaired predator avoidance. These changes can have cascading effects on survival and reproductive success.
• Diseases in Marine Animals: Microplastics can serve as vectors for pathogens, carrying harmful bacteria, viruses, and parasites into marine organisms. This can lead to increased incidences of disease, further compromising the health of affected species.

The ecotoxicological effects of microplastics and nanoplastics on aquatic wildlife are not limited to individual organisms. The accumulation of these particles in marine environments can lead to broader ecological disruptions. For example, reduced feeding activity and growth delays in key species can affect the entire food web, leading to declines in predator populations and altering ecosystem dynamics.

Moreover, the persistence of microplastics in the environment means that these impacts can accumulate and intensify over time, potentially leading to long-term declines in biodiversity and the health of marine ecosystems.

The Great Pacific Garbage Patch is a glaring example of how our discarded plastic waste has come to dominate the world's oceans, creating a cycle of pollution that impacts both the environment and human health. As this floating mass of debris continues to grow, so does the urgency to find solutions to the plastic pollution crisis.
​
Microplastics and nanoplastics are not just passive pollutants; they actively harm aquatic wildlife through a variety of mechanisms, including genotoxicity, cytotoxicity, oxidative damage, and neurotoxicity. These impacts, coupled with the physical presence of microplastics in the digestive systems of marine animals, can lead to significant ecological and biological disruptions, underscoring the urgent need for action to reduce plastic pollution in our oceans.

Mason's research, conducted in collaboration with the University of Minnesota, analyzed plastics found in various consumer products including beer, tap water, and salt. They discovered that sea salt is particularly susceptible to plastic contamination due to its production process, which involves evaporating saltwater and leaving behind the solid salt—along with any microplastics present in the water.

Mason emphasized that this contamination is not unique to any one region, stating, "It's not that sea salt in China is worse than sea salt in America, it's that all sea salt—because it's coming from the same origins—is going to have a consistent problem." She urged consumers to reconsider their plastic usage and its pervasive role in our society, suggesting that addressing the flow of plastic into the environment is essential to curbing this widespread contamination.
​
As consumers become more aware of the hidden dangers in everyday products, the need for alternative materials and reduced plastic consumption becomes increasingly critical for both environmental and public health.

A Word on the Benefits of Consuming Salt
Contrary to popular belief, consuming high amounts of salt does not necessarily lead to increased thirst or elevated blood pressure. In fact, studies have consistently failed to support these common assumptions. Instead, elevated insulin levels are the real culprit behind salt retention, which can lead to increased blood pressure. What drives up insulin? Refined sugars and carbohydrates. So, rather than blaming salt, it's more accurate to point the finger at sugar for these issues. Your body requires both sodium and chloride ions, the main components of salt, and it cannot produce them on its own. Therefore, it's essential to obtain these ions through your diet.

If you decide to follow a low-carb diet or engage in fasting, your insulin levels will naturally drop, leading to increased salt excretion through urine. This can cause dizziness, a common symptom when your body lacks adequate salt. The solution? Increase your salt intake. Feeling low on energy? Take salt. Experiencing headaches, brain fog, or difficulty focusing? Salt could be the answer.

Salt is an essential hydration mineral, and not getting enough can negatively impact your quality of life. Unlike some other nutrients, if you consume too much salt, your body simply excretes it through urine. In fact, drinking salt water has been associated with anti-aging properties. Maintaining healthy salt levels can boost your energy, improve sleep quality, reduce muscle cramps, and enhance exercise performance.
​
Starting your day with 16 ounces of water mixed with salt can set you on the right path for maintaining optimal hydration and overall well-being. So, rather than avoiding salt, recognize its vital role in your health and use it wisely to improve your quality of life.

​However, it's important to note that not all salt is created equal. Refined table salt is almost entirely sodium chloride, often with added man-made chemicals. In contrast, unprocessed salts, like pink Himalayan salt, offer a more balanced mix of sodium and chloride, along with other essential minerals such as calcium, potassium, and magnesium. These minerals not only contribute to the pink hue of Himalayan salt but also provide additional health benefits.

Oral Ingestion: Microplastics and nanoplastics enter our bodies predominantly through the food and water we consume. Experimental sampling, such as Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) on tap, bottled, and spring waters, has confirmed the presence of microplastics in all these sources, highlighting the pervasive nature of this pollution. Studies have detected these particles in everyday items like honey, beer, salt, seafood, and even mineral water. Recent research has shown that a single bottle of water (1L) can contain as many as 240,000 nanoplastic particles. These particles are introduced into the food chain as animals ingest them in their natural environments or as food is contaminated during production processes. Alarmingly, microplastics have also been found in human feces, underscoring their presence in our diet. While the evidence of their presence in food is growing, comprehensive quantitative data on human exposure through diet remains scarce, and no specific legislation currently exists to regulate micro- and nanoscale plastics in foodstuffs.

Inhalation: Airborne microplastics are another significant source of exposure. These particles originate from urban dust, synthetic textiles, rubber tires, and other sources. Due to their small size and lightweight nature, microplastics can remain suspended in the air and be easily inhaled, leading to their deposition in the respiratory system. Research has shown that microplastics can accumulate in the lungs, potentially leading to respiratory issues. More of this down below...

Skin Contact: Although less studied, skin contact represents another potential route of microplastic entry into the body. Microplastics are found in various personal care products, such as exfoliants and cleansers, which can penetrate the skin or be absorbed through wounds. The potential for microplastics to penetrate the skin barrier is an area of active research, with implications for chronic exposure and cumulative health effects.

Recent research has revealed the alarming extent to which humans are exposed to microplastics, with estimates suggesting that we might inhale around 16.2 bits of plastic every hour—equivalent to 5 grams of plastic every week, which is about the weight of a credit card's worth of plastic in just one week. For the first time in history, microplastic particles have been tracked in the lower airways, raising serious concerns about the potential health impacts.
​
Microplastics have been detected in various environments, including the air, water, oceans, lakes, snowfall, and rainfall, according to NOAA researchers. These tiny particles are produced from a wide range of sources, including:

• synthetic materials washed off clothes during laundry cycles, such as polyester and polypropylene
  
• abrasions to vehicle tires or brake components during transportation on the road that cause tiny tire shreds or brake wear particles to fly off
  
• abrasions to everyday plastic or synthetic objects, like the soles of shoes and cooking utensils
  
• runoff from plastic components used to develop and mark roads
  
• coatings used on marine equipment and infrastructure, such as container ships
  
• plastic components used in personal care products, such as plastic microdermabrasion beads in face wash
  
• plastic pellets used in manufacturing

Additionally, microplastics are a byproduct of sewage treatment, where wastewater containing these particles is released into the ocean and then evaporates into the atmosphere in large volumes.

The presence of microplastics in the air is particularly concerning. Microplastics may be present in 4-77% of the air you breathe on a regular basis. Studies have found that microplastics, especially synthetic fibers from textiles, can range in size from 1 to 5 microns—small enough to enter the respiratory system, pass through the lungs, and potentially enter the bloodstream. These particles can damage the air sacs in the lungs, increasing the risk of conditions like emphysema and lung cancer.

A 2020 study in Environment International conducted in London found that the air samples collected from the top of a 9-story building contained between 575 to 1008 microplastics per square meter. The study also suggested that microplastics could travel great distances through wind and weather patterns, potentially reaching remote areas like the North Atlantic and the Arctic during certain seasonal conditions like the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO).

This growing body of research underscores the pervasive nature of microplastic pollution and the urgent need for further studies to understand the full extent of their impact on human health and the environment.

Over time, the exposure to plastic really adds up. According to the World Wildlife Federation’s calculations, each month, you consume about 21 grams, or the equivalent of one Lego brick. In a year’s time, you’ve consumed 250 grams, or the size of a full dinner plate’s-worth of plastic.

In 10 years, you’ve ingested some 5.5 pounds, and in the average lifetime, a person will consume about 40 pounds. While much of this will pass through and be eliminated through your stool, some will remain and accumulate in your organs.

Recent research has uncovered alarming insights into the effects of weathered microplastics on human health, particularly concerning brain cells. Unlike newly manufactured plastics, weathered microplastics—those degraded by environmental factors such as heat and light—have been shown to trigger a more severe inflammatory response in human brain cells.

In an experiment led by Hee-Yeon Kim and colleagues at the Daegu Gyeongbuk Institute of Science and Technology (DGIST), researchers exposed microglia, the brain's immune cells, to weathered polystyrene microplastics. These plastics, which had undergone environmental degradation, caused a dramatic increase in inflammatory particles in the blood of mice. Additionally, there was a marked increase in brain cell death compared to those exposed to "virgin" or new microplastics.

The study found that weathered microplastics altered the expression (by a factor of 10-15) of proteins involved in energy metabolism and significantly increased proteins associated with brain cell death by a factor of five. The team suggests that these effects might be due to changes microplastics undergo when exposed to sunlight and UV radiation, such as increased brittleness and fragmentation, leading to a larger surface area and altered chemical bonds that heighten their reactivity.

This all amounts to an increased inflammatory response by brain cells — far more severe than what was produced by unweathered microplastics tested at equivalent doses.

This discovery has significant implications for human health, especially considering that much of the microplastic we consume comes from food sources. As plastic waste in the oceans breaks down into microplastics through exposure to sunlight, these particles are ingested by marine life, which then enters the human food chain. The increased neurotoxic potential of weathered microplastics emphasizes the urgent need for further research and potential policy interventions to mitigate the impact of microplastics on human health.

Recent research has highlighted the alarming effects of polystyrene nanoplastics (PS NPs) on cardiovascular health, specifically in the context of lipid accumulation and atherosclerosis. The study demonstrated that exposure to PS NPs, especially when combined with oxidized low-density lipoprotein (ox-LDL), led to significant lipid buildup in RAW264.7 macrophages. This lipid accumulation is a key marker in the development of atherosclerosis, a condition characterized by the hardening and narrowing of arteries due to plaque formation.

Using ultrasound biomicroscopy (UBM), researchers observed the development of atherosclerotic plaques in the aortic arch of ApoE-/- mice after three months of PS NPs exposure. This was further confirmed by Oil-red O and hematoxylin-eosin (H&E) staining, which revealed lipid deposition and plaque formation in the aortic root of these mice.

The study also linked the development of atherosclerosis in these mice to disturbances in lipid metabolism and oxidative stress damage in the liver. This suggests that PS NPs exposure not only affects local cardiovascular structures but also has systemic implications, disrupting lipid regulation and promoting inflammation.
​
These findings underscore the potential cardiovascular risks posed by nanoplastic exposure. Atherosclerosis, closely associated with abnormal lipid metabolism and oxidative stress, is a significant contributor to heart disease. The study indicates that PS NPs might exacerbate these processes, raising concerns about their long-term impact on cardiovascular health.

In a study published in the International Journal of Molecular Sciences, researchers uncovered the cytotoxic effects of microplastics on human cells. The study demonstrated that microplastic particles are capable of entering cells within just 24 hours of exposure, where they predominantly accumulate around the cell nucleus. This rapid infiltration is concerning, as it directly impacts cell health. The study showed that as the concentration of microplastics and the duration of exposure increased, cell viability—meaning the ability of cells to survive—significantly decreased.

Additionally, the study observed alarming changes in immune response markers. Notably, the expression of tumor necrosis factor (TNF-a), a cytokine involved in inflammation, was found to be twice as high in the livers of mice exposed to microplastics compared to those that were not exposed. This suggests that microplastics not only harm individual cells but can also trigger broader immune responses, potentially leading to inflammation and other related health issues.

These findings add to the growing body of evidence that microplastics pose serious health risks, emphasizing the need for further research and public awareness regarding their pervasive presence in our environment and food supply.

Micro- and nanoplastics have been shown to cause liver inflammation, a critical concern as the liver is essential for detoxifying the body. These plastics disrupt mitochondrial membrane potential, which is stronger with 5 μm particles, inhibiting ATP production—a crucial energy source for cells. Additionally, MNPs negatively affect food absorption and digestion, leading to altered hepatic lipid metabolism. This can result in changes in cholesterol and triglyceride (serum and total cholesterol, serum and total triglycerides, HDL and LDL) levels, which are risk factors for cardiovascular diseases.

MNPs can severely affect the gastrointestinal system. They negatively affect food absorption, inhibit food digestion, decrease mucus secretion in the intestine and impair gut microbiota composition, essential for a healthy digestive system. The dysfunction of the intestinal barrier caused by MNPs can lead to gut dysbiosis and impaired bile acid metabolism, further contributing to digestive issues and metabolic disorders.

Nanoplastics, due to their tiny size (the smaller the more harmful), pose a significant threat to the brain. These particles can cross the blood-brain barrier (BBB) within just two hours, a crucial defense that protects the brain from harmful substances. Once they breach the BBB, they can lead to cognitive impairment, neurological disorders, and neurotoxicity. This neurotoxic effect is thought to be due to the inhibition of acetylcholinesterase activity and altered neurotransmitter levels, which can contribute to behavioral changes. The high surface area to volume ratio of these particles makes them particularly reactive and potentially more harmful than larger microplastics.

​Experimental studies have shown that MNPs absorbed into cholesterol molecules on the brain membrane surface can cross the BBB and increase the risk of inflammation and neurological disorders. This could potentially contribute to neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s. The plastic microparticles in the brain could induce neuroinflammation, leading to long-term damage and chronic neurological conditions.

​In a study published in the August 2023 issue of the International Journal of Molecular Sciences, researchers uncovered alarming evidence that microplastics extensively infiltrate the body, including the brain, and can induce behavioral changes reminiscent of dementia in as little as three weeks. This research involved exposing both young (4-month-old) and old (21-month-old) mice to varying levels of microplastics in their drinking water over a three-week period.

Behavioral testing at the conclusion of the study revealed that many of the mice exhibited dementia-like symptoms, with older animals showing more pronounced changes. The researchers theorized that age-related dysfunction might exacerbate the effects of polystyrene microplastics (PS-MPs) on behavioral performance. Lead researcher Jaime Ross described the findings as "striking" because the doses of microplastics administered were relatively low.

Upon dissecting the animals, the researchers discovered that microplastics had accumulated in every organ, including the brain, which was an unexpected and shocking finding. Although the presence of microplastics in the gastrointestinal tract, liver, and kidneys was anticipated, their expansion to other tissues, such as the heart and lungs, suggests that microplastics are capable of undergoing systemic circulation.

Of particular concern was the detection of microplastics in the brain, which should be protected by the blood-brain barrier, a mechanism designed to prevent harmful substances, including bacteria and viruses, from entering the brain. The presence of microplastics in brain tissue raises significant concerns, as it may lead to a decrease in glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), a protein that supports cell processes in the brain. A reduction in GFAP has been associated with the early stages of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease, and even depression.

The study further explained that GFAP is commonly used as a marker for neuroinflammation and is typically found in mature astrocytes, which are cells located in the brain and spinal cord, and is involved in cellular processes such as autophagy, neurotransmitter uptake and astrocyte development. Although inflammation is usually linked to increased GFAP levels, the researchers observed a slight decrease in GFAP expression in the microplastic-exposed mice. This finding aligns with previous studies suggesting that early stages of certain diseases might be characterized by astrocyte atrophy, leading to decreased GFAP expression.
​
These findings underscore the potential for microplastics to contribute to neurological damage and cognitive decline, emphasizing the need for further research to fully understand the implications for human health.

Microplastics, increasingly recognized as endocrine disruptors, are now believed to be present in the majority of people. These tiny particles can cause structural changes and physical damage in the body, potentially long before their long-term endocrine effects have a chance to accumulate and cause harm on their own. One of the most concerning impacts of microplastics is their potential role in male infertility.
​
Many products, particularly canned and plastic goods, are high in synthetic forms of estrogen, such as bisphenol A (BPA). BPA, a well-known xenoestrogen, is notorious for leaching from polycarbonate plastics into food and drinks, especially when exposed to heat. This exposure can lead to various health issues, including alterations in liver function, insulin resistance, damage to developing fetuses, and modifications in reproductive and neurological functions.

Environmental toxins, including microplastics, are capable of penetrating the testicle and semen, potentially leading to deleterious effects on testicular function. This includes impairing testosterone production and sperm production, both of which are critical for male and female fertility. Research indicates that male factor infertility contributes to 50% of all infertility cases and is the sole cause in 20-30% of cases. The presence of microplastics and other endocrine-disrupting chemicals in the environment is increasingly seen as a significant factor in this rising trend.

Moreover, BPA and similar chemicals act as agonists for estrogen receptors, inhibiting thyroid hormone-mediated transcription, altering pancreatic beta cell function, and increasing the likelihood of obesity, cardiovascular diseases, and reproductive issues. The pervasive nature of these toxins in Western civilization underscores the urgent need to address their impact on human health, particularly concerning male fertility and overall endocrine function.
​
This segment highlights the pressing concern that environmental pollutants like microplastics pose to human health, particularly through their role as endocrine disruptors and their potential contribution to the growing issue of male infertility.

Research has increasingly shown that these tiny plastic particles can induce severe biological effects that span multiple generations and trigger various health conditions, including cancer.

In vitro studies have demonstrated that polystyrene nanoparticles (PS NPs) can induce oxidative stress, which leads to cellular damage in a context-dependent manner. This oxidative stress can result in apoptosis (programmed cell death) and autophagic cell death, processes that can significantly impact the health of exposed organisms.

Research using zebrafish models has provided alarming insights into the long-term effects of PS exposure. Zebrafish injected with 20 nm-sized PS particles during their embryonic stage and later grown in a plastic-free environment still passed on significant health issues to their offspring. The affected offspring exhibited malformations, decreased survival rates, increased heart and blood flow rates, and impaired growth, including smaller eye size and reduced locomotor activity. These effects were linked to increased cell death, elevated reactive oxygen species, and decreased lipid accumulation in the larvae. This study highlights the potential for PS exposure to disrupt biological processes across generations and contribute to disease development, including cancer.

BPA, an endocrine-disrupting chemical widely used in plastic manufacturing, has been identified as a possible risk factor for developing breast cancer. BPA has a strong affinity for non-classical membrane estrogen receptors, such as G protein-coupled receptors (GPER), and can alter multiple molecular pathways within cells (estrogen-related receptor gamma (ERRγ) pathway, HOXB9 (homeobox-containing gene) pathway, bone morphogenetic protein 2 (BMP2) and (BMP4), immunoregulatory cytokine disturbance in the mammary gland). These changes include disruptions in the EGFR-STAT3 pathway, FOXA1 in estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer cells, and epigenetic modifications through the enhancer of zeste homolog 2 (EZH2). These molecular alterations can lead to the undesired stimulation or repression of genes, increasing the risk of developing breast cancer.

The evidence linking MNP exposure to significant health risks is growing. From inducing oxidative stress and cell death to potentially triggering transgenerational effects and increasing the risk of breast cancer, the implications of MNP exposure are profound. Limiting exposure to these harmful particles, especially BPA, is crucial in reducing the risk of developing serious health conditions, including cancer.

In a groundbreaking study published in IJIR: Your Sexual Medicine Journal, microplastics have been discovered for the first time in human penile tissue. This discovery raises concerns about a potential link between microplastics and erectile dysfunction (ED), opening up new avenues of research into the impact of environmental pollutants on male sexual health.

The study, highlighted by CNN Health, analyzed tissue samples from five men undergoing penile implant surgery for ED at the University of Miami. Astonishingly, four out of the five samples contained microplastics, with polyethylene terephthalate (PET) and polypropylene (PP) being the most common types found.

Ranjith Ramasamy, the study’s lead author and a reproductive urology expert, explained, "The presence of microplastics in the penis is unsurprising. The penis, like the heart, is a highly vascular organ." This observation underscores the potential risk that microplastics pose to vascular-rich organs, but the connection between these particles and ED remains uncertain.

Male infertility remains a global issue, with its causes often not well understood. Given the growing evidence of microplastics infiltrating various biological systems, such as blood and lungs, researchers are now exploring their potential effects on reproductive systems. Previous research has investigated the presence of microplastics in male reproductive organs. For example, in one study, researchers discovered 12 different types of microplastics in the testicles of dogs and humans. In dogs, they found that higher levels of certain microplastics correlated with lower sperm counts and reduced testis weight.

Further research is essential to determine whether microplastics contribute to ED or other health issues. According to Ramasamy, "We need to identify if microplastics are linked to ED and if there are specific types or quantities that cause harm." The discovery marks the beginning of what could be a critical exploration into how microplastics may affect male sexual function and overall health.
​
As the scientific community continues to investigate, this study highlights the growing concern over the pervasive presence of microplastics in the human body and their potential implications for health, particularly in sensitive and vital tissues such as those involved in sexual function.

The study of microplastics and nanoplastics is fraught with challenges and complexities that make it difficult to fully understand their impact on the environment and human health. One of the main obstacles is the sheer diversity and complexity of these plastic particles. Micro- and nanoplastics are not a single type of material but rather a complex mixture of various polymers, additives, and contaminants. This diversity complicates efforts to develop standardized methods for detecting and analyzing these particles.

To minimize your contribution to global microplastics pollution, it's essential to make conscious decisions about the plastic products you buy and how you dispose of them. The pervasive issue of microplastics begins with the widespread use of cheap, disposable plastic items that are used once and immediately discarded. With nearly 8 billion people on the planet, this behavior results in an immense amount of plastic waste being generated every day. 
​
One of the most effective steps you can take is to choose recyclable plastic goods and recycle them correctly. Look for the universal recycling logo, often marked with a number inside the symbol. With approximately 299 million tons of plastic produced annually, these codes help identify how safe the plastic is, its environmental impact, and its recyclability. This number, known as the resin identification code, identifies the type of plastic and its recyclability. Here's a breakdown of common plastics and how to handle them:

• Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET, Plastic #1): Found in clear beverage bottles, synthetic fibers, and food packaging. PET is recyclable but should not be reused, especially if exposed to heat, as it can leach harmful chemicals, like antimony trioxide and DEHA, to leach into your liquids. Avoid reusing these containers as their porous nature can harbor bacteria.
• High-Density Polyethylene (HDPE, Plastic #2): Used in milk jugs, detergent bottles, and piping. HDPE is opaque, widely recyclable and considered one of the safer plastics. It has a low risk of leaching harmful substances and is widely accepted by recycling programs.
• Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC, Plastic #3): Common in plumbing pipes, cable insulation, medical tubing, and window frames, PVC is not recyclable and should be avoided, particularly for food-related use due to its harmful chemical (phthalates, dioxins, etc.) content which interfere with hormonal development.
• Low-Density Polyethylene (LDPE, Plastic #4): Found in grocery bags, containers, squeezable bottles and some food wraps, LDPE is difficult to recycle. It's better to reuse these items or switch to alternatives like reusable bags. Significant environmental impact.
• Polypropylene (PP, Plastic #5): Used in food containers, automotive parts, textiles, and medical devices, and yogurt cups, PP is generally safe and recyclable in many areas.
• Polystyrene (PS, Plastic #6): Used for disposable cutlery, food containers (foam plates/cups), foam packaging (Styrofoam, packing peanuts), and insulation materials, PS is notoriously difficult to recycle and can leach carcinogenic chemicals (styrene), especially when heated. It's best to avoid using PS altogether. It can take hundreds of years to decompose. 
• Other (Plastic #7): This category includes a variety of plastics (new/mixed plastics, LEXAN, etc.) that are often difficult to recycle and may contain harmful chemicals like BPA. Use products in this category with caution. Some are recyclable and some are not.
  • Polycarbonate (PC): Used in eyewear lenses, DVDs, automotive parts, and reusable water bottles. Should generally be avoided, especially in food and drink containers due to their potential to leach harmful chemicals. 
  • Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS): Found in LEGO bricks, automotive parts, and consumer electronics. It's environmental impact due to poor recyclability is concerning.
  • Polyamide (Nylon): Used in textiles, automotive parts, and industrial components.
  • Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE): Known as Teflon, used in non-stick cookware, plumbing tape, and industrial applications.
  • Polylactic Acid (PLA): A biodegradable plastic made from renewable resources like corn starch, used in disposable cups, packaging, and 3D printing. It’s still not perfect for high-temperature environments, as it can deform or release lactic acid under heat.

A 2020 review in Earth-Science Reviews identified microplastics in air pollution as potentially the largest contributor to microplastic contamination worldwide, affecting even remote regions like the Arctic and the vast expanses of our oceans. The pervasive nature of microplastics in the atmosphere is alarming, as these particles are not only inhaled but also deposited on land and water surfaces through precipitation, leading to widespread environmental and health impacts.
​
However, there are steps individuals can take to mitigate their exposure to microplastics and reduce their environmental footprint:

1. Opt for Compostable or Biodegradable Products: Traditional plastics are made from synthetic materials that can take thousands of years to degrade. Products labeled as compostable or biodegradable are designed to break down more quickly, either by decomposing in the soil or being consumed by microorganisms. Examples of rapidly degrading materials include starch-based polymers, plant-based silvergrass, wood fiber, and coconut fiber.
2. Avoid Harmful Plastic Substitutes: While it's beneficial to reduce single-use plastics, not all alternatives are created equal. For instance, "biodegradable" plastic bottles or bags may still take years to break down and could release harmful chemicals during degradation. Similarly, bamboo products (straws and silverware), though sustainable in small quantities, could become problematic if demand leads to over-harvesting of bamboo forests. Re-used plastic (clothes or shoes made of “recovered” plastic) still keeps plastic in the manufacturing and consumption cycle, leading to further environmental pollution by microplastics
3. Consider Durable, Eco-Friendly Alternatives: Many companies now offer long-lasting alternatives to plastic, such as glass or stainless steel products. Though initially more expensive, these materials do not generate microplastics and can endure years of use. For example, using stainless steel or glass containers instead of plastic can significantly reduce microplastic exposure, especially when heating food or beverages.

Reducing plastic consumption and waste generation is an effective strategy. Simple steps like using reusable shopping bags, using your own coffee mug when getting coffee to go, avoiding plastic-wrapped dry cleaning, ​bringing drinking water from home in glass water bottles instead of buying bottled water, and store foods in glassware or mason jars instead of plastic bags. You can also take your own leftover container to restaurants, which can significantly cut down the amount of plastic that ends up in landfills and oceans, thereby decreasing the microplastic contamination in our food and water. 

​Strategies such as these will help to reduce the amount of plastic that can migrate into your food.  Plastic is all around us and can be extremely difficult to avoid. But if you start looking around, you may find many areas of your life where you can eliminate the use of plastic and replace the it with something inert that won’t harm the environment and your health.

Given that adults may ingest thousands of microplastics annually through water consumption alone, it is advisable to minimize the use of plastic water bottles. Opting for a non-plastic water container, like one made from stainless steel or copper, can significantly reduce this exposure. Additionally, experts recommend avoiding microwaving food in plastic containers or placing them in the dishwasher, as heat can cause more plastic to leach into food, and release into the environment.

These changes, while seemingly small, can collectively make a significant difference in reducing microplastic pollution and protecting both human health and the environment.

In the battle against plastic pollution, both businesses and individuals play crucial roles. One initiative that stands out is the B Corporation movement. B Corporations are businesses committed to reducing global waste and promoting fair hiring and manufacturing practices across their supply chains. These companies actively work to minimize the use of materials that generate microplastics, making them leaders in sustainability. When shopping, look for the B Corporation logo—a "B" encircled—to support companies that adhere to these eco-friendly standards.

On an individual level, protecting yourself from airborne microplastics is becoming increasingly important. Microplastic particles in the air, though often larger than typical pollutants like PM10 and PM2.5, still pose significant health risks. Thankfully, these larger particles are easier to capture with a high-performance air purifier.

​While many air purifiers can only trap smaller pollutants, high-performance models with centrifugal fans are specifically designed to capture even large and heavy microplastics. These purifiers filter out particles as small as 0.003 microns, which is far smaller than the tiniest microplastics.

Consider using a personal air purifier in spaces where microplastics are likely to accumulate, such as bedrooms or workspaces, where they can be emitted from clothing, appliances, and containers. Additionally, a car air purifier can help filter out microplastics from tire and brake wear, which can infiltrate your vehicle's interior, especially in high-traffic areas.

​Emerging research suggests that sweating, whether through exercise or sauna use, may play a role in detoxifying the body from accrued microplastics. A 2022 study detected microplastic particles such as polyethylene, PET, and polymers from sportswear in sweat collected after exercise, indicating that perspiration could aid in the elimination of these particles alongside other toxins like pesticides, flame retardants, and bisphenol-A. This adds to a growing body of evidence showing that sweating can facilitate the excretion of heavy metals, petrochemicals, and other pollutants.
​
As with other toxins, microparticle content in sweat could indicate efficacy of interventions promoting clearance. Given the increasing prevalence of microplastics in our environment, inducing sweat through regular sauna use or exercise could offer a simple and accessible detoxification method to help reduce the body's burden of microplastics. However, more research is needed to understand the full impact of repeated sweating on microplastic levels in the body. Additionally, regulatory limits specific to nanoplastics in food and drinks could help safeguard public health given the unprecedented exposure uncovered by advanced microscopy techniques. After all, "seeing" the risk is the first step toward safety.

Nearly 75% of US adults are overweight or obese, and 40% have pre-diabetes or diabetes. This widespread issue has led to increased interest in medications like Ozempic (Semaglutide), a GLP-1 (glucagon-like peptide-1) receptor agonist.

Ozempic mimics the hormone GLP-1, which regulates blood sugar by stimulating insulin secretion and inhibiting glucagon release. It also slows digestion, increasing feelings of fullness and reducing caloric intake. This dual action helps improve glycemic control and can aid in weight loss. Efficacy varies among individuals; about 20% of users may not lose weight or may even gain weight. This is likely due to the fact that while for many people Ozempic reduces appetite, for some individuals Ozempic may lead to blood sugar that is too low, a condition known as hypoglycemia, which can increase cravings for carbohydrates and sugar.​

Ozempic has shown significant benefits for many, but it is not without risks. Known side effects include kidney damage, gastroparesis, gallbladder issues, muscle loss, nutrient deficiencies, thyroid cancer, and mental health concerns, including depression and increased suicidal ideation. Importantly, Ozempic is FDA-approved only for Type 2 Diabetes, not for weight loss.

​When discontinuing Ozempic, rapid weight gain, often termed "Ozempic rebound," is common. Studies show that within a year of stopping, two-thirds of users regain the lost weight, often ending up with a higher body fat percentage due to muscle loss (leads to lowered metabolic rate), poor dietary and lifestyle factors, and metabolic inhibition due to calorie restriction. ​

"With...[GLP-1]...treatments, there is a concomitant reduction in lean body mass, which seems to be in the range of 25%–40% of total weight loss." In other words, studies show that upwards of 40% of the weight lost on Ozempic isn’t the fat you’re hoping to bid adieu to – it’s muscle!

Additional Risks of Ozempic

• Pancreatitis (inflammation of pancreas): 9.09 times higher risk.
• Bowel Obstruction: 4.22 times higher risk.
• Gastroparesis (stomach paralysis): 3.67 times higher risk.
• Adipogenesis: Recent studies suggest that GLP-1 agonists can increase adipogenesis, the creation of new fat cells. While this might seem counterintuitive for weight loss, it emphasizes the importance of combining medication with lifestyle changes.
• Autoimmune Reactions: There have been reports of semaglutide-induced lupus erythematosus, which can involve multiple organs.
  
• Respiratory Risks: Some patients on semaglutide have experienced pulmonary aspiration of gastric contents.
  
• ​Appendicitis Risk: Emerging evidence suggests that GLP-1 receptor agonists, like Ozempic, may increase the risk of appendicitis.
  

Safety trial duration on Ozempic lasted only 30-68 weeks, so safety for use beyond this timeframe has not been evaluated.

For those seeking more advanced methods, peptides can be a powerful tool with fewer side effects than GLP-1 agonists. Some effective peptides include:

1. IGF-1 LR3: Increases muscle by stimulating hyperplasia.
2. Ipamorelin: Enhances muscle growth and suppresses hunger by increasing growth hormone secretion.
3. CJC-1295: Promotes fat loss and muscle protein synthesis by increasing IGF-1 and functioning as a growth hormone-releasing hormone.
4. Tesamorelin: Reduces visceral fat and stimulates muscle protein production.
5. 5-Amino-1MQ: Blocks NNMT, an enzyme linked to obesity, facilitating fat reduction and providing clean energy.

For injectable peptides, I recommend the companies Limitless Life or Peptide Sciences. If you're looking for quality oral peptide formulations, check out LVLUP Health.
​
Also, it’s important to understand that the best effects from any of the peptides listed above come via pairing them with a consistent weight training routine, adequate protein intake, and a physically active lifestyle. 
​

​While Ozempic has been demonstrated to mitigate blood sugar control and weight management, it's essential to weigh these against potential risks and side effects. Incorporating lifestyle changes and considering natural alternatives can help mitigate these risks and support long-term health. Natural alternatives and peptides can provide effective, safer options for achieving weight loss and muscle gain. Combining these with lifestyle changes is crucial for long-term success. Addressing the root causes of obesity through lifestyle changes is crucial for long-term health. Prioritizing physical activity, a balanced diet, reducing exposure to toxins, managing stress, and ensuring adequate sleep can significantly impact overall well-being and weight management.

Wadden, Thomas A. et al. “The Role of Lifestyle Modification with Second-Generation Anti-obesity Medications: Comparisons, Questions, and Clinical Opportunities.” Current Obesity Reports 12 (2023): 453 - 473. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13679-023-00534-z.
​
Castellanos, Vanessa, et al. “Semaglutide-Induced Lupus Erythematosus with Multiorgan Involvement.” Cureus, vol. 16, no. 3, 1 Mar. 2024, p. e55324, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38559525/, https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.55324. 

Billings, Sabrina A., et al. “Rhabdomyolysis Associated with Semaglutide Therapy: A Case Report.” Cureus, vol. 15, no. 12, 1 Dec. 2023, p. e50227, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38192938/, https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.50227. 

Li, J, et al. “Case Report: Semaglutide-Associated Depression: A Report of Two Cases.” Frontiers in Psychiatry, vol. 14, 29 Aug. 2023, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10495976/#:~:text=At%20present%2C%20most%20reported%20adverse, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1238353.

Casella, Sarah, and Katelyn Galli. “Appendicitis: A Hidden Danger of GLP-1 Receptor Agonists?” ˜the œJournal of Pharmacy Technology, vol. 40, no. 2, 7 Dec. 2023, pp. 108–111, https://doi.org/10.1177/87551225231216638. 

Challa, Tenagne Delessa, et al. “Regulation of Adipocyte Formation by GLP-1/GLP-1R Signaling.” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 287, no. 9, Feb. 2012, pp. 6421–6430, https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.m111.310342. 

Willoughby, Darryn, et al. “Body Composition Changes in Weight Loss: Strategies and Supplementation for Maintaining Lean Body Mass, a Brief Review.” Nutrients, vol. 10, no. 12, 3 Dec. 2018, p. 1876, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6315740/, https://doi.org/10.3390/nu10121876.

Wilding, John P. H., et al. “Weight Regain and Cardiometabolic Effects after Withdrawal of Semaglutide: The STEP 1 Trial Extension.” Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism, vol. 24, no. 8, 19 May 2022, pp. 1553–1564, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35441470/, https://doi.org/10.1111/dom.14725.

Leehey, David J., et al. “Acute Kidney Injury Associated with Semaglutide.” Kidney Medicine, vol. 3, no. 2, Mar. 2021, pp. 282–285, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xkme.2020.10.008.

Bezin, Julien, et al. “GLP-1 Receptor Agonists and the Risk of Thyroid Cancer.” Diabetes Care, vol. 46, no. 2, 10 Nov. 2022, https://doi.org/10.2337/dc22-1148.