The boffins in the chemistry department at Columbia University invented a new way of detecting tiny particles in water. The counting method is called Stimulated Raman Scattering (SRS) microscopy. They looked at popular brands of water in plastic bottles. They write in a recent PNAS paper:
Significance
Micro-nano plastics originating from the prevalent usage of plastics have raised increasingly alarming concerns worldwide. However, there remains a fundamental knowledge gap in nanoplastics because of the lack of effective analytical techniques. This study developed a powerful optical imaging technique for rapid analysis of nanoplastics with unprecedented sensitivity and specificity. As a demonstration, micro-nano plastics in bottled water are analyzed with multidimensional profiling of individual plastic particles. Quantification suggests more than 105 particles (100,000) in each liter of bottled water, the majority of which are nanoplastics. This study holds the promise to bridge the knowledge gap on plastic pollution at the nano level.
AbstractPlastics are now omnipresent in our daily lives. The existence of microplastics (1 µm to 5 mm in length) and possibly even nanoplastics (<1 μm) has recently raised health concerns. In particular, nanoplastics are believed to be more toxic since their smaller size renders them much more amenable, compared to microplastics, to enter the human body. However, detecting nanoplastics imposes tremendous analytical challenges on both the nano-level sensitivity and the plastic-identifying specificity, leading to a knowledge gap in this mysterious nanoworld surrounding us. To address these challenges, we developed a hyperspectral stimulated Raman scattering (SRS) imaging platform with an automated plastic identification algorithm that allows micro-nano plastic analysis at the single-particle level with high chemical specificity and throughput. .... With the established technique, we studied the micro-nano plastics from bottled water as a model system. We successfully detected and identified nanoplastics from major plastic types. Micro-nano plastics concentrations were estimated to be about 2.4 ± 1.3 × 105 particles per liter of bottled water, about 90% of which are nanoplastics. This is orders of magnitude more than the microplastic abundance reported previously in bottled water.
As much as experts are convinced that puny plastics are all around us, few methods to date have been able to directly detect them. Scientists suspect that the hardest to see are the most damaging of the lot: plastic fragments 100 nanometers in size or less, less than 1/100th the width of human hair. Now, a new study, published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, reports a plastics detection technique that can quickly identify the size and composition of miniscule particulates. The authors found that an average of 240,000 particles populate a liter of bottled water, a number greater than previously reported. The find illuminates the true presence of micro- and nanoplastics littering our homes and lives.
“This is really a breakthrough,” says Sherri Mason, director of sustainability at the Pennsylvania State University at Erie, the Behrend College, who wasn’t involved in the research. “If we can’t detect the particles, then we can’t study them. That’s why this study is so important.”
Hm . . . . . YIKES!! 240,000 plastic bits/L?? (1 L = 1.057 qt)
Some commentary from the learned peanut gallery commentated:
1. As I understand it, fetuses are being found with microplastics. I'd go so far to say the majority of the people of the world are full of microplastics.*2. Life in plastic it’s fantastic!
3. I am become Barbie
4. Destroyer of worlds.
5. This Barbenheimer thing is getting out of hand
6. They found a whole plastic bag on the bottom of the Mariana Trench. That's ~11,000 meters under the sea surface.
7. People are putting plastic in their Mariana trench all the time for fun.
8. Plastic degrades over thousands of years... and our life expectancy has increased as we got more plastic within us... that would mean that... if we were made 100% of plastic, we'd last thousands of years!
* Microplastic particles are found on both sides of the human placenta (both maternal and fetal) for the first time, in a study led by Antonio Ragusa of the San Giovanni Calibita Fatebenefratelli Hospital. In this study, six placentas were studied and found to contain a variety of plastics commonly used in man-made coatings, paints, adhesives, plasters, finger paints, polymers, cosmetics, and personal care products of various colors. (the research paper is here)
This helps explain why DJT needs to pull out all the stops and all the corks from all the bungs in his own defense:
OK, OK, DJT’s defense isn't quite as good as the dog ate my homework defense. Sheesh.
Although this news bit is posited as a big deal, it doesn’t look big to me. Maybe I’m missing something. Salon reports:
____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
DJT’s latest defense in the Georgia state election interference lawsuit is that no one told him it was illegal to overturn an election! Mediaite reports:
Trump Demands Election Crimes Case Be Dropped In New FilingBecause Nobody Told Him Overturning Election Was CrimeFormer President Donald Trump demanded the election crimes case against him be dismissed on the grounds that he didn’t have advance notice he would be committing a crime by trying to overturn the election. .... Trump’s attorney argued Trump “lacked fair notice” that his conduct could be considered criminal:
DJT’s I didn’t know it
was illegal defense
Maximum jail terms under Georgia state law
That defense ranks right up there with the dog ate my homework defense.
Cecil ate $4,000 in bills that were
laying around on the counter
Bad dog, bad, bad dog!
____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
Experts: Jack Smith’s “dramatic new proof” so “overwhelming”reluctant witnesses may decide to flip
Professor: Trump “demonstrated a criminal intent” to collaborate with insurrectionists at “expense of the Constitution”Former President Donald Trump refused to help stop the violent attack on the U.S. Capitol and instead watched TV from the White House, according to previously undisclosed details that special counsel Jack Smith's team uncovered as part of its Jan. 6 probe, ABC News reported.
A significant portion of the information in the report comes from interviews with Dan Scavino, Trump's former deputy chief of staff and current senior adviser to his reelection campaign. Scavino, who refused to cooperate with the House select committee's probe on Jan. 6, citing executive privilege, had his claims rejected by a judge last year and was informed he had to comply with a grand jury subpoena. Essential parts of his testimony were disclosed to ABC News.
“Trump was ‘very angry’ that day – not angry at what his supporters were doing to a pillar of American democracy, but steaming that the election was allegedly stolen from him and his supporters, who were ‘angry on his behalf,’” ABC News reported. “Scavino described it all as ‘very unsettling,’” sources told the outlet.
“Indeed, Trump’s angry response to Scavino’s comment to him that there’s smoke coming out of the Capitol in effect was, ‘Let it Burn,’” [former prosecutor] professor Bennett Gershman said. “And his nonchalant indifference to Vice President Pence’s safety and welfare offers chilling proof that Trump’s conscious purpose, namely, his intent, was first to incite an insurrection and then by his inaction to demonstrate his intent that the insurrection effectively stop Congress from doing its constitutional duty to certify the election results.”
This proof would be “powerful circumstantial” evidence of Trump’s criminal intent underlying all the federal charges, he added.
Aw, poor Scavino, he was all unsettled on 1/6 because his boss was trying to overthrow the government and pull off a coup. Poor, poor boy. Sad. /s
Actually, I wish Scavino would be put in the slammer for a decade or so to give him time to think about why he supported DJT in the first place and why he refused to cooperate with prosecutors. Citing executive privilege was pure cynical bullshit by Scavino and he knew it all along.
This news isn’t new. We all knew that DJT was watching the coup attempt on TV and refused to do anything about it. That makes perfect sense because he wanted the coup attempt to succeed, not fail because he intervened to stop it. Maybe what makes this important is that there is now testimony under oath about DKT’s morally rotted, autocratic state of mind on 1/6.
No comments:
Post a Comment