Previously, we touched on sunscreen. What about our weekly exfoliating beauty routine, often known to remove our dead and dull skin. These small pieces of plastic found in our beauty products, also known as microbeads, are approximately 0.5 to 500 micrometers in diameter (Dunning , 2020). While they may be small, this may not be the case for their environmental impact.
Being small in size, collectively microbeads have a huge surface area. This allows them to absorb large quantities of toxins and other pollutants. Consequently, toxic contaminants such as pesticides, flame retardants, and industrial chemicals accumulate in our marine environment (Microbeads | Plastic Free Seas, n.d.). Their small size also meant that they are also easily ingested by marine animals. More than 280 marine species are known to ingest microbeads, a number that is only going to grow (Nast, 2016). Through bioaccumulation, we consumers eventually ingest these microbeads into our systems. Moving up the food chain, these microbeads complete a cycle when we eventually consume them in our food. While research into microbeads is relatively new, there is bound to be an effect as these chemicals have been linked to a variety of health problems (Consumers, 2019).
Tackling this issue, certain countries such as Finland and France have taken a resolve to phase out the use of microbeads, with many international brands such as Unilever following suit as well (Galgani et al., 2019). However, not all have made such a commitment where the use of microbeads still remains. In 2021, a study carried out in Macao, China, revealed that personal care and cosmetic products containing microbeads are still widely available for sale in the region, with over 70% of them containing at least one type of microbeads as an ingredient. It is estimated that over 37 billion microbeads per year are released into the environment via wastewater treatment plants in the area (Bashir et al., 2021).
Having discussed the impacts of microbeads on our marine ecosystem, excessive use of these products that contain microbeads is damaging to us as well (Somerville, 2020). For example, microbeads may be abrasive on skin pores, allowing a way for bacteria and other pollutants. As consumers, we ought to make a conscious effort in decision-making when it comes to purchasing such products. Looking for an alternative to microbeads that are environmentally friendly could be a viable option – consider whole oats, coffee, or even salt.
References
Bashir, S. M., Kimiko, S., Mak, C.-W., Fang, J. K.-H., & Gonçalves, D. (2021). Personal care and cosmetic products as a potential source of environmental contamination by microplastics in a densely populated asian city. Frontiers in Marine Science, 8. https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fmars.2021.683482
Consumers, R. (2019). You’re literally eating microplastics. How you can cut down exposure to them. Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/youre-literally-eating-microplastics-how-you-can-cut-down-exposure-to-them/2019/10/04/22ebdfb6-e17a-11e9-8dc8-498eabc129a0_story.html
Dunning , H. (2020). Silica the best environmental alternative to plastic microbeads, finds study | Imperial News | Imperial College London. Imperial News. https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/210754/silica-best-environmental-alternative-plastic-microbeads/
Galgani, L., Beiras, R., Galgani, F., Panti, C., & Borja, A. (2019). Impacts of marine litter. Frontiers Media SA.
Microbeads | plastic free seas. (n.d.). Retrieved 24 February 2022, from https://www.plasticfreeseas.org/microbeads/
Nast, C. (2016). Toxic time bomb: Here’s the science that explains why microbeads are a disaster. Wired UK. https://www.wired.co.uk/article/microbeads-international-ban-damage-marine-life-plastic
Somerville, K. (2020). Over-exfoliation: What you need to know i kate somerville. https://www.katesomerville.com/us/en/blog/why-over-exfoliation-is-bad-for-your-skin.html#:~:text=Too%20much%20of%20a%20good,than%20what%20you%20started%20with