Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Discarded Face Masks and Effect on Marine Life.
The paper to which I'll refer in this post is this one: Identification of Additives in Disposable Face Masks and Evaluation of Their Toxicity Using Marine Medaka (Oryzias melastigma) Xiao-Pei Li, Guo-Yong Huang, Shu-Qing Qiu, Dong-Qiao Lei, Chen-Si Wang, Lingtian Xie, and Guang-Guo Ying Environmental Science & Technology 2024 58 (1), 121-131.
From the paper's introduction:
The outbreak of the COVID-19 has caused an enormous worldwide demand for face masks to mitigate airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2. (1?3) It is estimated that ?200 million disposable plastic face masks are manufactured per day in June 2020 in China, which is the main supplier. (2) Meanwhile, more than 1 billion face masks are consumed globally each month in 2020. (1) As a result, about 1.4 billion face masks were casually discharged into the environment in March 2023 in China. (4) This improper disposal of face masks has led to their presence in aquatic environments (rivers and estuaries), ultimately contaminating the ocean ecosystem. (5?7) The discarded face masks have attracted public attention as a new pollution source of the marine environment. (8) However, there is a lack of data on the complete evaluation of the face mask pollution and their impact in marine wildlife. (1,2)
Face masks are typically manufactured using synthetic thermoplastic carbon polymers such as polypropylene (PP), polyethylene (PE), and polylactic acid (PLA). (2,6,9) Various organic additives, including plasticizers, flame retardants, dyes, etc., are supplemented in the polymers to enhance the properties of face masks. (10,11) These additives have been reported to be present in face masks. (10?12) For instance, up to 4.8 ?g/g di-n-butyl phthalate in face masks with 98.2% detection frequency (11) and 0.02 to 27.7 ?g/mask of organophosphate esters have been reported. (12) In addition, elevated levels of lithium (49.7 mg/g) and aluminum (6.2 mg/g) are found in face masks. (13) Nonetheless, the chemicals added in the face masks are far from fully understood due to the complexity of these additives.
The additives in the face masks can be leached out once they are in the ocean, posing a potential hazard to marine organisms. (2,6) Previous studies have demonstrated that plastic additives can cause various adverse effects on the development, nerve, and endocrine system in aquatic animals. (14?17) In addition, mask fragments can downregulate the transcription of target genes related to reproduction in zebrafish, (13) cause histopathological alterations of the liver, gills, and intestine of zebrafish, and disrupt their aggressive behavior. (18) However, research on the toxicity of face masks, particularly their additives, to marine organisms is extremely scarce.
In this study, one of the main objectives was to qualify and quantify the organic additives and metals in 13 face masks (biodegradable and nondegradable masks). The additives in face masks might be numerous and complex, necessitating the use of multiple biomarkers from different biological organizations to assess their toxicity. In addition, marine medaka (Oryzias melastigma) has been used as a marine fish model for the evaluation of the toxicity of pollutants. (19,20) Therefore, the potential toxicities of face masks (i.e., developmental toxicity, locomotor behavior, and estrogenic activity) using O. melastigma embryos and larvae were evaluated. The findings of this study will enable a better understanding of the risk face masks pose to marine ecosystem...
Face masks are typically manufactured using synthetic thermoplastic carbon polymers such as polypropylene (PP), polyethylene (PE), and polylactic acid (PLA). (2,6,9) Various organic additives, including plasticizers, flame retardants, dyes, etc., are supplemented in the polymers to enhance the properties of face masks. (10,11) These additives have been reported to be present in face masks. (10?12) For instance, up to 4.8 ?g/g di-n-butyl phthalate in face masks with 98.2% detection frequency (11) and 0.02 to 27.7 ?g/mask of organophosphate esters have been reported. (12) In addition, elevated levels of lithium (49.7 mg/g) and aluminum (6.2 mg/g) are found in face masks. (13) Nonetheless, the chemicals added in the face masks are far from fully understood due to the complexity of these additives.
The additives in the face masks can be leached out once they are in the ocean, posing a potential hazard to marine organisms. (2,6) Previous studies have demonstrated that plastic additives can cause various adverse effects on the development, nerve, and endocrine system in aquatic animals. (14?17) In addition, mask fragments can downregulate the transcription of target genes related to reproduction in zebrafish, (13) cause histopathological alterations of the liver, gills, and intestine of zebrafish, and disrupt their aggressive behavior. (18) However, research on the toxicity of face masks, particularly their additives, to marine organisms is extremely scarce.
In this study, one of the main objectives was to qualify and quantify the organic additives and metals in 13 face masks (biodegradable and nondegradable masks). The additives in face masks might be numerous and complex, necessitating the use of multiple biomarkers from different biological organizations to assess their toxicity. In addition, marine medaka (Oryzias melastigma) has been used as a marine fish model for the evaluation of the toxicity of pollutants. (19,20) Therefore, the potential toxicities of face masks (i.e., developmental toxicity, locomotor behavior, and estrogenic activity) using O. melastigma embryos and larvae were evaluated. The findings of this study will enable a better understanding of the risk face masks pose to marine ecosystem...
The results of the analysis of the face masks is shown graphically:
The caption:
Figure 2. Levels of organic additives (A) and metals (B) in face masks (FM). TeP: tris(2-ethylhexyl) phosphate; DiBP: diisobutyl phthalate; OM: octyl 4-methoxycinnamate; DEP: diethyl phthalate; TEP: triethyl phosphate; TPP: triphenyl phosphate; DHP: dihexyl phthalate; TbP: tris(2-butoxyethyl) phosphate; BBP: benzyl butyl phthalate; EDP: 2-ethylhexyl diphenyl phosphate.
The authors found that some of the substances listed changed the expression of 19 genes in the fish, and affected the swimming behavior of larval fishes.
There are likely human physiological effects of these additives as well as those observed in fish, but it is important to keep in mind that the risks posed by the face masks are more than likely far lower than the risks of getting Covid were or are.
In our society we seem to expect zero risks, but zero risks are impossible, always have been impossible, and always will be impossible. We seem to have, to steal and paraphrase a locution from the Poet Amiri Baraka, "...the single specious need to keep what we have never really had..."
Nevertheless, we should seek to minimize risks by at least hoping that what we believe to be "proper disposal" will in fact be proper disposal.
I was disturbed, during the height of Covid (when I was using a lot of masks myself) by seeing so many discarded as litter.
Have a nice weekend.