Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Scientists Find Microplastics in Human Brain Tissue Above the Nose

News Feed
Wednesday, September 18, 2024

Microplastics are tiny pieces of plastic that have been found all over the world and in the human body. Oregon State University via Wikimedia Commons under CC BY-SA 2.0 Microplastics are inescapable. These miniscule plastic particles have been found at ancient archaeological sites, in freshly fallen snow on Antarctica, at the top of Mount Everest and deep in the Mariana Trench. In the human body, they’ve shown up in blood, baby poop, placentas and lungs. Now, scientists have also discovered the tiny pollutants in brain tissue, specifically the olfactory bulb that sits above the nose. They shared their findings Monday in the journal JAMA Network Open. Humans have two olfactory bulbs located in the forebrain, which are connected to each nasal cavity by the olfactory nerve. Olfactory bulbs help detect and process scents and odors, passing information from the nose to the brain. Microplastics have been found in human brains, according to recent research that has not yet been peer-reviewed. The new findings raise concerns among researchers that the olfactory pathway might allow microplastics to access the brain and potentially reach brain areas beyond the olfactory bulb. “Once present in [the olfactory bulb], there can be translocation to other regions of the brain,” says study co-author Luís Fernando Amato-Lourenço, an environmental scientist at the Free University of Berlin, to CNN’s Sandee LaMotte. “Translocation depends on several factors, including the shape of the particle, whether it is a fiber or a fragment, its size and the body’s defense mechanisms.” For the study, the team sampled olfactory bulb tissues from 15 human cadavers. The patients used in the study had died between the ages of 33 and 100. Eight of the samples contained microplastics, or bits of plastic less than less than five millimeters long. The researchers found 16 total plastic fibers and particles made of polypropylene, polyamide, nylon and polyethylene vinyl acetate. The most common was polypropylene, a type of plastic that’s used widely in clothes, furniture, rugs, packaging and more. The researchers did not analyze the samples for nanoplastics, which are even tinier particles about 1,000 times smaller than the width of a human hair. But the microplastics they did find were “much smaller than those of several other studies that have determined the presence of microplastics in human organs, such as the placenta, kidneys, liver, etc.,” Amato-Lourenço tells CNN. The findings don’t come as a surprise to the team, considering the ubiquity of microplastics. In addition, the nose’s job is to prevent dust, particles and other intruders from reaching the lungs, so it makes sense that nasal tissue would also capture plastic fragments. But it remains unclear whether microplastics can reach the brain via the olfactory pathway. Some microorganisms, such as the brain-eating amoeba Naegleria fowleri, can enter the brain this way, but those incidents are rare. “There is evidence that very small airborne particles can move to the brain via the olfactory bulb, but this is not known to be a major route of trafficking material to the brain,” says Matthew Campen, a toxicologist at the University of New Mexico who was not involved with the research, to NBC News’ Kaitlin Sullivan. Campen is the lead author of the preprint research that found microplastics in human brains. Researchers also weren’t able to determine why they found microplastics in some cadavers but not in others. One possible explanation is that inflammation of the nasal cavity lining, called the mucosa, made it easier for plastic particles to enter the nose tissue in only some individuals, per CNN. The potential consequences of having microplastics in the human body are also mostly unknown, though some studies suggest they could be harmful to human health. Earlier this year, researchers found a connection between microplastics in human arteries and a higher risk of heart disease. That study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine in March, marked the “first time we’ve seen a human health effect attributed to the particles themselves,” Philip Landrigan, a pediatrician and epidemiologist at Boston College who was not involved with either recent study, said to National Geographic’s Tara Haelle in April. “Until now, the mantra has always been, ‘Well, the particles are there, but we don’t know anything about what they’re doing,’” he added. “This paper changes that.” Get the latest stories in your inbox every weekday.

A new study identified the tiny pollutants in the olfactory bulbs of eight cadavers, suggesting microplastics can travel through the nose to the brain

Small pieces of sand and plastic on a table
Microplastics are tiny pieces of plastic that have been found all over the world and in the human body. Oregon State University via Wikimedia Commons under CC BY-SA 2.0

Microplastics are inescapable. These miniscule plastic particles have been found at ancient archaeological sites, in freshly fallen snow on Antarctica, at the top of Mount Everest and deep in the Mariana Trench. In the human body, they’ve shown up in blood, baby poop, placentas and lungs.

Now, scientists have also discovered the tiny pollutants in brain tissue, specifically the olfactory bulb that sits above the nose. They shared their findings Monday in the journal JAMA Network Open.

Humans have two olfactory bulbs located in the forebrain, which are connected to each nasal cavity by the olfactory nerve. Olfactory bulbs help detect and process scents and odors, passing information from the nose to the brain.

Microplastics have been found in human brains, according to recent research that has not yet been peer-reviewed. The new findings raise concerns among researchers that the olfactory pathway might allow microplastics to access the brain and potentially reach brain areas beyond the olfactory bulb.

“Once present in [the olfactory bulb], there can be translocation to other regions of the brain,” says study co-author Luís Fernando Amato-Lourenço, an environmental scientist at the Free University of Berlin, to CNN’s Sandee LaMotte. “Translocation depends on several factors, including the shape of the particle, whether it is a fiber or a fragment, its size and the body’s defense mechanisms.”

For the study, the team sampled olfactory bulb tissues from 15 human cadavers. The patients used in the study had died between the ages of 33 and 100.

Eight of the samples contained microplastics, or bits of plastic less than less than five millimeters long. The researchers found 16 total plastic fibers and particles made of polypropylene, polyamide, nylon and polyethylene vinyl acetate. The most common was polypropylene, a type of plastic that’s used widely in clothes, furniture, rugs, packaging and more.

The researchers did not analyze the samples for nanoplastics, which are even tinier particles about 1,000 times smaller than the width of a human hair. But the microplastics they did find were “much smaller than those of several other studies that have determined the presence of microplastics in human organs, such as the placenta, kidneys, liver, etc.,” Amato-Lourenço tells CNN.

The findings don’t come as a surprise to the team, considering the ubiquity of microplastics. In addition, the nose’s job is to prevent dust, particles and other intruders from reaching the lungs, so it makes sense that nasal tissue would also capture plastic fragments.

But it remains unclear whether microplastics can reach the brain via the olfactory pathway. Some microorganisms, such as the brain-eating amoeba Naegleria fowleri, can enter the brain this way, but those incidents are rare.

“There is evidence that very small airborne particles can move to the brain via the olfactory bulb, but this is not known to be a major route of trafficking material to the brain,” says Matthew Campen, a toxicologist at the University of New Mexico who was not involved with the research, to NBC News’ Kaitlin Sullivan. Campen is the lead author of the preprint research that found microplastics in human brains.

Researchers also weren’t able to determine why they found microplastics in some cadavers but not in others. One possible explanation is that inflammation of the nasal cavity lining, called the mucosa, made it easier for plastic particles to enter the nose tissue in only some individuals, per CNN.

The potential consequences of having microplastics in the human body are also mostly unknown, though some studies suggest they could be harmful to human health.

Earlier this year, researchers found a connection between microplastics in human arteries and a higher risk of heart disease. That study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine in March, marked the “first time we’ve seen a human health effect attributed to the particles themselves,” Philip Landrigan, a pediatrician and epidemiologist at Boston College who was not involved with either recent study, said to National Geographic’s Tara Haelle in April.

“Until now, the mantra has always been, ‘Well, the particles are there, but we don’t know anything about what they’re doing,’” he added. “This paper changes that.”

Get the latest stories in your inbox every weekday.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Giant Sinkhole in Chilean Mining Town Haunts Residents, Three Years On

TIERRA AMARILLA (Reuters) -Residents in the mining town of Tierra Amarilla in the Chilean desert are hopeful that a new court ruling will allay...

TIERRA AMARILLA (Reuters) -Residents in the mining town of Tierra Amarilla in the Chilean desert are hopeful that a new court ruling will allay their fears about a giant sinkhole that opened near their homes more than three years ago and remains unfilled.A Chilean environmental court this month ordered Minera Ojos del Salado, owned by Canada's Lundin Mining, to repair environmental damage related to activity at its Alcaparrosa copper mine, which is thought to have triggered the sinkhole that appeared in 2022.The ruling calls on the company to protect the region's water supply and refill the sinkhole. The cylindrical crater originally measured 64 meters (210 ft) deep and 32 meters (105 ft) wide at the surface.That has provided a small measure of relief to those in arid Tierra Amarilla in Chile's central Atacama region, who fear that without remediation the gaping hole could swallow up more land."Ever since the sinkhole occurred ... we've lived in fear," said Rudy Alfaro, whose home is 800 meters from the site. A health center and preschool are nearby too, she said."We were afraid it would get bigger, that it would expand, move toward the houses." The sinkhole expelled clouds of dust in a recent earthquake, provoking more anxiety, she said.     The court upheld a shutdown of the small Alcaparrosa mine ordered by Chile's environmental regulator in January, and confirmed "irreversible" damage to an aquifer, which drained water into the mine and weakened the surrounding rock."This is detrimental to an area that is already hydrologically stressed," said Rodrigo Saez, regional water director. Lundin said it will work with authorities to implement remediation measures.(Writing by Daina Beth Solomon, Editing by Rosalba O'Brien)Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

Scientists Warn: Bottled Water May Pose Serious Long-Term Health Risks

Using it regularly introduces tens of thousands of microplastic and nanoplastic particles into the body each year. The tropical beauty of Thailand’s Phi Phi islands is not the kind of place where most PhD journeys begin. For Sarah Sajedi, however, it was not the beaches themselves but what lay beneath them that sparked her decision [...]

A scientist’s island epiphany uncovers how single-use bottles shed micro- and nanoplastics that infiltrate the body, with emerging evidence of chronic harm and measurement blind spots. Credit: ShutterstockUsing it regularly introduces tens of thousands of microplastic and nanoplastic particles into the body each year. The tropical beauty of Thailand’s Phi Phi islands is not the kind of place where most PhD journeys begin. For Sarah Sajedi, however, it was not the beaches themselves but what lay beneath them that sparked her decision to leave a career in business and pursue academic research. “I was standing there looking out at this gorgeous view of the Andaman Sea, and then I looked down and beneath my feet were all these pieces of plastic, most of them water bottles,” she says. “I’ve always had a passion for waste reduction, but I realized that this was a problem with consumption.” Sajedi, BSc ’91, decided to return to Concordia to pursue a PhD with a focus on plastic waste. As the co-founder of ERA Environmental Management Solutions, a leading provider of environmental, health, and safety software, she brought decades of experience to compliment her studies. Her latest paper, published in the Journal of Hazardous Materials, looks at the science around the health risks posed by single-use plastic water bottles. They are serious, she says, and seriously understudied. Sarah Sajedi with Chunjiang An: “Drinking water from plastic bottles is fine in an emergency but it is not something that should be used in daily life.” Tiny threats, little known In her analysis of more than 140 scientific papers, Sajedi reports that people ingest an estimated 39,000 to 52,000 microplastic particles each year. For those who rely on bottled water, that number climbs even higher—about 90,000 additional particles compared to individuals who primarily drink tap water. These particles are invisible to the eye. Microplastics range in size from one micron (a thousandth of a millimeter) to five millimeters, while nanoplastics are smaller than a single micron. They are released as plastic bottles are manufactured, stored, transported, and gradually degrade. Because many bottles are made from low-grade plastic, they shed particles whenever they are handled or exposed to sunlight and changes in temperature. Unlike plastics that move through the food chain before entering the human body, these are consumed directly from the container itself. Sarah Sajedi and Chunjiang An. Credit: Concordia UniversityAccording to Sajedi, the health risks are significant. Once inside the body, these small plastics can pass through biological barriers, enter the bloodstream, and reach major organs. Their presence may contribute to chronic inflammation, cellular oxidative stress, hormone disruption, reproductive issues, neurological damage, and some cancers. Still, their long-term impacts are not fully understood, largely because of limited testing and the absence of standardized ways to measure and track them. Sajedi also outlines the range of methods available to detect nano- and microplastics, each with benefits and limitations. Some approaches can locate particles at extremely small scales but cannot reveal their chemical makeup. Others identify the material composition but overlook the tiniest plastics. The most sophisticated and dependable tools are often prohibitively expensive and not widely accessible. Education is the best prevention Sajedi is encouraged by the legislative action that has been adopted by governments around the world aimed at limiting plastic waste. However, she notes that the most common targets are single-use plastic bags, straws, and packaging. Very few address the pressing issue of single-use water bottles. “Education is the most important action we can take,” she says. “Drinking water from plastic bottles is fine in an emergency but it is not something that should be used in daily life. People need to understand that the issue is not acute toxicity—it is chronic toxicity.” Reference: “Unveiling the hidden chronic health risks of nano- and microplastics in single-use plastic water bottles: A review” by Sarah Sajedi, Chunjiang An and Zhi Chen, 14 June 2025, Journal of Hazardous Materials.DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2025.138948 Funding: Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada Never miss a breakthrough: Join the SciTechDaily newsletter.Follow us on Google, Discover, and News.

Wildfires in Western U.S. Play a Role in Global Warming, Research Shows

By Carole Tanzer Miller HealthDay ReporterSATURDAY, Sept. 27, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Wildfires are an increasingly common feature of life in...

By Carole Tanzer Miller HealthDay ReporterSATURDAY, Sept. 27, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Wildfires are an increasingly common feature of life in American West, and researchers are working overtime to understand how the resulting smoke affects air quality, human health and climate change."Wildfires do not emit ozone directly," Jan Mandel, a professor emeritus of mathematics at University of Colorado Denver, said in a news release. "Wildfire smoke contains chemical compounds that react with sunlight to produce ozone, often far from the fire itself."In turn, that added ozone fuels global warming.Mandel developed a computer model to gauge the air quality effects of large western wildfires that ripped across the West in 2020.His work with researchers from University of Utah and San Jose State University in California is the centerpiece of a study being published in the November issue of the journal Atmospheric Environment.Focusing on August 2020 wildfires that burned more than 1 million acres in northern California and dozens of smaller fires in Utah and Oregon that affected a combined 400,000 acres, they looked at ozone levels and air quality.Hundreds of miles from the wildfires, in Colorado, residents grappled with smoke-filled skies and repeated air quality and pollution alerts. But the impact didn’t end there, the study found.Not only did these large wildfires pump a large amount of ozone into the air, affecting people’s lungs far from the fire zone, they also added to climate change.For the study, Mandel worked with Derek Mallia of the University of Utah and Adam Kochanski of San Jose State University to model the extent to which wildfire chemical emissions wound up in the atmosphere.The takeaway: On average, wildfire smoke pumps up ozone concentrations by 21 parts per billion (ppb). On top of already high ozone levels in the West, that pushes levels over the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s 70-ppb health standard.Exposure to high levels of ozone can cause a variety of symptoms, ranging from coughing to lung and heart disease, and even premature death."Major wildfire events, such as the August 2020 episode, are likely to become more common in the coming decades due to increasing aridity driven by climate change," Mandel’s team wrote. "Thus, improving air quality across the western U.S. during the summer remains challenging," the study added. The results suggest that future reductions in pollution levels may not be enough to offset the effects of major wildfire smoke, especially in summer months. Major fires can emit as much nitric oxide as all other human-caused sources across the western U.S., the study pointed out. Wildfire smoke also contains fine particulate matter that poses significant health hazards."Given the complexity of the underlying physical and chemical processes governing smoke plume transport and chemistry, more research is needed to better understand how wildfires impact the … distribution of ozone," the study concluded.SOURCES: University of Colorado, Denver, news release, Sept. 19, 2025; Atmospheric Environment, November 2025.Copyright © 2025 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

Routine Community Screening Catches Undiagnosed Asthma

By Dennis Thompson HealthDay ReporterFRIDAY, Sept. 26, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Routine screening can help find kids who are suffering from...

By Dennis Thompson HealthDay ReporterFRIDAY, Sept. 26, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Routine screening can help find kids who are suffering from undiagnosed asthma in communities with high levels of the breathing disorder, a new study says.Asthma screening during well-child visits found that more than two-thirds (35%) of children with no previous diagnosis of asthma had at least one risk factor for the disease, researchers will report Monday at an American Academy of Pediatrics’ meeting in Denver.Further, about 24% of kids with risk factors were subsequently diagnosed with asthma, researchers said.Those diagnosed with asthma reported coughing or shortness of breath at night, previous use of an inhaler or difficulty exercising due to breathing problems, researchers said.“Asthma is often diagnosed late or not at all because parents may not think of certain symptoms such as night-time cough or needing to stop activity to catch your breath, as being related to asthma,” researcher Dr. Janine Rethy, division chief of community pediatrics at MedStar Health, a not-for-profit health care provider in the Baltimore-Washington D.C., metropolitan area, said in a news release.For the study, researchers screened 650 children ages 2 and older for asthma during well-child visits performed in a mobile medical clinic between 2021 and 2024. The mobile clinic performed these screens in urban areas with a known high prevalence of asthma.Overall, about 8% of children screened were found to have previously undiagnosed asthma, results showed. Another 18% of the kids had a previous diagnosis of asthma.The children’s home environment likely played a factor in their asthma, researchers found.About 52% of the undiagnosed kids who screened positive for asthma had poor housing conditions — mold, roaches, mice, rats, peeling paint or leaking water.About 38% of kids with a prior diagnosis of asthma also lived in such conditions, results showed.“There are also many environmental triggers in the home that may contribute to these symptoms and which a pediatrician should know about to help understand triggers and incorporate into a treatment plan,” Rethy said.The study shows that more kids with asthma can be helped if doctors and public health experts focus screening efforts on places known to have high rates of asthma, researchers said.“Asthma is highly treatable if diagnosed early and approached with a holistic lens that includes identifying and addressing environmental triggers,” researcher Dr. Karen Ganacias, a MedStar Health pediatrician, said in a news release.“In populations with high asthma prevalence, routine screening for asthma symptoms and modifiable home environmental triggers can be an important first step to improving outcomes and decreasing disparities,” Ganacias added.Findings presented at medical meetings should be considered preliminary until published in a peer-reviewed journal.SOURCE: American Academy of Pediatrics, news release, Sept. 26, 2025Copyright © 2025 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

Are Your Fruits & Veggies Hiding Pesticides? New Study Says Yes

By I. Edwards HealthDay ReporterTHURSDAY, Sept. 25, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Eating fruits and vegetables is key to good health, but a new study...

THURSDAY, Sept. 25, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Eating fruits and vegetables is key to good health, but a new study suggests that choosing produce with higher pesticide residues may boost the amount of these chemicals leaching into the body.Researchers linked the types of produce people eat with levels of pesticides found in their urine. The results show that eating foods on the Environmental Working Group’s (EWG) “Dirty Dozen” list such as spinach, strawberries and kale was tied to higher pesticide levels than eating items from the “Clean Fifteen,” which includes pineapples, sweet corn and avocados.“We found consuming different types of fruits and vegetables changes your pesticide levels accordingly, with greater consumption of the higher-residue foods increasing pesticide levels in urine more than consumption of the lower-residue foods,” study author Alexis Temkin, vice president of science at EWG, told CNN.Experts said the findings show a clear connection between what people eat and their exposure to different pesticides.“This tells us that we don’t have to measure each person — when people eat a lot of produce with high residues of pesticides, they’re more likely to have elevated levels in their urine,” Linda Birnbaum, former director of the National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences, told CNN. She was not involved with the study.The 2025 EWG Shopper’s Guide reported that samples of spinach carried more pesticide residue by weight than any other produce tested. In total, researchers found 203 different pesticides across the Dirty Dozen list. The most toxic mixtures were found in green beans, spinach, peppers and leafy greens, researchers said.On the other hand, papaya, onions and watermelon were among the least contaminated fruits, according to the Clean Fifteen list.Health experts stress that fruits and vegetables should still be part of a healthy diet. Further, if purchasing organic isn’t possible, you can reduce pesticide exposure by choosing more foods from the Clean Fifteen and by washing all produce thoroughly, researchers explained.Pesticide exposure has been linked in previous research to birth defects, heart disease and certain cancers. Children and pregnant women are especially vulnerable.SOURCE: CNN, Sept. 24, 2025Copyright © 2025 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.