The Plastic Tide: How Seafood Became a Health Hazard! By Mrs Vera West

I was scrolling through the news the other day when a headline stopped me cold: 99% of seafood samples from Oregon tested positive for microplastics. That's not a typo, 99%! A study from Portland State University, covered by The Guardian in February 2025, tested 182 samples of fish and shrimp, and all but two had tiny plastic bits in them. We're talking Chinook salmon, black rockfish, lingcod, Pacific herring, pink shrimp, even Pacific lamprey. These were fish and shellfish straight from fishing boats or local stores, the kind you'd pick up for dinner. And they're loaded with plastic. It's hard to wrap my head around how something as natural as seafood, something we've eaten for centuries, has become a carrier for this modern mess.

Microplastics are these minuscule plastic particles, smaller than a grain of rice, that come from all sorts of places, broken-down fishing nets, urban runoff, even the clothes we wear. The study found about 1,800 particles total, mostly fibres from synthetic fabrics like polyester. You know those comfy leggings or that fleece jacket? Every time you toss them in the wash, they shed tiny bits that end up in rivers, then oceans, then fish. Pink shrimp were the worst hit, probably because they're filter-feeders, slurping up whatever's floating near the surface, where plastics pile up alongside plankton. Herring and young lamprey weren't far behind, feeding in the same plastic-heavy zones. Chinook salmon filets had the least, about 0.028 particles per gram, but "least" doesn't mean clean. Store-bought lingcod had more plastics than fish caught fresh off boats, likely from extra handling or packaging. It's like every step from ocean to plate adds another chance for contamination.

Here's the part that gives this old girl indigestion: these microplastics aren't just sitting there. They're carrying some nasty stuff, chemicals like PFAS, bisphenol A, and phthalates. These are the kinds of toxins linked to cancer, hormone problems, even brain damage. The study mentions up to 16,000 chemicals hitching a ride on these particles, and when we eat contaminated seafood, those chemicals can leak into our bodies. Scientists have found microplastics in human blood, breast milk, even brains. A 2025 study said brain microplastic levels are up 50% in just eight years. Another found they double your risk of heart attack or stroke when they lodge in heart tissue. It's not just a vague "maybe this is bad" situation, these particles can cross into places they shouldn't, like the placenta or blood-brain barrier. We don't yet know the full damage, but the early signs are scary enough to make you rethink that tuna sandwich.

It's not just us, either. Marine life is taking a beating. Fish and shrimp end up with these plastics in their guts, causing stress and messing with their organs. A 2025 study on North Atlantic fish showed they're dealing with oxidative stress, basically, their bodies are fighting harder to stay healthy. Zooplankton, the tiny critters at the base of the food chain, eat microplastics, which get passed to shrimp, then fish, then bigger predators like dolphins or sea turtles. I read about a turtle hatchling with 104 plastic pieces in its stomach. That's not an outlier; it's a snapshot of what's happening out there. Microplastics even mess with marine algae, cutting photosynthesis by about 7%, which starves the whole ocean food web. Some estimates say we could lose 1 to 24 million tonnes of fish and seafood a year because of this. For coastal communities who live off fishing, that's not just an environmental hit, it's their livelihood crumbling.

Here's the problem: it's not just seafood. The study's authors were clear, don't ditch fish thinking you'll dodge microplastics. A 2024 study found them in 88% of protein samples, from beef to tofu to chicken nuggets. Processed foods like fish sticks are worse than fresh filets, but nothing's clean. Americans might be eating anywhere from 11,500 to 3.8 million microplastic particles a year just from proteins. It's in our meat, our veggies, our plant-based burgers. Knowing that makes me feel trapped, like there's no safe plate anymore. For the fishing industry, this is a slap in the face. Chinook salmon, a cultural and economic treasure, came out relatively better, but the stigma of "plastic fish" could scare people away. Shrimp and lingcod, with higher contamination, face an even tougher road. Every extra step in processing seems to pile on more plastics, and that's a problem no fisherman can fix alone.

I wish I had easy answers, but this is a beast of a problem. Rinsing seafood might knock off some surface plastics, but the ones buried in the flesh? You're stuck with those. On a personal level, I've started washing my clothes less, using cold water, and eyeing natural fabrics like cotton or wool to cut down on those fibres. But let's be real, that's a drop in the ocean. Washing machines are a huge source of microplastic fibres, dumping them into wastewater that flows to the sea. Filters exist, but they're not cheap, and most people don't even know they're an option.

Bigger solutions are hitting walls, too. The globalist UN tried to hammer out a global plastic pollution treaty in 2024, but it stalled. We're churning out 430 million tonnes of plastic a year, and 19 million tonnes leak into waterways. The globalist World Economic Forum calls plastic pollution a top-10 global risk, but companies keep prioritising recycling, which doesn't solve much, over cutting production. There's some light, though. Elise Granek at Portland State got $1.9 million from NOAA to work on appliance filters, which could make a dent if policymakers get on board. We also need stricter rules on industrial runoff and urban waste, plus more research on how microplastics move through our bodies and food chains. Without that, we're just guessing at the risks.

I don't want to sound like the sky's falling, but it is in a sense. Microplastics are everywhere, not just in seafood, and the levels vary. Salmon's not as bad as shrimp, and fresh fish beats processed stuff. The health risks are real but not fully nailed down, studies show connections to disease, not always direct causes. That uncertainty can drive you nuts, but it also means we shouldn't panic and swear off fish entirely. Seafood's still nutritious, and the ocean's worth fighting for. The problem's systemic, not a reason to vilify fishermen or coastal communities. It's on us, consumers, policymakers, companies, to push for change, whether it's cutting plastic use, mandating filters, or funding science to figure out what's at stake.

This study hit me like a wake-up call. From shrimp packed with fibres to salmon carrying traces of our waste, it's a reminder of how far plastic pollution has crept into our lives. It's in our food, our bodies, our oceans, and there's no quick fix. But there's hope in small steps, research, better policies, maybe even a shift in how we think about plastics. I'm not ready to give up my tuna sandwich just yet, but I'm sure paying attention now. We've got to act, or this invisible tide of microplastics will swallow more than just our seafood. It will swallow us whole in a sea of plastic!

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/feb/03/seafood-microplastic-contamination-study

"Study finds microplastic contamination in 99% of seafood samples

The peer-reviewed study detected microplastics in 180 of 182 samples comprising five types of fish and pink shrimp

Microplastics contamination is widespread in seafood sampled in a recent study, adding to growing evidence of the dangerous substances' ubiquity in the nation's food system, and a growing threat to human health.

The peer-reviewed study detected microplastics in 99%, or 180 out of 182, samples of seafood either bought at the store or obtained from a fishing boat in Oregon. The highest levels were found in shrimp.

Researchers also determined the most common type of microplastic were fibers from clothing or textiles, which represented over 80% of the substance they detected.

The findings highlight a serious problem with plastic use at its current scale, said Elise Granek, a Portland State University microplastics researcher and study co-author.

"As long as we're using plastic as a major component in our daily lives and we're using it in a widespread fashion, then we're going to see them in our food, too," Granek said.

Microplastics have been detected in water samples around the world, and food is thought to be a main exposure route: recent studies found them in all meat and produce products tested.

Microplastic pollution can contain any number of 16,000 plastic chemicals, and often is attached to highly toxic compounds – like PFAS, bisphenol and phthalates – linked to cancer, neurotoxicity, hormone disruption or developmental toxicity.

The substance can cross the brain and placental barriers, and those who have it in their heart tissue are twice as likely to have a heart attack or stroke during the next several years.

The study sampled five types of fin fish and pink shrimp, and found the microplastics can travel from gills or mouths to meat that humans eat. Granek said researchers suspect the high levels in shrimp and herring likely owe to them feeding on plankton on the surface of the water.

The plankton often accumulates in ocean fronts and moves in tides in the same way as microplastics, Granek said. Young lamprey that feed around the riverbed also show higher levels, but the levels dropped in older lamprey that move into the ocean.

Chinook salmon showed the lowest levels, though it was not a fully apples to apples comparison – researchers only looked at filets, which are largely what humans eat, and checked the entire body of the smaller fish and shrimp.

Pollutant levels are often higher further up the food chain because bigger animals eat smaller animals, and the substances accumulate, a process called biomagnification. That was not observed here, likely because the smaller fish feed in areas where microplastics concentrate.

Microplastic levels were higher in lingcod purchased from the store, likely because it is more processed than that from the boat. The levels were slightly higher, but not statistically significant, in processed shrimp versus that from the boat.

The authors don't recommend avoiding seafood because microplastics have been widely found in meat and produce, so changing eating patterns wouldn't help. They did find that rinsing the seafood could reduce levels.

Granek said on an individual level, washing machines are a major source of pollution, so people can wash clothes less, wash with cold water, and try to avoid synthetic fabrics and fast fashion.

Ultimately, the solution needs to come at a policy level and plastic use needs to be reduced, and filters that catch microplastics should be required on washing machines.

A bill to require that passed the California legislature in 2023 but was vetoed by the state governor, Gavin Newsom, which critics said resulted from industry pressure. A similar bill has been introduced in Oregon.

"If we don't want microplastics in our food then we're going to have to make changes to our everyday practices," Granek said."