Several studies on microplastics in the human body are being criticized by experts as unreliable. The reported quantities are often exaggerated and based on methodological errors. Critics warn of misinterpretations that could influence policy decisions.
For years, studies have detected alarming amounts of micro- and nanoplastics in organs such as brains, arteries, placentas, and testicles, drawing global attention. Now these findings are under scrutiny: Experts argue in the British newspaper Guardian that many discoveries may stem from contaminations, inaccuracies, and misinterpretations. While plastic pollution is undeniably ubiquitous, detecting tiny particles pushes the limits of analytical technology.
Seven studies have been publicly questioned, with another review identifying 18 investigations marred by scientific inaccuracies. For instance, particles were detected that turned out to be natural body substances. A particularly contested study from February 2025 reported a sharp rise in microplastics in the brain. Dr. Dušan Materić from Germany's Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research called it a 'joke' in the Guardian, pointing to misinterpretations from fat tissue mimicking polyethylene signals.
Similar accusations target research on plastics in arteries, male reproductive organs, blood samples, and nanoplastics in mineral water, where 100,000 particles per liter were deemed 'grossly unreliable.' The common Py-GC-MS method is faulted for confusing polyethylene and PVC with fat components. Environmental chemist Cassandra Rauert from the University of Queensland stated: 'It's a problem in the entire research field. Many of the reported concentrations are completely unrealistic.'
Germany's Deutsches Ärzteblatt had raised similar concerns in July, noting a lack of reliable data on distribution in the body. Authors of the criticized studies defend their work: The field is nascent, improvements are underway, and potential inaccuracies were addressed. These doubts reopen questions about actual exposure levels and health consequences, potentially complicating regulations or benefiting industry arguments.
