Blurblogs
Global
Popular
Log in
sarcozona's blurblog
plant lover, cookie monster, shoe fiend
19986 stories
·
20 followers

work 😤👔📈 - YouTube
Friday September 19th, 2025 at 12:51 AM

1 Share
Read the whole story
sarcozona
3 hours ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

Health impacts of microplastic and nanoplastic exposure | Nature Medicine
Thursday September 18th, 2025 at 8:44 PM

Nature Medicine
1 Share

  1. Cressey, D. Bottles, bags, ropes and toothbrushes: the struggle to track ocean plastics. Nature 536, 263–265 (2016).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Carpenter, E. J., Anderson, S. J., Harvey, G. R., Miklas, H. P. & Peck, B. B. Polystyrene spherules in coastal waters. Science 178, 749–750 (1972).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Carpenter, E. J. & Smith, K. L. Plastics on the sargasso sea surface. Science 175, 1240–1241 (1972).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ragusa, A. et al. Plasticenta: first evidence of microplastics in human placenta. Environ. Int. 146, 106274 (2021).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Jenner, L. C. et al. Detection of microplastics in human lung tissue using μFTIR spectroscopy. Sci. Total Environ. 831, 154907 (2022).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Leslie, H. A. et al. Discovery and quantification of plastic particle pollution in human blood. Environ. Int. 163, 107199 (2022).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. World Health Organization. Dietary and Inhalation Exposure to Nano-and Microplastic Particles and Potential Implications for Human Health (WHO, 2022).

  8. UNEP Environment Assembly. Resolution adopted by the United Nations Environment Assembly on 2 March 2022 5/14. End plastic pollution: towards an international legally binding instrument. UNEP/EA.5/RES.14 (2022).

  9. European Union. Directive - 2019/904 - EN - SUP Directive - EUR-Lex. PE/11/2019/REV/1 (2019).

  10. Marfella, R. et al. Microplastics and nanoplastics in atheromas and cardiovascular events. N. Engl. J. Med. 390, 900–910 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Nihart, A. J. et al. Bioaccumulation of microplastics in decedent human brains. Nat. Med. 31, 1114–1119 (2025).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Allen, D. et al. Microplastics and nanoplastics in the marine-atmosphere environment. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 3, 393–405 (2022).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Ugwu, K., Herrera, A. & Gómez, M. Microplastics in marine biota: a review. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 169, 112540 (2021).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Koelmans, A. A. et al. Microplastics in freshwaters and drinking water: critical review and assessment of data quality. Water Res. 155, 410–422 (2019).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Feng, S., Lu, H., Yao, T., Tang, M. & Yin, C. Analysis of microplastics in soils on the high-altitude area of the Tibetan Plateau: multiple environmental factors. Sci. Total Environ. 857, 159399 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Cole, M., Lindeque, P., Halsband, C. & Galloway, T. S. Microplastics as contaminants in the marine environment: A review. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 62, 2588–2597 (2011).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. European Commission. Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/2055 of 25 September 2023 amending Annex XVII to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) as regards synthetic polymer microparticles. C/2023/6419 (2023).

  18. Liu, S. et al. Microplastics in three types of human arteries detected by pyrolysis–gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (Py–GC/MS). J. Hazard. Mater. 469, 133855 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Evangeliou, N. et al. Atmospheric transport is a major pathway of microplastics to remote regions. Nat. Commun. 11, 3381 (2020).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Thompson, R. C. et al. Twenty years of microplastic pollution research-what have we learned? Science 386, eadl2746 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Napper, I. E. & Thompson, R. C. Release of synthetic microplastic plastic fibres from domestic washing machines: effects of fabric type and washing conditions. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 112, 39–45 (2016).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. De Falco, F., Cocca, M., Avella, M. & Thompson, R. C. Microfiber release to water, via laundering, and to air, via everyday use: a comparison between polyester clothing with differing textile parameters. Environ. Sci. Technol. 54, 3288–3296 (2020).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Quik, J., Hids, A., Steenmeijer, M., Mellink, Y. & van Bruggen, A. Emission of Microplastics to Water, Soil, and Air. What Can We Do About It? (National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, 2024).

  24. Gouin, T., Ellis-Hutchings, R., Pemberton, M. & Wilhelmus, B. Addressing the relevance of polystyrene nano- and microplastic particles used to support exposure, toxicity and risk assessment: implications and recommendations. Part. Fibre Toxicol. 21, 1–27 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Boyle, K. & Örmeci, B. Microplastics and nanoplastics in the freshwater and terrestrial environment: a review. Water 12, 2633 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Science for Environment Policy. Nanoplastics: State of Knowledge and Environmental and Human Health Impacts (Univ. West England Bristol, 2023).

  27. Letcher, T. M. (ed.) Plastic Waste and Recycling: Environmental Impact, Societal Issues, Prevention, and Solutions (Academic Press, 2020).

  28. Yokota, K. et al. Finding the missing piece of the aquatic plastic pollution puzzle: interaction between primary producers and microplastics. Limnol. Oceanogr. Lett. 2, 91–104 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Prata, J. C. Airborne microplastics: consequences to human health? Environ. Pollut. 234, 115–126 (2018).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Dris, R. et al. Microplastic contamination in an urban area: a case study in Greater Paris. Environ. Chem. 12, 592–599 (2015).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Allen, S. et al. Atmospheric transport and deposition of microplastics in a remote mountain catchment. Nat. Geosci. 12, 339–344 (2019).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. Biodegradability of Plastics in the Open Environment Scientific Opinion No. 10 (European Commission, 2021).

  33. Werbowski, L. M. et al. Urban stormwater runoff: a major pathway for anthropogenic particles, black rubbery fragments, and other types of microplastics to urban receiving waters. ACS EST Water 1, 1420–1428 (2021).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Astner, A. F. et al. Mechanical formation of micro- and nano-plastic materials for environmental studies in agricultural ecosystems. Sci. Total Environ. 685, 1097–1106 (2019).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Steinmetz, Z. et al. Plastic mulching in agriculture. Trading short-term agronomic benefits for long-term soil degradation? Sci. Total Environ. 550, 690–705 (2016).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Wiewel, B. V. & Lamoree, M. Geotextile composition, application and ecotoxicology—a review. J. Hazard. Mater. 317, 640–655 (2016).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Harley-Nyang, D., Memon, F. A., Osorio Baquero, A. & Galloway, T. Variation in microplastic concentration, characteristics and distribution in sewage sludge & biosolids around the world. Sci. Total Environ. 891, 164068 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. European Commission: Directorate-General for Environment and University of the West of England. Nanoplastics – State of Knowledge and Environmental and Human Health Impacts (Publications Office of the European Union, 2023).

  39. World Health Organization. Microplastics in Drinking-Water (2019).

  40. Vethaak, A. D. & Legler, J. Microplastics and human health. Science 371, 672–674 (2021).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Food, Safety & Authority, E. Presence of microplastics and nanoplastics in food, with particular focus on seafood. EFSA J. 14, e04501 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  42. Passos, R. S. et al. Microplastics and nanoplastics in haemodialysis waters: emerging threats to be in our radar. Environ. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 102, 104253 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Li, P. et al. Direct entry of micro(nano)plastics into human blood circulatory system by intravenous infusion. iScience 26, 108454 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Krajnak, K. et al. Inhalation of polycarbonate emissions generated during 3D printing processes affects neuroendocrine function in male rats. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health A 86, 575–596 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Yang, Y. et al. Detection of various microplastics in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Environ. Sci. Technol. 57, 10911–10918 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Krajnak, K. et al. Exposure to emissions generated by 3-dimensional printing with polycarbonate: effects on peripheral vascular function, cardiac vascular morphology and expression of markers of oxidative stress in male rat cardiac tissue. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health A 87, 541–559 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Vianello, A., Jensen, R. L., Liu, L. & Vollertsen, J. Simulating human exposure to indoor airborne microplastics using a breathing thermal manikin. Sci. Rep. 9, 1–11 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  48. Dethmers, K., Spek, H. & Kraaijeveld, B. Do Clothes Make Us Sick? Fashion, Fibers and Human Health (Plastic Soup Foundation, 2022).

  49. Prasittisopin, L., Ferdous, W. & Kamchoom, V. Microplastics in construction and built environment. Dev. Built Environ. 15, 100188 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  50. Stapleton, M. J., Ansari, A. J., Ahmed, A. & Hai, F. I. Evaluating the generation of microplastics from an unlikely source: the unintentional consequence of the current plastic recycling process. Sci. Total Environ. 902, 166090 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Bao, X. et al. Microplastics derived from plastic mulch films and their carrier function effect on the environmental risk of pesticides. Sci. Total Environ. 924, 171472 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Mateos-Cárdenas, A., van Pelt, F. N. A. M., O’Halloran, J. & Jansen, M. A. K. Adsorption, uptake and toxicity of micro- and nanoplastics: effects on terrestrial plants and aquatic macrophytes. Environ. Pollut. 284, 117183 (2021).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Larue, C. et al. A critical review on the impacts of nanoplastics and microplastics on aquatic and terrestrial photosynthetic organisms. Small 17, 2005834 (2021).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Sa’adu, I. & Farsang, A. Plastic contamination in agricultural soils: a review. Environ. Sci. Eur. 35, 1–11 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  55. da Costa, J. P., Avellan, A., Mouneyrac, C., Duarte, A. & Rocha-Santos, T. Plastic additives and microplastics as emerging contaminants: mechanisms and analytical assessment. Trends Anal. Chem. 158, 116898 (2023).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Seewoo, B. J. et al. How do plastics, including microplastics and plastic-associated chemicals, affect human health? Nat. Med. 30, 3036–3037 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Wagner, M. et al. State of the science on plastic chemicals — identifying and addressing chemicals and polymers of concern. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10701705 (2024).

  58. Ullah, S. et al. A review of the endocrine disrupting effects of micro and nano plastic and their associated chemicals in mammals. Front. Endocrinol. 13, 1084236 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  59. Witzig, C. S. et al. When good intentions go bad—false positive microplastic detection caused by disposable gloves. Environ. Sci. Technol. 54, 12164–12172 (2020).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Noonan, M. J., Grechi, N., Mills, C. L., de, A. M. M. & Ferraz, M. Microplastics analytics: why we should not underestimate the importance of blank controls. Microplastics Nanoplastics 3, 17 (2023).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Hermsen, E., Mintenig, S. M., Besseling, E. & Koelmans, A. A. Quality criteria for the analysis of microplastic in biota samples: a critical review. Environ. Sci. Technol. 52, 10230–10240 (2018).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. Ziajahromi, S. & Leusch, F. D. L. Systematic assessment of data quality and quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) of current research on microplastics in biosolids and agricultural soils. Environ. Pollut. 294, 118629 (2022).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Qiu, Y., Mintenig, S., Barchiesi, M. & Koelmans, A. A. Using artificial intelligence tools for data quality evaluation in the context of microplastic human health risk assessments. Environ. Int. 197, 109341 (2025).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Xu, J.-L., Wright, S., Rauert, C. & Thomas, K. V. Are microplastics bad for your health? More rigorous science is needed. Nature 639, 300–302 (2025).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Hanif, M. A., Ibrahim, N. & Odli, Z. S. M. Overview of analysis of microplastics and nanoplastics. in Analysis of Microplastics and Nanoplastics 39–61 (Elsevier, 2025).

  66. Yan, Z. et al. Analysis of microplastics in human feces reveals a correlation between fecal microplastics and inflammatory bowel disease status. Environ. Sci. Technol. 56, 414–421 (2022).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. De Ruijter, V. N., Redondo-Hasselerharm, P. E., Gouin, T. & Koelmans, A. A. Quality criteria for microplastic effect studies in the context of risk assessment: a critical review. Environ. Sci. Technol. 54, 11692–11705 (2020).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. Zhang, D. et al. Microplastics are detected in human gallstones and have the ability to form large cholesterol–microplastic heteroaggregates. J. Hazard. Mater. 467, 133631 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Luqman, A. et al. Microplastic contamination in human stools, foods, and drinking water associated with Indonesian coastal population. Environments 8, 138 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  70. Cetin, M. et al. Higher number of microplastics in tumoral colon tissues from patients with colorectal adenocarcinoma. Environ. Chem. Lett. 21, 639–646 (2023).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Zhao, Q. et al. Detection and characterization of microplastics in the human testis and semen. Sci. Total Environ. 877, 162713 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Hibbert, D. B., Korte, E.-H. & Örnemark, U. Metrological and quality concepts in analytical chemistry (IUPAC Recommendations 2021). Pure Appl. Chem. 93, 997–1048 (2021).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Munno, K., Helm, P. A., Jackson, D. A., Rochman, C. & Sims, A. Impacts of temperature and selected chemical digestion methods on microplastic particles. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 37, 91–98 (2018).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Dehaut, A. et al. Microplastics in seafood: benchmark protocol for their extraction and characterization. Environ. Pollut. 215, 223–233 (2016).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Cole, M. et al. Isolation of microplastics in biota-rich seawater samples and marine organisms. Sci. Rep. 4, 4528 (2014).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  76. Wang, T. et al. Multimodal detection and analysis of microplastics in human thrombi from multiple anatomically distinct sites. eBioMedicine 103, 105118 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  77. Geppner, L. et al. A novel enzymatic method for isolation of plastic particles from human blood. Environ. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 104, 104318 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Al-Azzawi, M. S. M. et al. Validation of sample preparation methods for microplastic analysis in wastewater matrices—reproducibility and standardization. Water 12, 2445 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  79. Guan, Q. et al. The landscape of micron-scale particles including microplastics in human enclosed body fluids. J. Hazard. Mater. 442, 130138 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Brits, M. et al. Quantitation of micro and nanoplastics in human blood by pyrolysis-gas chromatography–mass spectrometry. Microplastics Nanoplastics 4, 12 (2024).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Rauert, C. et al. Assessing the efficacy of pyrolysis–gas chromatography–mass spectrometry for nanoplastic and microplastic analysis in human blood. Environ. Sci. Technol. 59, 1984–1994 (2025).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  82. Xu, H. et al. Detection and analysis of microplastics in tissues and blood of human cervical cancer patients. Environ. Res. 259, 119498 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Garcia, M. A. et al. Quantitation and identification of microplastics accumulation in human placental specimens using pyrolysis gas chromatography mass spectrometry. Toxicol. Sci. 199, 81–88 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  84. Song, X. et al. Micro(nano)plastics in human urine: a surprising contrast between Chongqing’s urban and rural regions. Sci. Total Environ. 917, 170455 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Rauert, C., Pan, Y., Okoffo, E. D., O’Brien, J. W. & Thomas, K. V. Extraction and pyrolysis–GC–MS analysis of polyethylene in samples with medium to high lipid content. J. Environ. Expo. Assess. 1, 13 (2022).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Nijenhuis, W. et al. Improved multivariate quantification of plastic particles in human blood using non-targeted pyrolysis GC–MS. J. Hazard. Mater. 489, 137584 (2025).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Zhang, N., Li, Y. B., He, H. R., Zhang, J. F. & Ma, G. S. You are what you eat: microplastics in the feces of young men living in Beijing. Sci. Total Environ. 767, 144345 (2021).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. The Lancet Planetary Health. Microplastics and human health—an urgent problem. Lancet Planet. Health 1, e254 (2017).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Amereh, F. et al. Placental plastics in young women from general population correlate with reduced foetal growth in IUGR pregnancies. Environ. Pollut. 314, 120174 (2022).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Xue, J. et al. Microplastics in maternal amniotic fluid and their associations with gestational age. Sci. Total Environ. 920, 171044 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Xu, H. et al. Microplastic changes during the development of cervical cancer and its effects on the metabolomic profiles of cancer tissues. J. Hazard. Mater. 483, 136656 (2025).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Zhao, J., Zhang, H., Shi, L., Jia, Y. & Sheng, H. Detection and quantification of microplastics in various types of human tumor tissues. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 283, 116818 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Yang, Y. et al. Microplastics are associated with elevated atherosclerotic risk and increased vascular complexity in acute coronary syndrome patients. Part. Fibre Toxicol. 21, 34 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  94. Horvatits, T. et al. Microplastics detected in cirrhotic liver tissue. eBioMedicine 82, 104147 (2022).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  95. Garcia, M. M. et al. In vivo tissue distribution of polystyrene or mixed polymer microspheres and metabolomic analysis after oral exposure in mice. Environ. Health Perspect. 132, 047005 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  96. Nikolic, S. et al. Orally administered fluorescent nanosized polystyrene particles affect cell viability, hormonal and inflammatory profile, and behavior in treated mice. Environ. Pollut. 305, 119206 (2022).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Ding, Y. et al. Tissue distribution of polystyrene nanoplastics in mice and their entry, transport, and cytotoxicity to GES-1 cells. Environ. Pollut. 280, 116974 (2021).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Zaheer, J. et al. Pre/post-natal exposure to microplastic as a potential risk factor for autism spectrum disorder. Environ. Int. 161, 107121 (2022).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Zhang, Z. et al. Polystyrene microplastics induce size-dependent multi-organ damage in mice: Insights into gut microbiota and fecal metabolites. J. Hazard. Mater. 461, 132503 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Xu, D., Ma, Y., Han, X. & Chen, Y. Systematic toxicity evaluation of polystyrene nanoplastics on mice and molecular mechanism investigation about their internalization into Caco-2 cells. J. Hazard. Mater. 417, 126092 (2021).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Deng, Y., Zhang, Y., Lemos, B. & Ren, H. Tissue accumulation of microplastics in mice and biomarker responses suggest widespread health risks of exposure. Sci. Rep. 7, 46687 (2017).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  102. Jin, Y., Lu, L., Tu, W., Luo, T. & Fu, Z. Impacts of polystyrene microplastic on the gut barrier, microbiota and metabolism of mice. Sci. Total Environ. 649, 308–317 (2019).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Stock, V. et al. Uptake and effects of orally ingested polystyrene microplastic particles in vitro and in vivo. Arch. Toxicol. 93, 1817–1833 (2019).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Xiong, X. et al. The microplastics exposure induce the kidney injury in mice revealed by RNA-seq. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 256, 114821 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Jin, H. et al. Evaluation of neurotoxicity in BALB/c mice following chronic exposure to polystyrene microplastics. Environ. Health Perspect. 130, 107002 (2022).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  106. Shan, S., Zhang, Y., Zhao, H., Zeng, T. & Zhao, X. Polystyrene nanoplastics penetrate across the blood–brain barrier and induce activation of microglia in the brain of mice. Chemosphere 298, 134261 (2022).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Lee, C.-W. et al. Exposure to polystyrene microplastics impairs hippocampus-dependent learning and memory in mice. J. Hazard. Mater. 430, 128431 (2022).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Okamura, T. et al. Oral exposure to polystyrene microplastics of mice on a normal or high-fat diet and intestinal and metabolic outcomes. Environ. Health Perspect. 131, 027006 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  109. Wen, J. et al. Environmentally relevant concentrations of microplastic exposure cause cholestasis and bile acid metabolism dysregulation through a gut–liver loop in mice. Environ. Sci. Technol. 58, 1832–1841 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Jeon, B. J. et al. Examining the relationship between polystyrene microplastics and male fertility: insights from an in vivo study and in vitro sertoli cell culture. J. Korean Med. Sci. 39, e259 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  111. Moreno, G. M. et al. Identification of micro- and nanoplastic particles in postnatal Sprague–Dawley rat offspring after maternal inhalation exposure throughout gestation. Sci. Total Environ. 951, 175350 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  112. Fournier, S. B. et al. Nanopolystyrene translocation and fetal deposition after acute lung exposure during late-stage pregnancy. Part. Fibre Toxicol. 17, 1–11 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  113. Abdelkhaliq, A. et al. Impact of nanoparticle surface functionalization on the protein corona and cellular adhesion, uptake and transport. J. Nanobiotechnology 16, 70 (2018).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  114. Schimpel, C. et al. Development of an advanced intestinal in vitro triple culture permeability model to study transport of nanoparticles. Mol. Pharm. 11, 808–818 (2014).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  115. Marcellus, K. A., Prescott, D., Scur, M., Ross, N. & Gill, S. S. Exposure of polystyrene nano- and microplastics in increasingly complex in vitro intestinal cell models. Nanomaterials 15, 267 (2025).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  116. Yang, S. et al. In vitro evaluation of nanoplastics using human lung epithelial cells, microarray analysis and co-culture model. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 226, 112837 (2021).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  117. Dusza, H. M. et al. Uptake, transport, and toxicity of pristine and weathered micro- and nanoplastics in human placenta cells. Environ. Health Perspect. 130, 97006 (2022).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  118. Rothbauer, M. et al. A comparative study of five physiological key parameters between four different human trophoblast-derived cell lines. Sci. Rep. 7, 5892 (2017).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  119. Lesniak, A. et al. Nanoparticle adhesion to the cell membrane and its effect on nanoparticle uptake efficiency. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 135, 1438–1444 (2013).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  120. Ramsperger, A. F. R. M. et al. Environmental exposure enhances the internalization of microplastic particles into cells. Sci. Adv. 6, eabd1211 (2020).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  121. Zeng, G. et al. Polystyrene microplastic-induced oxidative stress triggers intestinal barrier dysfunction via the NF-κB/NLRP3/IL-1β/MCLK pathway. Environ. Pollut. 345, 123473 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  122. Donkers, J. M. et al. Advanced epithelial lung and gut barrier models demonstrate passage of microplastic particles. Microplastics Nanoplastics 2, 1–18 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  123. Dong, C. D. et al. Polystyrene microplastic particles: in vitro pulmonary toxicity assessment. J. Hazard. Mater. 385, 121575 (2020).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  124. Paul, M. B., Böhmert, L., Hsiao, I. L., Braeuning, A. & Sieg, H. Complex intestinal and hepatic in vitro barrier models reveal information on uptake and impact of micro-, submicro- and nanoplastics. Environ. Int. 179, 108172 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  125. Liu, L. et al. Cellular internalization and release of polystyrene microplastics and nanoplastics. Sci. Total Environ. 779, 146523 (2021).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  126. da Silva, A. B. et al. Gastrointestinal absorption and toxicity of nanoparticles and microparticles: Myth, reality and pitfalls explored through titanium dioxide. Curr. Opin. Toxicol. 19, 112–120 (2020).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  127. Gruber, M. M. et al. Plasma proteins facilitates placental transfer of polystyrene particles. J. Nanobiotechnology 18, 1–14 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  128. Wick, P. et al. Barrier capacity of human placenta for nanosized materials. Environ. Health Perspect. 118, 432–436 (2010).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  129. Aengenheister, L. et al. An advanced human in vitro co-culture model for translocation studies across the placental barrier. Sci. Rep. 8, 5388 (2018).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  130. Liu, S. et al. Detection of various microplastics in placentas, meconium, infant feces, breastmilk and infant formula: a pilot prospective study. Sci. Total Environ. 854, 158699 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  131. Liu, W. et al. Toxicological effects of micro/nano-plastics on mouse/rat models: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front. Public Health 11, 1103289 (2023).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  132. Hu, J. et al. Polystyrene microplastics disturb maternal–fetal immune balance and cause reproductive toxicity in pregnant mice. Reprod. Toxicol. 106, 42–50 (2021).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  133. Bai, J. et al. Microplastics caused embryonic growth retardation and placental dysfunction in pregnant mice by activating GRP78/IRE1α/JNK axis induced apoptosis and endoplasmic reticulum stress. Part. Fibre Toxicol. 21, 36 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  134. Cheng, W. et al. Aged fragmented-polypropylene microplastics induced ageing statues-dependent bioenergetic imbalance and reductive stress: In vivo and liver organoids-based in vitro study. Environ. Int. 191, 108949 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  135. Lu, L., Wan, Z., Luo, T., Fu, Z. & Jin, Y. Polystyrene microplastics induce gut microbiota dysbiosis and hepatic lipid metabolism disorder in mice. Sci. Total Environ. 631–632, 449–458 (2018).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  136. Zeng, L. et al. The ovarian-related effects of polystyrene nanoplastics on human ovarian granulosa cells and female mice. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 257, 114941 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  137. Hou, B., Wang, F., Liu, T. & Wang, Z. Reproductive toxicity of polystyrene microplastics: in vivo experimental study on testicular toxicity in mice. J. Hazard. Mater. 405, 124028 (2021).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  138. Fang, Q., Wang, C. & Xiong, Y. Polystyrene microplastics induce male reproductive toxicity in mice by activating spermatogonium mitochondrial oxidative stress and apoptosis. Chem. Biol. Interact. 396, 111043 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  139. Hou, J. et al. Polystyrene microplastics lead to pyroptosis and apoptosis of ovarian granulosa cells via NLRP3/Caspase-1 signaling pathway in rats. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 212, 112012 (2021).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  140. Hu, Y. et al. Protective effect of Cordycepin on blood–testis barrier against pre-puberty polystyrene nanoplastics exposure in male rats. Part. Fibre Toxicol. 21, 30 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  141. Ilechukwu, I. et al. Chronic toxic effects of polystyrene microplastics on reproductive parameters of male rats. Environ. Anal. Health Toxicol. 37, e2022015 (2022).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  142. Wang, W. et al. Polystyrene microplastics induced ovarian toxicity in juvenile rats associated with oxidative stress and activation of the PERK–eIF2α–ATF4–CHOP signaling pathway. Toxics 11, 225 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  143. Xuan, L. et al. Predictive metabolomic signatures for safety assessment of three plastic nanoparticles using intestinal organoids. Sci. Total Environ. 913, 169606 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  144. da Silva Brito, W. A. et al. Sonicated polyethylene terephthalate nano- and micro-plastic-induced inflammation, oxidative stress, and autophagy in vitro. Chemosphere 355, 141813 (2024).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  145. Woo, J. H. et al. Polypropylene nanoplastic exposure leads to lung inflammation through p38-mediated NF-κB pathway due to mitochondrial damage. Part. Fibre Toxicol. 20, 2 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  146. Hu, J. et al. The potential toxicity of polystyrene nanoplastics to human trophoblasts in vitro. Environ. Pollut. 311, 119924 (2022).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  147. Ma, L. et al. Differences in toxicity induced by the various polymer types of nanoplastics on HepG2 cells. Sci. Total Environ. 918, 170664 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  148. Goodman, K. E., Hua, T. & Sang, Q. X. A. Effects of polystyrene microplastics on human kidney and liver cell morphology, cellular proliferation, and metabolism. ACS Omega 7, 34136–34153 (2022).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  149. van Boxel, J. et al. Effects of polystyrene micro- and nanoplastics on androgen- and estrogen receptor activity and steroidogenesis in vitro. Toxicol. Vitr. 101, 105938 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  150. Zhou, B. et al. Microplastics exposure disrupts nephrogenesis and induces renal toxicity in human iPSC-derived kidney organoids. Environ. Pollut. 360, 124645 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  151. da Silva Brito, W. A. et al. Comprehensive in vitro polymer type, concentration, and size correlation analysis to microplastic toxicity and inflammation. Sci. Total Environ. 854, 158731 (2023).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  152. Shelver, W. L., Billey, L. O., McGarvey, A. M., Hoselton, S. A. & Banerjee, A. The effects of concentration, duration of exposure, size and surface function of polymethyl methacrylate micro/nanoplastics on human liver cells. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 287, 117240 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  153. Schneider, K. et al. ToxRTool, a new tool to assess the reliability of toxicological data. Toxicol. Lett. 189, 138–144 (2009).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  154. Cartwright, L. et al. In vitro placental model optimization for nanoparticle transport studies. Int. J. Nanomed. 7, 497–510 (2012).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  155. Boran, T. et al. An evaluation of a hepatotoxicity risk induced by the microplastic polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) using HepG2/THP-1 co-culture model. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 31, 28890–28904 (2024).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  156. Zhu, Z. et al. Polystyrene nanoplastics induce apoptosis of human kidney proximal tubular epithelial cells via oxidative stress and MAPK signaling pathways. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int. 30, 110579–110589 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  157. Lu, Yyang, Cao, M., Tian, M. & Huang, Q. Internalization and cytotoxicity of polystyrene microplastics in human umbilical vein endothelial cells. J. Appl. Toxicol. 43, 262–271 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  158. Schmid, O. & Cassee, F. R. On the pivotal role of dose for particle toxicology and risk assessment: exposure is a poor surrogate for delivered dose. Part. Fibre Toxicol. 14, 52 (2017).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  159. Wang, Y. & Qian, H. Phthalates and their impacts on human health. Healthcare 9, 603 (2021).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  160. Ma, Y. et al. The adverse health effects of bisphenol A and related toxicity mechanisms. Environ. Res. 176, 108575 (2019).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  161. Busch, M., Kämpfer, A. A. M. & Schins, R. P. F. An inverted in vitro triple culture model of the healthy and inflamed intestine: adverse effects of polyethylene particles. Chemosphere 284, 131345 (2021).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  162. Montano, L. et al. Raman microspectroscopy evidence of microplastics in human semen. Sci. Total Environ. 901, 165922 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  163. Montano, L. et al. First evidence of microplastics in human ovarian follicular fluid: an emerging threat to female fertility. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 291, 117868 (2025).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  164. Halfar, J. et al. Microplastics and additives in patients with preterm birth: the first evidence of their presence in both human amniotic fluid and placenta. Chemosphere 343, 140301 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  165. Chartres, N. et al. Effects of microplastic exposure on human digestive, reproductive, and respiratory health: a rapid systematic review. Environ. Sci. Technol. 58, 22843–22864 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  166. Plastic pollution assessment and monitoring – harmonization and standardization of methods- EUROqCHARM. Zenodo https://zenodo.org/communities/eqctest/ (accessed 3 March 2025).

  167. van Mourik, L. M. et al. Results of WEPAL-QUASIMEME/NORMANs first global interlaboratory study on microplastics reveal urgent need for harmonization. Sci. Total Environ. 772, 145071 (2021).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  168. Hurley, R. et al. Production and characterisation of environmentally relevant microplastic test materials derived from agricultural plastics. Sci. Total Environ. 946, 174325 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  169. Dorresteijn, J. M. et al. Chitosan microsphere-supported catalysts: design, synthesis and optimization for ethylene polymerization. Mater. Adv. 6, 201–213 (2025).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  170. Cohen, J. M., Beltran-Huarac, J., Pyrgiotakis, G. & Demokritou, P. Effective delivery of sonication energy to fast settling and agglomerating nanomaterial suspensions for cellular studies: implications for stability, particle kinetics, dosimetry and toxicity. NanoImpact 10, 81–86 (2018).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  171. Pradhan, S., Hedberg, J., Blomberg, E., Wold, S. & Odnevall Wallinder, I. Effect of sonication on particle dispersion, administered dose and metal release of non-functionalized, non-inert metal nanoparticles. J. Nanopart. Res. 18, 285 (2016).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  172. Xu, W. et al. Single-cell RNA-seq analysis decodes the kidney microenvironment induced by polystyrene microplastics in mice receiving a high-fat diet. J. Nanobiotechnology 22, 1–21 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  173. Wardani, I., Hazimah Mohamed Nor, N., Wright, S. L., Kooter, I. M. & Koelmans, A. A. Nano- and microplastic PBK modeling in the context of human exposure and risk assessment. Environ. Int. 186, 108504 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  174. Chen, C. Y., Kamineni, V. N. & Lin, Z. A physiologically based toxicokinetic model for microplastics and nanoplastics in mice after oral exposure and its implications for human dietary exposure assessment. J. Hazard. Mater. 480, 135922 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  175. Prata, J. C. Microplastics and human health: integrating pharmacokinetics. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 53, 1489–1511 (2023).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  176. Helm, L. T., Venier-Cambron, C. & Verburg, P. H. The potential land-use impacts of bio-based plastics and plastic alternatives. Nat. Sustain. 8, 190–201 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  177. Leenders, N. et al. Polycotton waste textile recycling by sequential hydrolysis and glycolysis. Nat. Commun. 16, 738 (2025).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  178. European Commission. EU Action Plan: ‘Towards Zero Pollution for Air, Water and Soil’ https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52021DC0400 (2021).

  179. Wright, S. et al. Application of infrared and near-infrared microspectroscopy to microplastic human exposure measurements. Appl. Spectrosc. 77, 1105–1128 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  180. Ishimura, T. et al. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of mixtures of microplastics in the presence of calcium carbonate by pyrolysis–GC/MS. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 157, 105188 (2021).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  181. Berkel, C. & Özbek, O. Methods used in the identification and quantification of micro(nano)plastics from water environments. South Afr. J. Chem. Eng. 50, 388–403 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  182. Lee, D.-W. et al. Microplastic particles in human blood and their association with coagulation markers. Sci. Rep. 14, 30419 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  183. Leonard, S. V. L. et al. Microplastics in human blood: polymer types, concentrations and characterisation using μFTIR. Environ. Int. 188, 108751 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  184. Sun, H. et al. Microplastics in maternal blood, fetal appendages, and umbilical vein blood. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 287, 117300 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  185. Yu, H. et al. Association between blood microplastic levels and severity of extracranial artery stenosis. J. Hazard. Mater. 480, 136211 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  186. Braun, T. et al. Detection of microplastic in human placenta and meconium in a clinical setting. Pharmaceutics 13, 921 (2021).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  187. Weingrill, R. B. et al. Temporal trends in microplastic accumulation in placentas from pregnancies in Hawaiʻi. Environ. Int. 180, 108220 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  188. Zhu, L. et al. Identification of microplastics in human placenta using laser direct infrared spectroscopy. Sci. Total Environ. 856, 159060 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  189. Huo, C. et al. Polystyrene microplastics induce injury to the vascular endothelial through NLRP3-mediated pyroptosis. Environ. Toxicol. 39, 5086–5098 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  190. Martín-Pérez, J. et al. Hazard assessment of nanoplastics is driven by their surface-functionalization. Effects in human-derived primary endothelial cells. Sci. Total Environ. 934, 173236 (2024).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  191. Hesler, M. et al. Multi-endpoint toxicological assessment of polystyrene nano- and microparticles in different biological models in vitro. Toxicol. Vitr. 61, 104610 (2019).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  192. Huang, J. P. et al. Nanoparticles can cross mouse placenta and induce trophoblast apoptosis. Placenta 36, 1433–1441 (2015).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  193. Wan, S. et al. Exposure to high dose of polystyrene nanoplastics causes trophoblast cell apoptosis and induces miscarriage. Part. Fibre Toxicol. 21, 13 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  194. Fournier, E. et al. Exposure to polyethylene microplastics alters immature gut microbiome in an infant in vitro gut model. J. Hazard. Mater. 443, 130383 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  195. Inkielewicz-Stepniak, I. et al. The role of mucin in the toxicological impact of polystyrene nanoparticles. Materials 11, 724 (2018).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  196. Kim, W. H. et al. Characterization of the intestinal transport mechanism of polystyrene microplastics (MPs) and the potential inhibitory effect of green tea extracts on MPs intestinal absorption. Toxicol. Vitr. 97, 105813 (2024).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  197. Le Bihanic, F. et al. Toxicity assessment of DMSO extracts of environmental aged beached plastics using human cell lines. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 289, 117604 (2025).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  198. Wang, J. et al. The enhancement in toxic potency of oxidized functionalized polyethylene-microplastics in mice gut and Caco-2 cells. Sci. Total Environ. 903, 166057 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  199. Wu, S., Wu, M., Tian, D., Qiu, L. & Li, T. Effects of polystyrene microbeads on cytotoxicity and transcriptomic profiles in human Caco-2 cells. Environ. Toxicol. 35, 495–506 (2020).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  200. Gemini Team Google. Gemini 1.5: Unlocking multimodal understanding across millions of tokens of context. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2403.05530 (2024).

  201. Moldoveanu, S. C. Pyrolysis of Organic Molecules: Applications to Health and Environmental Issues (Elsevier, 2018).

  202. Kozliak, E. et al. Pathways toward PAH formation during fatty acid and triglyceride pyrolysis. J. Phys. Chem. A 124, 7559–7574 (2020).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  203. Lou, F. et al. Influence of interaction on accuracy of quantification of mixed microplastics using Py-GC/MS. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 10, 108012 (2022).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  204. Wenzel, M. et al. Assessment of sample pre-treatment strategies to mitigate matrix effects for microplastics analysis using thermoanalytical techniques. Trends Anal. Chem. 181, 117997 (2024).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  205. Torres-Agullo, A., Zuri, G. & Lacorte, S. Pyr–GC–Orbitrap–MS method for the target/untargeted analysis of microplastics in air. J. Hazard. Mater. 469, 133981 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  206. Hashemihedeshi, M. et al. Size-resolved identification and quantification of micro/nanoplastics in indoor air using pyrolysis gas chromatography–ion mobility mass spectrometry. J. Am. Soc. Mass. Spectrom. 35, 275–284 (2024).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  207. Brits, M. et al. Quantitation of polystyrene by pyrolysis–GC–MS: the impact of polymer standards on micro and nanoplastic analysis. Polym. Test. 137, 108511 (2024).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Read the whole story
sarcozona
7 hours ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

COVID outbreak blamed for Sydney Airport chaos
Thursday September 18th, 2025 at 11:46 AM

7NEWS
1 Share

Sydney Airport has been hit by major delays after a COVID outbreak swept through the control tower, forcing multiple air traffic controllers to call in sick.

The staffing crisis severely impacted departure operations, with flights limited to just 15 per hour for much of the day — around half the usual capacity at Australia’s biggest airport.

Airlines expressed fury over the disruptions but worked to shuffle passengers and reschedule flights to minimise the impact on travellers.

Know the news with the 7NEWS app: Download today Download today

Tower management initially warned the delays would continue into tonight, leaving red faces across the airport as frustrated passengers faced lengthy waits.

However, by mid-afternoon, airport authorities had scrambled to fill the roster gaps and flights returned largely to normal operations.

The timing couldn’t have been worse, with heavy passenger loads expected between Sydney and Melbourne due to the big weekend of footy finals.

Despite the earlier chaos, airport officials have promised there will be no further delays for football fans travelling to Melbourne for the finals.

The incident highlights the ongoing impact of COVID-19 on critical infrastructure, with the virus continuing to cause staffing shortages across essential services.

Read the whole story
sarcozona
16 hours ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

Quebec bet big on Lion electric school buses. Now critics say the plan has backfired - Castanet.net
Wednesday September 17th, 2025 at 12:15 PM

Castanet.net - Canada
1 Comment
Andrew Jones, owner of Autobus Beaconsfield and Transport Scolaire Élite, poses next to Lion electric school buses in his garage at their depot in Montreal, Friday, Sept. 12, 2025, after the government pulled the electric buses off the roads in the province following a fire. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Graham Hughes

Photo: The Canadian Press

Andrew Jones, owner of Autobus Beaconsfield and Transport Scolaire Élite, poses next to Lion electric school buses in his garage at their depot in Montreal, Friday, Sept. 12, 2025, after the government pulled the electric buses off the roads in the province following a fire. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Graham Hughes

The Quebec government's aggressive push to electrify its school bus fleet — while giving one local manufacturer a virtual monopoly — could now be turning school bus operators off electric vehicles and delaying the transition, critics say.

The abrupt withdrawal of 1,200 Lion electric school buses from Quebec roads after a bus in Montreal caught fire last week is prompting renewed criticism of the provincial government's approach to electrification.

Many school bus routes in Quebec remained cancelled Tuesday as bus operators completed inspections and made repairs to the vehicles' wiring, following guidance from Lion. Three Lion buses have caught fire in the last year, though nobody has been injured and the buses' batteries were not involved.

Chantale Dugas, president of the Quebec federation of bus operators, said Tuesday that about half of Lion buses were back in service. The federation says three-quarters of the buses should be running on Wednesday, and full service should resume by Friday at the latest.

But Dugas said the episode, which began Thursday night when the province ordered Lion buses off the road, is the latest in a "chaotic" series of events since the Quebec government embarked four years ago on a mission to electrify the school bus fleet, which she said has left bus operators feeling "abandoned."

It's not just carriers who are raising concerns. Valérie Tremblay with the Canadian Electric School Bus Alliance said provincial policies have already hindered the uptake of electric buses, and the fires will only aggravate the problem. "Right now, if I were a school bus operator, I could see very few good reasons to make the transition," she said.

In 2021, Quebec mandated that all new school buses purchased in the province be zero-emission as part of a goal to electrify 65 per cent of its bus fleet by 2030. But the subsidies it offers to bus operators to buy electric vehicles require that they be assembled in Canada, meaning that Lion is the main beneficiary of the program.

The province was trying to support a local company, Tremblay said, since Lion is headquartered in St.-Jérôme, Que. "I think it was really a matter of political will."

But the quasi-monopoly that Quebec gave to Lion has had consequences for private carriers like Andrew Jones, a Montreal-area bus operator. He said the eight Lion buses he owns are unreliable, in part because when they break down, it can take weeks to get them back on the road.

"In the case of Lion buses, we're obligated to only deal with their certified techs. So we're waiting on them to have availability. We're waiting on them for parts," he said. "We're subject to waiting on them 100 per cent of the time."

Dugas and Tremblay both said Quebec should make it easier for operators to purchase buses from elsewhere, especially in light of the string of negative headlines about Lion in recent months. After seeking protection from its creditors in December, the struggling manufacturer was acquired by a group of Quebec investors in May.

The Quebec government has invested heavily in Lion, and Premier François Legault said in May that the province stood to lose about $140 million.

"Perhaps broadening the administrative criteria and allowing other manufacturers to sell their vehicles in Quebec will give the transition a second wind," Tremblay said. "It could definitely help to ensure that electric school buses are not exclusively associated with Lion in the public's mind."

Lion's financial woes left operators in a bind earlier this year, unable to buy more electric buses while the company was in bankruptcy protection and forbidden from buying diesel replacements. In the spring, the Quebec government finally scrapped its requirement that all new purchases be electric.

Jones said he has since cancelled orders for 20 new Lion buses, and has ordered diesel buses instead. He said a deciding factor for him was the province's decision last year to reduce annual financial support for operating the electric buses from $12,900 to $5,000 per vehicle. "It's a huge shortfall for us to cover," he said.

According to Jones, the insurance cost for an electric bus is triple what it would be for a diesel equivalent. Electric buses also go through more tires because the vehicles are heavier, he said, and operators have to pay to maintain electric charging stations. The operators' federation estimates that each electric bus costs $14,000 more per year to operate than its diesel counterpart.

"When you start adding it all up and then knowing that (Lion) went through financial difficulties, you start wondering, will they still be here in two or three years?" Jones said. "So if that means I have to put off electrification for two or three years again … I'll roll that dice."

In the spring, the government increased its subsidy for the purchase of electric buses to $240,000 per vehicle, up from a maximum of $175,000. But Jones said the sticker price of Lion buses has also increased, so operators are still paying the same amount.

Dugas said the federation hopes to meet with the Quebec education and transport ministers to chart a path forward. "The government's mistake wasn't in wanting electrification, it was in the business model that was imposed on our carriers," she said.

"It was in saying that you would receive financial assistance on the condition that you use the services of a single manufacturer."

Read the whole story
sarcozona
1 day ago
reply
Right to repair would save so much money - and ultimately bolster the growth of competitors

> He said the eight Lion buses he owns are unreliable, in part because when they break down, it can take weeks to get them back on the road.
"In the case of Lion buses, we're obligated to only deal with their certified techs. So we're waiting on them to have availability. We're waiting on them for parts," he said. "We're subject to waiting on them 100 per cent of the time."
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

'Gut punch' for people who get cancer diagnosis in emergency: study | National Post
Wednesday September 17th, 2025 at 11:03 AM

National Post
1 Share

Read the whole story
sarcozona
1 day ago
reply
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete

CDC pauses work-from-home permission for those with disabilities | STAT
Tuesday September 16th, 2025 at 10:55 PM

STAT
1 Comment

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has revoked permission for employees with disabilities to work from home, at least temporarily, and paused approving reasonable accommodations for new applicants seeking to work from home, according to a Sept. 15 email obtained by STAT.

The agency’s decision stems from the Trump administration’s January directive to mostly end remote work for federal employees and is tied to an August update to a broader Health and Human Services telework policy, which the CDC email said did not include long-term telework as an option for federal employees with disabilities. 

The email says CDC is awaiting clarification from HHS, but meanwhile, “all approvals for long-term telework, to include reasonable accommodation (RA) long-term telework are paused until further notice.” Employees may still submit requests for reasonable accommodation and are “encouraged to reach out to their supervisor or manager for assistance with an interim solution,” according to the email from an official in the CDC’s Office of Human Resources.

It’s unclear how many CDC employees work remotely full time, though Yolanda Jacobs, president of AFGE Local 2883, one of the unions representing CDC workers, said that dozens of employees were affected by the withdrawal of approval for remote work.

Disability lawyers suggested that the CDC’s action could violate the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, a landmark law that provides employment protections for federal employees with disabilities.

“This raises serious concerns, any type of reasonable accommodation must be individualized and looking at the specific job’s duties,” said Alison Barkoff, the former head of the Administration for Community Living. “A blanket policy that telework can never be an accommodation raises serious legal concerns.”

This confusion over remote work started in January, when President Trump issued an executive order calling for agency heads to “terminate remote work arrangements” and require employees to return to working in person, though federal officials would later carve out telework exceptions. The uncertainty spread when everyone at the CDC who oversaw reasonable accommodations was let go as part of the major April reduction in force, at which time employees with pending requests for reasonable accommodations were given temporary approval for their exemptions, according to Jacobs.

There was no movement in this telework tug-of-war until Monday, when CDC employees with longstanding reasonable accommodations and others who had submitted requests were denied without explanation. Jacobs believes this policy change can be attributed to “overreach and overinterpretation” from CDC officials who were unsure of how to interpret the August policy update. It’s unclear whether other health agencies will be affected. 

HHS officials did not respond to a request for comment.

CDC employees were not given detailed explanation for why their reasonable accommodations or requests had been withdrawn, though disability law requires that supervisors have conversations with federal employees about why they need accommodations for their specific role. One employee received an email revoking their telework accommodation at 2:23 a.m. on Tuesday, according to emails obtained by STAT. Their supervisor had not been made aware of the decision. Jacobs said that others were told to report to work the next day, disability notwithstanding.

“That means that some employees would no longer be able to work for the agency,” she said. “You’re being told that your disability doesn’t matter.”

STAT’s coverage of disability issues is supported by grants from Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and The Commonwealth Fund. Our financial supporters are not involved in any decisions about our journalism.

Read the whole story
sarcozona
2 days ago
reply
The cdc doesn’t want any more disabled employees
Epiphyte City
Share this story
Delete
Next Page of Stories