Experts sound alarm over ominous side effects from growing global industry: 'Often the blame is put on us'

As plastic production rises worldwide, scientists say the health consequences will become more of a burden. 

What's happening?

A study published in The Lancet Planetary Health estimates that, in 2016, pollution from plastic lifecycles was associated with about 2.1 million global disability-adjusted life years, which is a way to measure how much healthy life people lose because of disability or early death. 

The analysis projects that, if trends continue, plastics-related health burdens could double by 2040, reaching roughly 4.5 million life years annually. 

The researchers attributed these impacts to the pollution coming from primary plastic production, including planet-warming gases, fine particulate air pollution, and toxic chemical releases. 

"Often the blame is put on us as individual consumers of plastics to solve the problem, but while we all have an important role to play in reducing the use of plastics our analysis shows systemic change is needed 'from the cradle to the grave' of plastic production, use and disposal," said study author and Research Fellow Megan Deeney from the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine. 

"Much more ambitious action from governments and industry transparency is needed to curb this growing global plastics public health crisis."

Why is reducing plastic production important?

Plastic production is one of the fastest-growing industrial systems on earth, according to global manufacturing data. Plastics are embedded in nearly every sector, from food packaging to transportation and construction. 

The Lancet study is one of many to have linked plastic pollution to increased risks of respiratory diseases, cancers, and other non-communicable mental and physical illnesses. Climate-related issues also accounted for a lot of these issues, including malnutrition and infectious disease risks. 

To make matters more important for major companies to mitigate, researchers noted that their estimates likely understated the true harm because the study doesn't include direct exposure to plastic chemicals during product use or health impacts from microplastics. 

Public health experts have warned that focusing only on waste management ignores upstream pollution that affects communities living near petrochemical facilities. Petrochemical pollution tied to the fossil fuels it takes to produce plastic has been linked to higher cancer risks in the communities nearby. 

What's the most you'd pay per month to put solar panels on your roof if there was no down payment? $200 or more 💰 $100 💸 $30 💵 I'd only do it if someone else paid for it 😎 Click your choice to see results and speak your mind.

"This can really only be accomplished through improved public policies," wrote Tracey Woodruff, who authored the facilities study. 

What's being done about plastic production?

The Lancet study found that reducing primary plastic production was the single most effective way to reduce the harm to our health over time. 

Researchers noted that a combined system-change approach, like cutting production while improving waste management and reuse, reduced projected health burdens by 21%. 

Although industries have helped create and perpetuate the plastics crisis while shifting responsibility onto communities, that doesn't mean individual changes won't make a difference. 

If you're interested in doing what you can, you can learn ways to reduce plastic use and reuse items you already have in your home. Even changing the way you shop for groceries can help reduce plastic production and benefit human and planetary health.

Get TCD's free newsletters for easy tips to save more, waste less, and make smarter choices — and earn up to $5,000 toward clean upgrades in TCD's exclusive Rewards Club.