Plastic pollution is an underrecognized threat to health, according to The Lancet.

The article published in The Lancet reveals a silent reality: plastic—ubiquitous and indispensable in modern life—negatively impacts human health throughout its entire life cycle. Although scientific evidence is growing, the issue is rarely addressed comprehensively; only by considering production, use, disposal, and degradation together can we grasp the true extent of its consequences.

Far from reducing our dependence, plastic production continues to rise, extending decades of pollution and emissions whose health toll is becoming increasingly apparent. The problem we are facing is that these pollutants are atypical: their movement is slow and complex, making them difficult to study and requiring substantial research resources.

Data suggest that chronic exposure to micro- and nanoplastics—particularly to their additives—may be linked to an increase in certain cancers, the proliferation of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, and, more broadly, a global decline in quality of life. In light of this scenario, the article stresses the urgency of ambitious public policies, responsible industrial innovations, and decisive citizen actions aimed at reducing both production and exposure.

The article also highlights the creation of the Lancet Countdown on Health and Plastics, an annual indicator system that will track production, exposure, health impacts, and societal responses. I personally believe that parallel initiatives adopted by other governments and institutions would be essential to coordinate efforts and reverse a trajectory that is already compromising—or is at imminent risk of compromising—the health of future generations.

Landrigan and colleagues emphasize the growing and largely unrecognized risk that plastics pose to human and planetary health. Coinciding with the expected conclusion of the United Nations–led Global Plastics Treaty negotiations, this group of researchers proposes the creation of an independent global monitoring system based on indicators that track progress toward reducing plastic exposure and mitigating its harms to both human and planetary health.

The study presents a summary of the damages caused by plastics throughout their life cycle, with particular focus on new information that has emerged since the 2023 publication of the Minderoo-Monaco Commission report on plastics and human health. Most of the confirmed harms are mediated by exposure to chemicals present in plastics, while others may be due to micro- and nanoplastics. The study highlights the lack of transparency around which chemical substances are present in plastics, their uses and applications, production volumes, and toxic effects. This limits a full understanding of the potential health impacts of these chemicals. Multiple analyses from various organizations conclude that comprehensive, multilevel policies addressing the entire plastic life cycle would be the most effective in controlling plastic pollution and protecting human health.

The key indicators identified in this proposal include production and emissions, exposures, and health impacts, following a classic source–exposure–effect model that provides a framework for tracking the impacts of plastics on human health at each stage of their life cycle. In addition, the area of interventions and engagement will monitor societal responses to the plastics crisis, encompassing both policy actions and public responses, from the international to the individual level.

By making visible the impact of plastics on human and planetary health, the proposed system—The Lancet Countdown on Health and Plastics—aims to place health at the center of the plastics debate, with the hope that the reports it generates will provide robust data and insights to inform evidence-based plastic policies at all levels, from global to local, for the benefit of public health.

The article published in The Lancet warns of the threat posed by plastic pollution, which endangers human health and ecosystems, and emphasizes two key aspects that are highly relevant when seeking solutions to this major environmental contamination issue—both of which should be considered in the upcoming meeting for the Global Plastics Treaty.

On the one hand, it highlights the need to address the problem across all phases of the plastic life cycle—from production, through use, to disposal. Considering the position supported by the bloc of oil- and plastic-producing countries in previous Global Treaty negotiations, the recovery and recycling stages of plastic waste are deemed vital. Therefore, these stages must also be included in risk assessments in order to promote a ‘clean’ Circular Economy.

Closely tied to this concept of a ‘clean’ Circular Economy is the second highly relevant aspect: the control of toxic chemical additives associated with plastics throughout all life cycle stages, including recycling. It is crucial to monitor the presence of these toxic substances, especially in cases where recycled plastic is used for purposes different from its original one (e.g., recycled tires used in playgrounds). A major issue is the lack of transparency regarding which chemical substances are present in plastics and their waste. Introducing a 'digital passport' that includes this information for all produced materials would be a significant step toward more sustainable management.

Another important issue addressed in the article concerns medical products. It is clear that the use of plastic materials in this sector is of vital importance and cannot be dispensed with. However, we must ensure that such materials are safe and effective, and therefore they should not be exempt from the Global Plastics Treaty.

The press release accurately reflects the study’s findings—a clear and concise report prepared by a group of renowned experts on the still little-known but increasingly evident effects of plastics on human health. These effects are worsening due to the rapid growth in plastic production, which is projected to triple between 2019 and 2060. However, the article emphasizes that the continued worsening of plastic-related harms is not inevitable and can be mitigated through evidence-based laws and policies, with transparent monitoring, effective implementation, and adequate funding. In this regard, the Global Plastics Treaty represents a unique opportunity to address the plastic crisis in a binding manner.

Moreover, the article calls for greater attention to the human health impacts of micro- and nanoplastics, as well as the many chemical compounds added to plastics, when addressing plastic pollution. The experts acknowledge that although many uncertainties remain about the damage plastics cause to human health and the global environment—and further research is undoubtedly needed—there is already sufficient data to state that these harms are significant. There is also enough information about plastic production trends to anticipate that, in the absence of intervention, the situation will worsen.

In this context, the upcoming launch of the Lancet Countdown on Health and Plastics aims to monitor and report regularly on the impacts of plastics on human health and the environment throughout their entire life cycle, providing scientific data to guide evidence-based public policymaking as the Global Plastics Treaty comes into effect.

The article (Health Policy) published in The Lancet aims to present the Lancet Countdown on Health and Climate Change project, which offers a monitoring system to assess exposure to plastics and their potential associated harms, both to human health and the environment. In line with the latest scientific trends, the proposed actions are intended to be global in geographical scope and span all stages of the plastic life cycle.

At the same time, the article reviews current evidence on how plastics, including their associated chemicals, can affect health and the environment. It highlights important issues such as the lack of transparency regarding the chemicals present in plastics as additives, many of which lack toxicological or ecotoxicological data. It also addresses other concerning aspects, such as the fact that a large proportion of plastic waste is not properly managed—especially in countries with poor infrastructure—as well as the high mobility and colonization potential of plastics, which may contribute to the spread of pathogenic microorganisms or invasive species. These facts are well known and widely documented in the scientific literature.

However, the article makes some claims that are unfounded or excessively alarmist. First, it has not been conclusively demonstrated that plastics generally cause "disease and death from infancy to old age," nor that they are directly responsible for the economic losses mentioned. The projected figure of 1,200 Mt by 2060 also appears to be inflated. A more realistic estimate, based on growth trends observed over the past 5 to 10 years—and which anyone can calculate using openly available data—would place that figure at around 850 Mt under a business-as-usual scenario. Similarly, the effects on human health are questionable, as they often rely on debatable or even implausible results, stemming from the use of inappropriate techniques, calculation errors, or sample contamination.

Ultimately, the problem of plastic waste pollution is real and deeply concerning. However, exaggerating its negative effects does not contribute to an effective solution. It is important to remember that plastic is not used as part of a conspiracy to harm humanity, but because it is an extraordinarily useful material for society. Its use allows, among other benefits, food preservation, reduced packaging weight and consequently lower fuel consumption during transport, as well as numerous medical and industrial applications for which there are few or no viable alternatives. Of course, this does not exempt manufacturers or regulators from the responsibility of ensuring safe materials and establishing appropriate systems for their end-of-life management.