普通实验室手套可能导致微塑料数据偏差
Ordinary Lab Gloves May Have Skewed Microplastic Data

原始链接: https://nautil.us/ordinary-lab-gloves-may-have-skewed-microplastic-data-1279386

## 微塑料研究受实验室手套影响 最新研究显示,微塑料污染研究可能存在一个缺陷:科学家们使用的手套。密歇根大学的一个团队发现,常见丁腈和乳胶手套会脱落被称为“硬脂酸盐”的碳氢化合物颗粒——这些是生产中使用的添加剂,标准实验室设备无法将其与微塑料区分开来。 这种污染可能导致数量被显著高估,一些测试显示,每平方毫米的手套接触区域会产生超过2000个“假阳性”颗粒。即使在以前认为不太容易受到污染的干燥样品制备过程中,也会出现这个问题。 解决方案?更换*不*含硬脂酸盐的“洁净室”手套可以大大减少污染。虽然这并不能否定广泛存在的微塑料污染,但它强调了改进方法和更准确的数据收集的必要性。研究人员强调,问题仍然很严重,但了解其真实规模需要仔细注意潜在的实验室引入的污染物。

## 微塑料研究因实验室污染而复杂化 最近在Hacker News上的一场讨论围绕着一篇《Nautilus》文章,强调了微塑料研究中潜在的缺陷。核心问题是:常用的实验室手套会脱落材料,这些材料可能被误认为是微塑料,从而可能扭曲结果并夸大样本(如脑组织)中的污染程度。 用户指出塑料在现代生活中普遍存在,完全避免几乎不可能——甚至收据也会造成暴露。讨论强调了“运行空白对照”的重要性——分析对照样本以考虑环境污染——但质疑其有效性,因为*所有*样本都已经受到微塑料污染。 人们对脑组织中微塑料的浓度表示担忧,但有人认为用于检测的热解方法可能会将脂类误认为塑料。许多评论员表达了对微塑料积累的潜在健康影响的担忧,并引用了与心脏病、中风和激素紊乱的关联,而另一些人则告诫不要过度恐慌,并呼吁提供更可靠的证据。还有人怀疑行业正在试图淡化风险。
相关文章

原文

Scientists researching the microplastics crisis may have unintentionally made it worse. Not by directly contributing to the problem, but by inadvertently skewing the data. The culprit, a new study published in the journal RSC Analytical Methods reveals, could be their gloves. 

A team of researchers from the University of Michigan discovered that nitrile and latex gloves traditionally worn by laboratory scientists of all stripes, can shed particles called “stearates” that mimic microplastics. These hydrocarbons, added by the glove manufacturers to prevent the gloves from sticking to the molds, can fool spectroscopy machines and are nearly impossible to distinguish from polyethylene under electron microscopes.

The discovery of the problem was something of an accident itself. Researching microplastics in the atmosphere, study author Madeline Clough detected alarmingly high levels of the tiny pollutants on a metal substrate she prepared while wearing nitrile gloves, a practice the literature currently recommends. 

Read more: “A Plastic Oasis in the Sea

“It led to a wild goose chase of trying to figure out where this contamination could possibly have come from, because we just knew this number was far too high to be correct,” Clough said in a statement. “Throughout the process of figuring it out—was it a plastic squirt bottle, was it particles in the atmosphere of the lab where I was preparing the substrates—we finally traced it down to gloves.”

Previous research found that disposable gloves used in wet preparations of samples could skew microplastics data, but this is the first study to find similar activity in dry preparations. 

So what’s the solution? 

The researchers tested seven different glove types, painstakingly examining every imaginable point of contact between a gloved hand and a piece of laboratory equipment. They found that, on average, all gloves led to about 2,000 false positives per millimeter squared of contact area. Clean-room gloves, manufactured without stearites, led to only 100 false positives per millimeter squared of contact area, making them the safer bet if gloves need to be worn for a procedure.

Most importantly, the researchers stress this doesn’t mean there’s no such thing as microplastic pollution, just that scientists studying it should refine their methodology. “We may be overestimating microplastics,” study co-author Anne McNeil said. “But there’s still a lot out there, and that’s the problem.”

It’s a difficult thing for scientists to get their hands around. Now they just need to be a little more mindful of what those hands are wearing.

Enjoying  Nautilus? Subscribe to our free newsletter.

Lead image: SIVStockStudio / Shutterstock

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com