Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 284

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 54 of the 54 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Microplastics in human blood: Polymer types, concentrations and characterisation using μFTIR

Open access
V. L. Leonard, Sophie, Liddle, Catriona R., Atherall, Charlotte A., Chapman, Emma, Watkins, Matthew, D. J. Calaminus, Simon, Rotchell, Jeanette M.·2024·Environment International

Abstract

Microplastics (MPs) are an everyday part of life, and are now ubiquitous in the environment. Crucially, MPs have not just been found within the environment, but also within human bodies, including the blood. We aimed to provide novel information on the range of MP polymer types present, as well as their size and shape characteristics, in human whole blood from 20 healthy volunteers. Twenty-four polymer types were identified from 18 out of 20 (90 %) donors and quantified in blood, with the majority observed for the first time. Using an LOQ approach, five polymer types met the threshold with a lower mean ± SD of 2466 ± 4174 MP/L. The concentrations of plastics analysed in blood samples ranged from 1.84 - 4.65 μg/mL. Polyethylene (32 %), ethylene propylene diene (14 %), and ethylene-vinyl-acetate/alcohol (12 %) fragments were the most abundant. MP particles that were identified within the blood samples had a mean particle length of 127.99 ± 293.26 µm (7-3000 µm), and a mean particle width of 57.88 ± 88.89 µm (5-800 µm). The MPs were predominantly categorised as fragments (88 %) and were white/clear (79 %). A variety of plastic additive chemicals were identified including endocrine disrupting-classed phthalates. The procedural blank samples comprised 7 polymer types, that were distinct from those identified in blood, mainly resin (25 %), polyethylene terephthalate (17 %), and polystyrene (17 %) with a mean ± SD of 4.80 ± 5.59 MP/L. This study adds to the growing evidence that MPs are taken up into the human body and are transported via the bloodstream. The shape and sizes of the particles raise important questions with respect to their presence and associated hazards in terms of potential detrimental impacts such as vascular inflammation, build up within major organs, and changes to either immune cell response, or haemostasis and thrombosis.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.envint.2024.108751

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 54 references

Cited by

See all 284

Metadata

Authors
V. L. Leonard, S., Liddle, C. R., Atherall, C. A., Chapman, E., Watkins, M., D. J. Calaminus, S., & Rotchell, J. M.
Venue
Environment International
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024-06
Volume
188
Pages
108751
ISSN
0160-4120 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4396902238
Cited by
284
References
54
FWCI
25.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Microplastics in human blood: Polymer types, concentrations and characterisation using μFTIR. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.envint.2024.108751
The paper
V. L. Leonard, S., Liddle, C. R., Atherall, C. A., Chapman, E., Watkins, M., D. J. Calaminus, S., & Rotchell, J. M. (2024). Microplastics in human blood: Polymer types, concentrations and characterisation using μFTIR. Environment International. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2024.108751

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.