It concludes that of the 50 studies they reviewed only 4 were of sufficient quality to draw conclusions. So, the study concluded
>>We conclude that more high quality data is needed on the occurrence of microplastics in drinking water, to better understand potential exposure and to inform human health risk assessments.
How does this translate to "microplastics not harmful"?
Re:Microplastics in water not harmful to humans, says WHO re...
by Halluxfboy009 on Thursday August 22, 2019 @04:36AM
(#20765907)
Misleading titles, of course. My takeaway from that is what was repeated multiple times throughout the actual article - they don't have enough evidence to prove it either way.
It concludes that of the 50 studies they reviewed only 4 were of sufficient quality to draw conclusions. So, the study concluded
>>We conclude that more high quality data is needed on the occurrence of microplastics in drinking water, to better understand potential exposure and to inform human health risk assessments.
How does this translate to "microplastics not harmful"?