They can't be anywhere even close to synthetic textiles.

Presumably you're not chewing on or eating from synthetic textiles. Meanwhile an enormous amount of food is shipped in, and even cooked in, plastic directly.

Of course you're right in the sense that when it comes to our general environment textiles produce far more environmental microplastics than most other sources. Particularly in our water systems.

…water systems that supply our drinking water.

I think synthetic fabrics shed very small particles into the air every time they are disturbed, eventually wearing out entirely. We breath a lot of that in. Clothes, furniture, sometimes even bed sheets; these all shed fibers into our living spaces.

Or car tires..

I don’t personally normally buy bottled water but the alternative is probably to go back to glass which means higher consumer prices, increased fossil fuel consumption for transportation, etc.

Why not aluminum cans? There's still some plastic in there, but you can mostly recycle them, they must be fairly cheap, and they're quite light. As an added benefit they stack higher in transit with less extra packaging, at least if they're shipped like beer.

I literally just saw those for the first time. As I understand it they’re still plastic lined and the energy efficiency depends on how much recycling takes place. It depends if eliminating plastics is what you really care about or not.

>They’re one of the greatest sources of micro plastics in our bodies.

Source?

Have you ever drank from one of those bottles?? It literally tastes like plastic.

Yeah, but I don't taste the plastic.

Even if it's true that those bottles shed plastic and you can taste that plastic, that's not a source for the claim that the bottles are one of the foremost sources of the microplastic in our bodies.