National Microbead Ban Moves Forward in the House

Published in The Center for Effective Government / Dec. 10, 2015 by Ronald White

UPDATE (12/10/15): On Dec. 7, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Microbead-Free Waters Act of 2015, which prohibits the manufacture of cosmetics containing microbeads as of July 1, 2017 and bans the sale of cosmetics with microbeads as of July 1, 2018. Rinse-off cosmetic nonprescription drugs are provided an additional year for both deadlines.

The bill was sent to the Senate on Dec. 8, where it will be reconciled with a similar bill introduced in May 2015 by Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) and Gary Peters (D-MI), which bans the sale of cosmetics containing microbeads as of Jan. 1, 2018.

In addition to Illinois, California recently adopted legislation banning the sale of cosmetics containing microbeads, including those made of so-called biodegradable plastics as well as synthetic plastics, as of 2020, and both Ohio and Michigan are considering similar legislation.

However, once national legislation is adopted, the federal law would supersede the state bans.

Examples of cosmetics and other consumer products that contain microbeads, as well as those that do not contain them, is available here.


UPDATE (6/23/14): Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ) introduced legislation, the Microbead-Free Waters Act of 2014, on June 18 that would prohibit the sale or distribution of personal care products that contain synthetic plastic microbeads. The bill would ban the sale or distribution of cosmetics products containing plastic microbeads effective January 1, 2018.

“These tiny plastic particles that are polluting our environment are found in products specifically designed to be washed down shower drains,” said Pallone. “And many people buying these products are unaware of their damaging effects.

If we know that these products will eventually reach our waterways, we must make sure that they don’t contain synthetic plastic that does not biodegrade and ultimately pollute our waterways. We have a responsibility to put a stop to this unnecessary plastic pollution. By phasing out the use of plastic microbeads and transitioning to non-synthetic alternatives, we can protect U.S. waters before it’s too late.”

**********************************************************************************************************************

Illinois has become the first state to ban the manufacture and sale of consumer products containing synthetic plastic microbeads, frequently found in facial scrubs, body washes, and cosmetics. The state passed the ban to address an increasing water pollution problem in Lake Michigan and other waterways across Illinois.

On June 8, Gov. Pat Quinn (D) signed Senate Bill 2727, which amends the state Environmental Protection Act with new requirements for the elimination of synthetic plastic microbeads in personal care products. The new law restricts the manufacture of personal care products containing such microbeads effective Dec. 31, 2017 and bans the sale of personal care products containing the material beginning Dec. 31, 2018.

Microbeads are minute plastic beads that are used in consumer products such as toothpaste and cosmetic scrubs to produce a “feel-good factor.” After use, they are flushed into wastewater systems where, because of their small size and non-biodegradable composition, they escape into waterways.

A major concern with microbeads is that because of their very small size, they have a large surface area by volume, thus serving as highly efficient toxic accumulators. Once discharged into the water, they can be immediately ingested by tiny organisms at the bottom of the food chain, with toxins then accumulating in larger fish and other animals, posing both an immediate and long-term threat to the health of our lakes, rivers, and oceans and the seafood we eat.

While Illinois is the first state to enact a ban on the sale and production of microbead-containing products, the issue is gaining attention in other states. Similar bans are being considered in California, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and New York. A growing number of soap and beauty product manufacturers are voluntarily phasing out the use of microbeads.

According to the advocacy group Plastic Free Seas, Unilever, The Body Shop, Johnson & Johnson, Beiersdorf AG, L'Oreal, and Procter & Gamble have all agreed to discontinue their use of microbeads in consumer products over the next several years.

California joins six other states in banning plastic microbeads

Published in BioTechin.Asia by Laxmi Iyer on October 12, 2015 

California state has followed Illinois and five other states including Colorado, Indiana, Maine, Maryland and New Jersey in banning plastic microbeads. Illinois was the first to ban microbeads in June 2014. Governor Jerry Brown of California signed the legislation on Thursday that bans these tiny abrasives used in exfoliators and other personal care products.

(Read More: Water pollution due to microbeads: a major problem in today’s world)

“We’re obviously incredibly excited,” said Stiv Wilson, director of campaigns at the nonprofit group the Story of Stuff Project. “We just passed a very simple ban on plastic microbeads without any loopholes.”

The consumer products industry had objected to certain aspects of the bill, arguing that it was overly restrictive and did not allow companies to come up with environmentally friendly alternatives. The California rules include a prohibition against biodegradable microbeads, which other states with similar legislation allow.

Lisa Powers, a spokeswoman for the Personal Care Products Council, said in an email that the industry trade group had taken a neutral position on the bill.

Microbeads look like tiny dots suspended in cleansers and other toiletries. Manufacturers including Johnson & Johnson and Procter & Gamble advertise their exfoliating power, particularly in face and body scrubs.

But when consumers rinse these products off, the microbeads gets flushed into sinks and sewage from where they enter the ocean and pollute them. Billions of microbeads have the same effect as grinding up plastic water bottles and dumping them into the ocean, environmentalists say.

These are harmful and are capable of affecting our aquatic ecosystems and human health. Microbeads look similar to fish eggs- especially their size, so aquatic organisms and birds mistake it for food and consume them. And when we consume these fishes and birds, they get passed onto us through the food chain.

Awareness on this issue is on the rise, and this is a step in the right direction.

Source: NewYork Times

Plastic pollution: California lawmakers to vote on banning 'microbeads' from personal care products

Published 05/17/2015 in Mercury News by Paul Rogers

File: A sample of "microbeads" collected in eastern Lake Erie is shown on the face of a penny. (AP)

They are in soaps, cosmetics, shampoos, even toothpaste. Tiny pieces of plastic -- most no bigger than a pencil dot -- called "microbeads" are designed to do everything from help exfoliate skin to whiten teeth.

But they are pouring by the billions into oceans, rivers and bodies of water like San Francisco Bay, scientists say, contaminating the environment and wildlife as people rinse and wash, sending the microbeads down drains and through sewage treatment plants, which aren't designed to filter them.

On Monday, state lawmakers in Sacramento are scheduled to vote on the nation's strictest ban on microbeads, prohibiting them in all personal care products starting Jan. 1, 2020.

 

 

 

"It's almost like confetti, like small grains of plastic sand," said Mark Murray, executive director of Californians Against Waste, an environmental group supporting the ban.

"We shouldn't be adding these plastics to our environment. We're just pouring them into the oceans."

 

 

 

The bill, AB 888, by Assemblyman Richard Bloom, D-Santa Monica, is virtually identical to a similar bill that Bloom wrote last year. That measure, AB 1699, passed the California Assembly easily last May, and then died in the state Senate amid industry opposition when Republicans came out broadly against it and Democrats wavered.

 

 

 

 

This year, the chemical and cosmetics industry has so far kept a lower profile. But lobbyists working with the Personal Care Products Council and the California Manufacturers & Technology Association have been pushing for an exemption to allow biodegradable plastics to remain legal.

Earlier this year, the industry won that loophole when lawmakers in New Jersey and Colorado banned microbeads but allowed biodegradable plastic. The governor of Illinois signed a law last year with the same guidelines.

 

Lisa Powers, a spokeswoman for the Personal Care Products Council, a Washington, D.C., group that represents companies that manufacture cosmetics, sunscreen, toothpaste and other items, did not respond Sunday when asked for the industry's position on California's bill.
Last year, the council opposed the bill, as did the California Chamber of Commerce, Grocery Manufacturers Association and other industry groups.

"Plastic microbeads are used in cosmetic and personal care products because of their safe and effective exfoliating properties," the Personal Care Products Council said in a statement last summer. "However, many personal care products companies have voluntarily committed to discontinue formulating with plastic microbeads in cleansing products in favor of other viable alternatives despite the uncertainty associated with the science.

"We urge policymakers to work with all sectors of the business community as they seek to eliminate plastic waste in our waterways and to identify effective and realistic solutions."

Supporters of the California ban say there are already lots of products for sale with natural alternatives, such as apricot shells and cocoa beans, and that they do not want to allow biodegradable plastics. Those plastics simply break into tiny pieces and are not consumed by microorganisms and decomposed as part of the natural food chain, particularly in cold ocean waters, they note. Also, there are no scientific standards in the other state laws to specifically define what "biodegradable" means.

"We are loathe to include an exemption for a plastic product that we can't define," said Bloom. "We are hoping that California will model a better approach that can be adopted by other states."

Tiny bits of plastic have been found in high concentrations in the Great Lakes, the Los Angeles River and the Pacific Ocean where, according to some studies, they outnumber plankton. Scientists say the plastic also absorbs contaminants such as pesticides and PCBs, which then are accumulated in fish when they eat the bits, mistaking them for fish eggs, plankton and other natural materials. People who eat the affected fish also can be exposed to the chemicals.

In January, scientists skimmed the water surface over nine large areas of San Francisco Bay. They found between 14,000 and 440,000 plastic particles, including microbeads, per square kilometer -- an area of about 250 football fields, said Rebecca Sutton, a senior scientist with the San Francisco Estuary Institute, a research organization based in Richmond.

"It's a persistent substance, and organisms like fish are trying to ingest it," Sutton said. "And you've got chemical contaminant issues. This is a preventable type of pollution, and it's certainly not something we could encourage to have in the bay."

Supporters of the bill include the California Association of Sanitation Agencies, Sierra Club California, the cities of Palo Alto and San Francisco, the East Bay Municipal Utility District, Breast Cancer Fund and the Surfrider Foundation.

Last August, Crest announced that although microbeads have been found safe by the FDA, the company would be phasing them out of its toothpastes by March, 2016. Responding to consumer concerns, Johnson & Johnson also said it will be removing microbeads from its products by 2017.

Bloom said consumers who don't want to buy products containing microbeads should look on the labels for ingredients like polyethylene and polypropylene.

"It's exactly like food," he said. "We have to be more conscientious about reading labels. These products are listed. The more educated people are about what's in their products, the healthier we will be."

Paul Rogers covers resources and environmental issues. Contact him at 408-920-5045. Follow him at Twitter.com/PaulRogersSJMN.

Ban Microbeads in California

Take Action to Tip The Scales Let's Ban Microbeads in California!

The 5 Gyres Institute has come a long way since we began sailing the high seas on a mission to document the emerging global plastic crisis.  In the last 5 years, we have sailed over 50,000 miles, collected more than four hundred ocean surface samples, published several peer reviewed scientific papers documenting our findings, and helped launch a national movement to ban microbeads from personal care products like facial scrubs and toothpaste.  Your support right now will help 5 Gyres tip the scales in favor of the planet and win the battle to Ban Microbeads in California. A win against microbeads in California will help pave the way toward legislative wins across the country.   The movement has caught fire. In the last few months, 18 states across the country - from Hawaii to Maine - have introduced legislation to ban microbeads. Were building upon the tremendous efforts of our partners at The Plastic Soup Foundation, who first galvanized European audiences to take this issue on. Just last week, a federal bill was introduced in congress. But major players in the cosmetics industry are spending big bucks to introduce language that allows bioplastics to replace current plastic beads. Without adequate testing and oversight, 5 Gyres and our coalition partners are wary of bioplastics - unless they are proven beyond any shadow of doubt to break down into before they reach the ocean.    With research emerging daily highlighting the devastating effects of plastic on marine life - from starving coral reefs to poisoning fish that humans consume - it's clear that we need to act now to stop plastic pollution at the source, before it ever has a chance to reach the oceans. That's why in California we have teamed up with Assembly Member Richard Bloom (D - Santa Monica) and a coalition of leading environmental groups to introduce the most comprehensive ban in the country. Over the next several months, 5 Gyres will be working to educate lawmakers and citizens about the dangers of microplastic pollution, build grassroots support in key districts, and pass responsible policies with one objective: to keep plastic off of our faces and out of our oceans. We have a momentous battle ahead - and the stakes could not be higher. What happens in 2015 in legislatures across the country will determine the fate of billions of microbeads and accordingly, our oceans. Join us in our last stand to ban the bead and protect the oceans that we cherish, and the marine life that calls them home. Support our work to protect the oceans from microplastic pollution by making a contribution today.

Sincerely, The 5 Gyres Team

Environmentalists pan microbead ban pushed by beauty industry

Published in The News Tribune January 28, 2015  by Melissa Santos

The push is on in Washington state to ban synthetic plastic microbeads, the tiny pieces of plastic sometimes used in face washes and bath products as an exfoliant.

But in a twist, an environmental group working to curb plastic pollution is critical of the plan, while manufacturers of microbead-laden beauty products are pushing it.

The small plastic beads, commonly used in facial scrubs and body washes, are known to pollute waterways and can end up in the bellies of fish and other marine animals, according to the state Department of Ecology.

A proposal in the Legislature would phase out products containing the synthetic microbeads by 2020. House Bill 1378 will receive a public hearing at 8 a.m. Thursday (Jan. 29) before the House Environment Committee.

As written, though, the legislation would only ban microbeads that are made out of plastic that isn’t biodegradable, which one environmental group said wouldn’t solve the problem.

The biodegradable plastics now on the market don’t break down in cold environments such as the ocean, according to 5 Gyres, a nonprofit working to reduce plastic pollution in the world’s oceans. Instead, the currently available biodegradable plastics need to be composted in a high-heat industrial compost facility, said Anna Cummins, executive director of the group.

5 Gyres has been critical of a similar law passed in Illinois last year that also targets only non-biodegradable plastic microbeads.

“The whole point is to prevent these toxic plastic pellets from entering our oceans,” Cummins said. “Replacing plastic microbeads with compostable plastic microbeads would be a huge loss for the environment.”

Yet the Personal Care Products Council, a national trade group representing about 600 companies, is supporting the legislation. So is the state Department of Ecology.

Karin Ross, director of government affairs for the Personal Care Products Council, said there aren’t many scientific studies yet showing that microbeads have become a large pollution problem, but manufacturers want to get ahead of the issue.

She said manufacturers of personal care products are already switching voluntarily to alternatives to plastic microbeads, which she said may include natural exfoliants such as ground seeds.

“The industry has taken the worries about them possibly ending up in waterways very seriously,” Ross said.

Ross made no mention of biodegradable plastics being used as an alternative, but said she couldn’t speak to all the products in development by companies represented by her organization.

The proposal the House committee will hear Thursday would phase out products containing non-biodegradable plastic microbeads over a five-year period. Under the bill, it would be illegal for anyone in Washington to manufacture or knowingly sell any products containing synthetic microbeads starting in January 2020.

Violators could be fined between $1,000 and $10,000.

Microbeads are defined in the legislation as plastic particles less than 5 millimeters in diameter that are used for exfoliation.

An identical bill has been introduced in the Senate, and both bills have a mix of Republican and Democratic supporters.

State Rep. Joan McBride, D-Kirkland, said her intention in sponsoring the House version of the legislation is to stop microbead pollution in waterways.

She said Wednesday that she hadn’t heard of any opposition to the bill until a reporter told her of 5 Gyres’ concerns. She said she is open to amending the the bill to apply to all products with plastic microbeads, regardless of whether they are made of biodegradable or non-biodegradable plastic.
McBride said the plastic microbeads are particularly problematic because they are often too small to be caught by water filtration systems.

She said that she’s worried about plastic microbeads contaminating the state’s food supply and damaging aquatic ecosystems.

“They’re not meant to be ingested,” McBride said. “They work at exfoliation — they don’t work as food for fish.”

Melissa Santos: 360-357-0209 melissa.santos@thenewstribune.com @melissasantos1

A response from Crest (Proctor & Gamble)

Here is a response from Crest I received in response to comments I submitted to them about microbeads (polyethylene) in their toothpaste products:

Hi Melanie! Thank you for contacting Crest.

We appreciate your interest in our products. In regards to your question, nothing matters more to us than the well-being of our consumers around the world who use our toothpastes. We want to assure you that our products are safe. Our products and their ingredients undergo rigorous safety evaluations before going to market.  And once in market, we continually monitor their safety.  The colored polyethylene (PE) specks used in our oral care products are safe, FDA approved food additives. They are used in chewing gums and are commonly used in toothpastes. P&G and other toothpaste manufacturers use limited amounts of small colored polyethylene specs in some toothpaste.  Polyethylene beads are commonly used as scrub beads (e.g. in exfoliating products) but are also sometimes used to give color, like in chewing gum and toothpaste. There is no evidence from clinical studies or from on-going monitoring to indicate that these particles persist underneath the gum line or cause harm. We've already begun the process of identifying alternatives for use in our toothpaste and the PE specks will be replaced as soon as alternatives are qualified.  In addition, we have decided not to introduce microplastic beads into any new product category. 

I hope this information is helpful to you, once again thank you for taking the time to write!

Krissia

Crest Team

Crest toothpaste imbeds plastic in our gums

Published Mar. 4th  by Trish Walraven in dentalbuzz.com

This is polyethylene:

Did you know that polyethylene is the most common plastic in the world? It is used primarily for containers and packaging, such as these bottles and plastic grocery bags, and has been a concern for the environment because polyethylene lasts practically forever and isn’t biodegradable. It only breaks down into smaller and smaller particles until you can’t see it anymore. That’s why a couple of states are trying to ban it in body scrubs and dental products.

This is also polyethylene:

Well, not all of it. Most of it is toothpaste. But do you see those blue specks? That’s plastic. This is the suggested pea-sized amount that you should use when you brush your teeth. Yes, there is plastic in this toothpaste.

Want to see how many pieces of plastic are in this exact sample?

Not that I’m counting the bits but that seriously looks like A LOT of plastic… err…high density polyethylene. That’s what plastic trash cans are made from! If you throw away the box like most people do, the ingredients aren’t actually listed on the tube (sneaky, sneaky, Procter & Gamble!) However, I was able to track down the box here at this link. We’re not talking about polyethylene glycol, which is soluble in water. This stuff won’t dissolve in water, or even acetone or alcohol for that matter. How do I know it won’t dissolve? Because I put on my little scientist hat and tested it.
Like many of you, we often let our daughter pick out her own toothpaste at the store. She liked the tween vibe of this particular product so much that she chose it twice, but eventually the squeezed-out tubes ended up in the back of her toothpaste drawer.

When I first got wind that plastic was in some toothpastes, it was kind of exciting to realize that we had some on hand! And a bit concerning, because, after all, this is in my own home, used by my own child. Able to confirm that, sure enough, there was polyethylene in this toothpaste, I squirted out a pea-sized sample, mixed it up with some water, strained out the undissolved particles and let them dry on a paper towel. Oh, and I used a hair dryer to speed things up because I’m impatient. Then I shook approximately half of the sample into each of two pyrex bowls and added some household solvents:


They didn’t dissolve in the acetone, (nail polish remover) or in the alcohol either. I even left the samples in the solutions overnight, then re-hydrated them. No change in the particles.

So it has been established here that polyethylene will not dissolve in the mouth, or even in household products. It is an inert substance, which means that it doesn’t change at all. You know, that’s pretty good in some ways, because at least it’s probably not morphing into big blobs of plastic evil cancer bait.

Here’s where the story gets scary, though.

You see, I’m not just a concerned mom. I’m also a dental hygienist. And I’m seeing these same bits of blue plastic stuck in my patients’ mouths almost every day.

Around our teeth we have these little channels in our gums, sort of like the cuticles around our fingernails. The gum channel is called a sulcus, and it’s where diseases like gingivitis get their start. A healthy sulcus is no deeper than about 3 millimeters, so when you have hundreds of pieces of plastic being scrubbed into your gums each day that are even smaller than a millimeter, many of them are getting trapped:

The thing about a sulcus is that it’s vulnerable. Your dental hygienist spends most of their time cleaning every sulcus in your mouth, because if the band of tissue around your tooth isn’t healthy, then you’re not healthy. You can start to see why having bits of plastic in your sulcus may be a real problem, sort of like when popcorn hulls find their way into these same areas. Ouch, right?

Like I said, I’ve been seeing these blue particles flush out of patients’ gums for several months now. So has the co-hygienist in our office. So have many dental hygienists throughout the United States and Canada who have consulted with each other and realized that we have a major concern on our hands.

This is what an actual polyethylene speck looks like when it’s embedded within the sulcus, under the gumline:

I am not saying that polyethylene is causing gum problems. I’d be jumping too soon to that conclusion without scientific proof.  But what I am saying definitively is that plastic is in your toothpaste, and that some of it is left behind even after you’re finished brushing and rinsing with it.

Do you want plastic in your toothpaste? So far the only mention of polyethylene on the Official Crest website at this link is that it is added to your paste for color, not as an aid in helping to clean your teeth or to disperse important anti-plaque or anti-cavity ingredients.

In other words, according to Crest:

Polyethylene plastic is in your toothpaste for decorative purposes only.

This is unacceptable not only to me, but to many, many hygienists nationwide. We are informing our patients. We are doing research separately and comparing notes. And until Procter & Gamble gives us a better reason as to why there is plastic in your toothpaste, we would like you to consider discontinuing the use of these products.

Here are some of the brands (click each to see their ingredient list and labeling) that we currently are aware of which contain polyethylene:

• Crest 3D White Radiant Mint

• Crest Pro-Health For Me

• Crest 3D White Arctic Fresh

• Crest 3D White Enamel Renewal

• Crest 3D White Luxe Glamorous White

• Crest Complete Multi-Benefit Whitening Plus Deep Clean

• Crest Extra White Plus Scope Outlast

• Crest Complete Multi-Benefit Extra White+ Crystal Clean Anti-Bac

• Crest Be Adventurous Mint Chocolate Trek

• Crest Be Dynamic Lime Spearmint Zest

• Crest Be Inspired Vanilla Mint Spark

• Crest Pro-Health Healthy Fresh

• Crest Pro-Health Smooth Mint

What you can do

At this point, it’s probably best if you leave your flaming torches back in the barn. We’re not going after witches or Frankenstein here; you’re using your power as a consumer to send a message that you do NOT want plastic in your toothpaste. Heck, you might even be worrying about what may happen if you or your children swallow some of it.

1. If you’ve already purchased one of these toothpastes you can take it back to the retailer where you bought it, make sure that the manufacturer knows why you’re returning it, and ask for a refund.

2. Lodge a Crest consumer complaint at (800) 959-6586 and report an adverse health effect, namely, that you’re concerned that plastic pieces may be getting trapped in your mouth.

3. Click here to send an email to Procter & Gamble, the makers of Crest.

4. Share this! Let your friends and family know that you are also concerned about the plastic in their toothpaste by clicking on your favorite social media link below and getting the word out.

Response to criticism

Procter & Gamble’s current party line? “We will discontinue our use of PE micro plastic beads in skin exfoliating personal care products and toothpastes as soon as alternatives are qualified.”
And your response then may be, “I will discontinue MY use of Crest toothpaste until there are no more decorative microplastics entering my mouth.”

References and acknowledgements

Plastic Trades Industry: http://www.plasticsindustry.org/AboutPlastics
US National Library of Medicine: http://dailymed.nlm.nih.gov/crest
HygieneTown: http://www.hygienetown.com/blue-dots-in-patients-mouths
And a HUGE thank you goes out to my friend and colleague Erika B. Feltham, RDH for bringing this problem to our attention and for her extensive research. Erika is dedicated to providing the best possible care for her patients. She has been active in the dental profession for over 30 years, is a recipient of the 2008 American Dental Hygiene Association/Johnson and Johnson Hygiene Hero Award, the 2010 RDH Sunstar Americas (GUM Dental)Award of Distinction, lectures extensively about the harmful effects of sour candies, energy and sports drinks, and along with her San Diego component, she is responsible for presenting the resolution on sour candy labeling at the 2009 CDHA House of Delegates.

Plastic pollution a problem in the Great Lakes

Posted July 2, 2013 by Sharon Hill in WindsorStar.com

 
Microbeads from samples in the eastern half of Lake Erie. (Courtesy of Marcus Eriksen)

Tiny bits of plastic found in cosmetic products from toothpaste to body washes are posing a growing pollution threat to the Great Lakes, according to researchers.

The first survey of plastic pollution in the Great Lakes discovered spots in Lake Erie with more than 450,000 plastic particles per square kilometre, double what similar surveys have found in oceans, the study’s principal investigator Sherri Mason said Tuesday.

“We’re plasticizing our water,” said Mason, an associate chemistry professor at the State University of New York’s College at Fredonia, N.Y.

The research, which was done from the Flagship Niagara, a reconstructed flagship of the 1813 Battle of Lake Erie, found plastic microbeads in surface water samples last year from lakes Superior, Huron and Erie. Mason was on the Detroit River in May conducting more research. The study has been submitted to a marine pollution journal but is not published yet.

Mason said they were collecting bits of plastic less than a millimeter in size in fine netting dragged behind the boat. The majority of the particles appear as spherical balls when seen under a microscope.

Microbeads come from all sorts of personal care products and give a creamy feel to cosmetics and lotions.

Mason did the study with the 5 Gyres Institute which researches plastic pollution in oceans and has a campaign against microbeads.

Marcus Eriksen, the institute’s executive director and the lead author of the study, said microbeads are the same size and color as many kinds of fish eggs and absorb chemicals such as DDT, PCBs and flame retardants in our lakes. This could allow a path for pollutants to enter the food chain, he said.

“There could easily be billions of microplastic particles in the Great Lakes system,” Ericksen said via email Tuesday.

The campaign to get consumers to stop using products with microbeads and to get manufacturers to stop making them has prompted Unilever, Body Shop and Johnson & Johnson to say they will discontinue using them by 2015, Eriksen said. Those companies could be joined by 2017 by Proctor & Gamble.

The amounts found by the researchers ranged from 600 plastic particles per square kilometer to 460,000 per square kilometre. The larger amounts were found in Lake Erie near Erie, Penn., across from Long Point. Near Essex County, researchers found about 6,000 plastic particles per square kilometre.

More research is being done to determine what type of plastic they are finding and if it is being found in fish. More samples will be taken in Lake Ontario in July and Lake Michigan in August.

Mason said product labels may identify microbeads or micro abrasives. Microbeads can also show up as polypropylene or polyethylene on the label, she said.

Some products use natural abrasives such as apricot seeds, almonds or cocoa beans, Mason said.

Plastic microbeads aren’t being directly studied by the International Joint Commission but they are on scientists’ radar, said John Nevin, the public affairs adviser at the IJC Great Lakes Regional Office in Windsor.

The IGC has been collecting research on the impact of personal care products since 2007 and it would be good to have more research on the plastic, he said.

Plastic microbeads are not found in drinking water since they cannot get past the finer filters, Nevin said.

While you may have heard of the great Pacific garbage patch of trash in the ocean, these microbeads are the next big marine debris concern, said Kirk Havens, a researcher at the Virginia Institute of Marine Science, the graduate school of marine science for the William and Mary College.

Havens is testing a biodegradable polymer that could be eaten by bacteria as a replacement for the plastic.

He said the non-degradable plastic microbeads which can be ten to a few hundred microns in size, like dust or a miniscule flake of cayenne pepper, are in many cosmetic products. They go on the skin smoothly, feel creamy and are good for filling in wrinkles, Havens said. But they never really go away and we keep adding them to our lakes.

“You don’t really want to know all the things they are in,” he said listing toothpaste, sunscreen, lip gloss, eyeliner, shampoo, deodorant, soaps and exfoliating creams.