Microplastics are highly prevalent in the United States, contaminating various environmental compartments and even entering the human body. Studies have found microplastics in food, water, and air, with estimates suggesting that the average American consumes thousands to hundreds of thousands of microplastic particles annually (Ocean Conservatory). So it’s no surprise that the medical industry is stepping in and beginning to offer solutions and treatments to rid our body of these harmful toxins we are now learning so much more about. In fact, clinics across the country are now offering therapeutic plasma‑exchange treatments that promise to strip microplastics, PFAS and other pollutants from the bloodstream—at roughly the cost of a year’s in‑state college tuition per session. (The Cut)
These boutique interventions exist for one simple reason: microplastics have become a personal health problem as well as an environmental one, so medical professionals want to take action to ensure Americans are treated if and when they feel they should be. But given all of the new research pointing out the prevalence and harmful effects, the big question is why the government has been slow to take action despite the evidence?
The science is no longer hypothetical
Tiny plastic particles have been detected in nearly 80 percent of human blood samples, confirming that they enter our circulation and can lodge in organs. (The Guardian) New research published this year in Nature found that patients with plastic fragments in the carotid artery faced sharply higher risks of heart attack, stroke and early death. (Nature) Scientists have also documented microplastics in nerves, lungs, placentas and even the brain, raising questions about inflammation, endocrine disruption and long‑term cognitive effects.
Yet while the evidence base grows, the United States still regulates microplastics largely as an afterthought.
A regulatory patchwork full of holes
Washington’s last meaningful action was the 2015 Microbead‑Free Waters Act—an important but narrow ban on rinse‑off exfoliating beads that left most plastic products and industrial sources untouched. (Wikipedia) Since then, Congress and federal agencies have offered studies, advisory committees and aspirational road‑maps—but no binding national standards on exposure in drinking water, consumer goods, or air.
States have begun to fill the void. California now requires four years of testing and public reporting for microplastics in drinking‑water systems—the first program of its kind anywhere in the world.(King & Spalding) Lawmakers in at least six states, from Illinois to New York, are advancing bills that would add micro‑fiber filters to new washing machines, following France’s nationwide mandate that takes effect next January. (PlanetCare Blog) Great Lakes advocates want Ottawa and Washington to list microplastics as a “Chemical of Mutual Concern,” triggering cross‑border cleanup obligations. (International Joint Commission)
These efforts are laudable, but they are no substitute for coherent federal policy. Plastics don’t respect state lines any more than the jet stream does.
Meanwhile, the plastic tide keeps rising
Global production is on pace to double by 2030, and the volume of microplastics in key ocean regions is expected to match that trajectory. (AGU Publications) As particles break down, they become small enough to cross cell membranes and the blood‑brain barrier, making downstream remediation vastly harder—and making medical “blood cleansing” look like a desperate last resort rather than prevention.
What Washington can—and must—do now
- Adopt a national drinking‑water standard. The EPA has proposed aggressive limits on PFAS; microplastics deserve parallel treatment. California’s protocol offers an off‑the‑shelf template.
- Require source‑control technology. France’s washing‑machine filter mandate will keep an estimated 500 million plastic fibers a year out of waterways. Congress should direct the Consumer Product Safety Commission to set comparable performance standards for U.S. appliances.
- Close the packaging loophole. The microbead ban proved Congress can act on a specific polymer threat; expanding that authority to cover single‑use sachets, glitter and other high‑shedding items is low‑hanging fruit.
- Fund exposure and biomonitoring. The National Institutes of Health and CDC should track microplastics the way they track lead and PFAS, giving clinicians—and patients—actionable data.
- Create a medical‑research fast lane. Techniques such as therapeutic plasma exchange (the backbone of Circulate Health’s platform) show promise in removing persistent pollutants, but clinical trials require clear FDA pathways and reimbursement codes. Despite improved regulations and human avoidance techniques, some occupations will inherently have increased levels of exposure and potential treatment options must also be explored.
Healthcare can’t shoulder this alone
As an emergency physician, I have watched chronic diseases—cardiovascular, neurologic, autoimmune—march steadily younger. Environmental stressors like particulate air pollution and endocrine‑disrupting chemicals are key drivers. Adding microplastics to that list without taking preventative action would be an abdication of public duty. So while it’s a relief to see the medical community taking action, our larger political conglomerate has not stepped up and started to take notice and implement policies to account for this clear threat.
While certain procedures are becoming more widely available thanks to the healthcare industry, it is not a population‑health solution. It is a stopgap for those who can afford it, not a shield for the 330 million Americans who cannot.
A call to govern upstream, not downstream
The longer we delay, the further we shift costs from polluters to patients—and to every taxpayer who funds Medicare, Medicaid and community hospitals. Environmental stewardship and human health are inseparable; regulating microplastics is preventive medicine on a national scale.
If private clinics can engineer columns that capture nanoscopic polymers, surely the most technologically advanced nation on Earth can engineer regulations that prevent those particles from entering our bodies in the first place.
Washington often waits for a crisis before acting. The microplastics crisis is already circulating—literally—in our veins. The question is whether policymakers will meet it upstream or downstream. As a physician and as a CEO, I know which approach is safer, cheaper and more equitable. I hope Congress and federal agencies will choose it, too.
About Brad Younggren
Brad Younggren, MD, is CEO and co-founder of Circulate Health, a company dedicated to improving human healthspan. A former U.S. Army physician, Dr. Younggren served as a combat physician in Iraq and was awarded a Bronze Star and Combat Medical Badge. An emergency medicine specialist and seasoned healthcare executive, Younggren has led teams at the cutting edge of medicine for decades. Most recently, he was President and Chief Medical Officer at 98point6, where he led the development and launch of AI-powered primary care solutions. He previously served as CMO at Cue Health, Shift Labs, and Mobisante. At Circulate, Younggren leads an expert team of clinicians and scientists working to harness the potential of therapeutic plasma exchange to advance health and longevity.
