Microplastics Keynote: Unique & Comprehensive Facts About Microplastics

The world has been gripped by microplastic hysteria but what are the facts? Are the scary stories all true or is there more to it? Since publishing The Plastics Paradox, this one topic has attracted more attention and concern than any other.

Fear of the unknown is natural and there is a general belief that microplastics are new, representing an untested and unquantified threat to our health. I looked to see what we know and it turns out that the science is done. We have decades of data and the answers are known.

In this microplastics keynote Dr. DeArmitt explains every topic in layperson’s language.

Dr. DeArmitt is probably the leading independent expert on microplastics having read hundreds of peer-reviewed studies. Other “experts” gain notoriety by frightening the public with junk science but Dr. DeArmitt digs deeper, exposing the fake science and debunking myths with facts, logic and humor. ~90% of microplastics studies are flawed, so it takes an expert to find the truth by understanding the science.

The microplastics keynote devoted exclusively to microplastics exposure / safety, degradation and biodegradation was just released in 2024. It covers amounts, types, exposure and health effects on humans and animals. It also explains how they are formed and what they degrade into. If you have customers, regulators and other stakeholders asking tough questions and don’t want to spend a fortune doing studies, then this talk has all the facts you need to allay their fears!

Each keynote can be customized to your needs and included 10 signed hardcover copies of The Plastics Paradox book. Put down a deposit to book the date and booking now locks in this year’s price.

How Did Dr. DeArmitt Become A Top Microplastics Expert and Keynote Speaker?

Microplastics is topic of deep concern to the general public due to a wave of media articles. However, studies show that the public do not trust the media but prefer to get their information from scientists. Dr. Chris DeArmitt is considered a leading international expert on microplastics having read hundreds of peer-reviewed studies to find the facts and then share them so that we can make sensible choices based on real evidence, instead of media hype. Dr. DeArmitt is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Chemistry, Fellow of the Institute for Materials, Minerals and Mining (IOM3) as well as a Chartered Chemist.

There are thousands of scientists working on microplastics, so what sets Dr. DeArmitt apart? Scientists working on a topic are intrinsically biased in favor of their own work and their particular niche area of interest. Not only that, but there is a temptation for them to report sensational findings, not only to attract attention but also to get access to increased funding. Ideally, the public needs input from someone not conducting their own experiments and someone who considers the big picture, not just one niche.

Until now, the public has had no independent expert to rely on. Dr. DeArmitt conducts no microplastics experimental research himself and has no niche. Instead, he has read over 500 scientific studies from around the world completely unfunded, in order to preserve impartiality. Those studies cover all aspects including polymer degradation to form plastic particles, aka “microplastics” as well as detailed comparisons to other types of particles like soot, carbon black, minerals and pigments.

Remarkably, most microplastics studies are not performed by materials scientists who understand the materials that they are studying, which has led to serious errors in the science we read about. Because Dr. DeArmitt has decades of experience in plastic materials science, he is able to discern which studies are valid and which are not. As one example, a large percentage of microplastic studies has been determined to be invalid because they look at a type of particle that only exists in the lab and is not found in the environment at all, so no-one is actually exposed to it. What an obvious mistake.

Many studies were declared to be not valid by Dr DeArmitts’ comprehensive review of the microplastics science and this has since been confirmed by other teams of scientists. The main fundamental errors are:

Each of these errors invalidates a study and yet it is precisely such studies that are being shown to the public as evidence of danger, when none exists. This is another reason why Chris DeArmitt is a trusted independent microplastics expert and keynote speaker – he actually reads each study carefully, including the tedious experimental section, to check that the experiment was performed in a professional manner. Scaring the public with bad science is neither professional, nor acceptable.

Here is one specific example. There was a headline that there are 100 000 – 200 000 plastic particles per gram of fruits and vegetables that we eat. That is an incredibly high amount, so high that it seemed suspicious. So, I read that article in detail and was astonished to discover that the study did not actually detect plastic at all. Shocking – I know. Instead, the study found some particles and assumed that they were plastic. That is very poor science indeed. Still, I was curious to understand how there were so many particles in the fruit and vegetables, so I looked at the method used to prepare the samples for analysis. It turns out that they dissolved the food in concentrated acid, which is what formed the particles they later detected. This serious error was reported to the journal editors and the publisher but of course, the public is not aware that the story turned out to be false.

Another popular story was that we eat a credit card of microplastic per week. That claim has been made by the WWF and many other so-called environmental groups. However, a newer independent study showed that to be complete nonsense. It would actually take over 20 000 years to ingest that much microplastic. So, once again, the public saw the first headline but were not informed when it was conclusively disproven. Many so-called environmental groups make that same claim to this day, even though it is not true, presumably because their donations rely on such hype.

This then is the role of an independent microplastics expert like Dr. DeArmitt, who has read the science for you unpaid and who then shares the facts for free via the Plastics Paradox book, podcasts, social media, radio and television. After reviewing fifty years of testing and hundreds of studies, we find no evidence of adverse health outcomes as the result of microplastic exposure.

Testing of plastics shows that the materials themselves such as PE, PP, PET and PVC are non-toxic. Unsurprisingly, particles of those non-toxic materials were also found to be non-toxic. For context, microplastics were shown to be as safe as the some of the safest natural particles, like clay (a major component of soil) or cellulose (which is what plants and trees are made of). Therefore, even if there was significant exposure to such particles from pipes or any other source, there would be no logical cause for concern.

If the science is so extensive and conclusive, then why is the public so concerned? Science can answer that question as well. An investigation found that the media have intentionally misled the public by repeatedly telling the publishing the opposite of what science shows. This blatant preference for profit over professionalism has produced undue concern without just cause.

It is not just the media who have misled us, some scientists rigged their experiments which gets them attention, headlines and funding, or the science just was done very poorly. Later, other, more ethical scientists read their work and discredited it by exposing clear and inexcusable errors such as using up to 10 million times too much microplastic compared to actual exposure levels. Choosing a totally inappropriate exposure level is unprofessional because everything shows effects at unreasonable doses, even oxygen can be made to look harmful using that approach.

Delighted Clients…

More glowing testimonials at SpeakerHub