Health

Scientists Warn of Health Risks from Fine Microplastics in Drinking Water

Published

1 year ago

January 17, 2025

RTX

A new study has highlighted the presence of fine microplastics in drinking water, urging the European Union (EU) to revise its detection standards to include smaller particles that may pose a greater risk to human health.

Researchers in Toulouse, France, found that most microplastics in bottled and tap water samples measured less than 20 microns (μm), a size small enough to potentially pass from the human intestine into the bloodstream and organs. Current EU guidelines only require monitoring of particles between 20 μm and 5 mm, leaving these finer plastics largely undetected.

Majority of Microplastics Found Are Under 20 Microns

The study, published in PLOS Water, tested 10 bottled water brands and one tap water source using a new method capable of detecting microplastics smaller than 20 μm. Results showed that 98% of the microplastics detected were below this threshold, with 94% measuring less than 10 μm in diameter.

“The idea was to prove it’s possible to analyze very fine plastics and to show the European Union that setting the detection limit at 20 microns makes little sense,” said Oskar Hagelskjaer, CEO of Microplastic Solution and the study’s lead author.

The researchers found microplastic concentrations ranging from 19 to 1,154 particles per liter, with the tap water sample from Toulouse containing 413 particles per liter—higher than most bottled water samples.

Advanced Detection Methodology

The study employed enhanced instrumentation and rigorous quality control to prevent sample contamination, offering a more accurate assessment of microplastic prevalence.

Bethanie Carney Almroth, a professor of ecotoxicology at the University of Gothenburg, Sweden, called the methodology “quite strong,” noting the researchers’ careful consideration of potential contamination and measurement accuracy.

Microplastics in Bottled vs. Tap Water

While bottled water was packaged in polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles, PET was not the most prevalent plastic found in the samples. Researchers speculate that factors such as tap water filtration processes or river contamination may contribute more significantly to microplastic presence.

Groundwater-sourced drinking water, which undergoes natural soil filtration, showed significantly lower microplastic concentrations compared to treated surface water, the study found.

Health Concerns and Global Impact

The health implications of microplastic exposure remain uncertain, though their ubiquity raises concerns. “They’re finding them everywhere they look. We know we have them in our bodies,” Almroth said, adding that emerging evidence suggests potential health impacts.

Researchers described microplastic contamination as a “pervasive problem,” noting that no region on the planet remains unaffected. The findings call for immediate action to address the risks associated with microplastics in drinking water and the broader environment.

Health

World Cup Emotion Can Strain the Heart, Cardiologists Warn Fans at Risk

Published

2 days ago

June 13, 2026

Web Reporter

As the World Cup begins, medical experts are cautioning football fans with underlying heart conditions that the emotional intensity of matches can place unexpected strain on the cardiovascular system.

Cardiologists say that the excitement, tension, and anxiety generated during high-stakes games can trigger physical reactions similar to intense exercise, raising heart rate, blood pressure, and stress hormones.

“Intense emotions, whether positive or negative, can act as ‘precipitating risk factors’ for cardiovascular events such as heart attack,” said Paola Santalucia, a cardiologist and board member of the European Heart Network.

She explained that moments of extreme excitement, such as a decisive penalty shootout or a last-minute goal, may pose risks for people already living with heart disease. Those with additional risk factors, including hypertension, obesity, or smoking habits, are also advised to be cautious during emotionally charged matches.

Research using wearable devices has shown that during major football events, some fans experience heart rates climbing as high as 150 beats per minute. That level is comparable to sprinting and reflects how strongly the body reacts to emotional stress.

A study examining supporters during the 2025 German Cup final found that even watching from home can significantly affect physiological responses. “They still had an increase in heart rate that compares to walking, even though they didn’t walk,” said Christian Deutscher, professor of sports economics at Bielefeld University and co-author of the study.

He noted that the most intense reactions often occur not during goals themselves, but during moments of uncertainty such as VAR checks, penalty shootouts, or shots striking the post. These unpredictable situations, he said, are what drive the strongest emotional and physical responses among fans.

Deutscher also pointed out that stadium spectators may experience even greater strain due to environmental factors such as heat and alcohol consumption.

However, experts emphasize that football itself is not inherently dangerous. Instead, it is the body’s natural response to excitement that can create temporary stress.

“The adrenergic stimulation is at its max: extreme high blood pressure, high heart rate, and adrenaline, cortisol, skyrocketing,” said Dan Atar, professor of cardiology at Oslo University Hospital. In rare cases, he added, this surge can contribute to the rupture of arterial plaque in vulnerable individuals, potentially leading to a heart attack.

Atar stressed that such events can occur in everyday situations as well, including physical exertion like shoveling snow. “It is in no way dangerous to watch a football game,” he said. “All this is physiologic. It’s not dangerous to be excited.”

Still, he acknowledged that combining emotional stress with alcohol, heat, and pre-existing conditions can increase risk for some viewers.

Doctors advise those at higher risk to continue prescribed medications, limit alcohol intake, avoid smoking, and watch for warning signs such as chest pain or irregular heartbeat.

“The key message is not to avoid enjoying the match, but to do so with moderation and awareness,” Santalucia said.

Health

AI Models Show Ability to Mimic Human Emotions, Offering New Pathways for Mental Health Research

Published

4 days ago

June 11, 2026

Web Reporter

Artificial intelligence systems may be able to imitate human emotional responses in controlled settings, potentially opening new directions for mental health research, according to a recent study from Dresden University of Technology in Germany.

The findings come at a time when mental health conditions are rising globally, with projections suggesting that up to 1.2 billion people could be affected by 2050. Researchers say this growing challenge highlights the need for improved understanding of psychological disorders and more effective treatment approaches, particularly in talk-based therapies that are difficult to model through traditional methods.

Unlike drug development, which can rely on biological testing, psychotherapy research faces limitations because neither animal models nor human trials can fully capture the complexity of emotional and cognitive processes. Scientists involved in the study argue that large language models (LLMs) may help bridge part of this gap.

“Our results show that large language models can reproduce patterns of human affective and cognitive processes under controlled conditions,” said Dr Magdalena Wekenborg, who leads the PsychoDigital Research group at TU Dresden. She added that such systems could support efforts to better understand underlying psychological mechanisms and help explore new forms of psychotherapy research.

The study examined whether LLMs could replicate emotional states such as fear, anxiety, anger, sadness, disgust, worry, and stress when prompted. Researchers then tested whether those induced states could be altered using different emotional regulation techniques, and whether emotional prompting would lead the models to make errors similar to those seen in humans experiencing the same feelings.

Findings showed that while artificial intelligence systems do not experience emotions in a human sense, they are capable of reproducing certain patterns of emotional reasoning through language processing. This allows researchers to observe behaviour that resembles human cognitive responses under structured conditions.

The team also noted that such models offer a level of experimental control that is not possible in human or animal studies. According to researcher Jakob N. Kather, experiments can be repeated under identical conditions and adjusted systematically, allowing for more precise comparisons.

He said this could enable new data-driven approaches in psychological and biomedical research, particularly in areas where ethical or practical constraints have limited traditional experimentation.

While the study does not suggest that artificial intelligence understands emotion as humans do, it highlights how language models may serve as useful tools for exploring aspects of mental health and human cognition in ways that were previously out of reach.

Health

AI Saves Clinicians Weeks of Work but Health Systems Struggle to Keep Up, Philips Report Finds

Published

5 days ago

June 10, 2026

Web Reporter

Healthcare professionals are gaining significant time savings through artificial intelligence tools, but health systems are struggling to adapt quickly enough to the rapid pace of change, according to a new global report.

The findings come from the Future Health Index 2026 report published by health technology company Philips, which examined how AI is being used across hospitals and clinics and its impact on clinical workflows.

The study surveyed more than 2,000 clinicians and over 20,000 patients across 10 countries, including the United Kingdom, United States, Germany, France, China and India. It found that AI adoption among healthcare workers has increased significantly over the past year, with growing confidence in its ability to improve patient care.

More than 80% of healthcare professionals said they are optimistic about AI’s impact on patient outcomes, while around 70% believe the benefits already outweigh the risks. Many clinicians reported that AI is already making a measurable difference in their daily work.

According to the report, 46% of clinicians said they save at least 132 hours per year through AI-enabled tools, equivalent to more than three working weeks. Nurses were among those reporting the greatest time savings, particularly from reduced administrative workloads.

Shez Partovi, Chief Innovation Officer at Philips, said clinicians are increasingly able to redirect that time toward patient care, collaboration and reflection on complex medical cases. He noted improvements in work-life balance, reduced stress and greater efficiency across clinical teams.

Around 71% of respondents said AI has improved workflow efficiency, while half said it has allowed them to see more patients. Approximately the same proportion reported better work-life balance and lower stress levels.

Common uses of AI include transcribing medical notes, scheduling appointments and assisting with diagnostic tasks such as reviewing X-rays. Some clinicians also described using AI systems as support tools for clinical discussions and decision-making, including identifying potential drug interactions.

The report also found that 39% of clinicians had seen AI help identify or prevent potential medical errors multiple times in recent months, while more than 65% said it had improved their confidence in clinical decisions.

Despite these gains, the report highlights growing pressure on health systems to keep pace with demand for AI tools. Nearly two-thirds of clinicians said they turn to personal AI applications when workplace systems are insufficient, raising concerns about governance and data security.

Seven in 10 respondents said training for AI tools is limited or inconsistent, suggesting organisations are struggling to implement structured adoption programmes. Partovi said this reflects a gap between rapid technological advancement and slower institutional rollout.

He added that hospitals face complex challenges including privacy, safety, regulatory oversight and role-specific training, all of which must be addressed to ensure safe deployment.

Looking ahead, 96% of healthcare professionals expect AI to change their roles, with more than half anticipating major shifts in how they work. However, concerns remain, with 44% worried about losing clinical skills due to over-reliance on AI and 37% saying changes are happening faster than they are comfortable with.

Even so, most clinicians emphasised that human oversight remains essential. Around 86% said AI outputs must always be reviewed by healthcare professionals, while more than 80% said technology will not replace the patient-clinician relationship.