Hello again, my little microbes!
Now that you have read all about the dangers of working out in polyester, you may be scrambling to find something plastic-free. With you all in mind, I recently marched into several clothing stores with the intent to collect suggestions for you. Surely, there must be some, right??
Immediately, gargantuan green tags shouted virtue-signaling phrases everywhere I went:
“Made from Recycled Plastic Bottles!!”
“Vegan Leather!”
“Recycled Polyester!!”
“Premium Recycled Fabric!!”
Surprisingly, design houses were no better than the budget stores. Once pinnacles of tailored Italian leather, summer wool, and mulberry silk, designers now charge the same (and sometimes more) for plastic pants (Gucci, I’m looking at you). Of course, from a business standpoint, this all makes sense. Putting a designer's name on $15-per-yard plastic fabric tailored in China rather than $2000-per-yard wool is wildly advantageous for the design houses, but is it advantageous to us?
No. The answer is no.
What about online shopping? Many find it a far more blood-boiling process. Search for leather and you are given 999 options of vegan leather (for which you have to click on each item, open the pictures, scroll for the label tag, and pray to all that is holy that it doesn’t say polyester), only to find on google search page 16, one maybe-potential option. However, it takes two months to ship, costs more than your grandmother’s home to purchase, may not fit, has zero returns, and is, well… ugly.
Searching Google or Amazon or any of the other Gods of the Interwebs for silk may prove even more frustrating. “Silk Satin” is all one would find. No, not the satin weave (a type of real silk in other countries). This “Real Silk Satin” will be made of, you guessed it, plastic.
PETA (the Karen of the dietary world) has officially usurped the market.
Anyway, have you all read, “Brave New World?”
Let’s give a moment of silence to this literary brilliance.
For those who haven’t read this dystopian gem, I’ll provide an inadequate summary: Huxley (the author) posits that the destruction of mankind will not come from a Big Brother-like puppeteer recording our every move, but from corporations and governments making humans too busy to be knowledgeable, too distracted by escapism, and so infused by cultural advertising that no one’s opinion (unbeknownst to them) is not their own.
If “1984” is modern-day South Korea with cameras everywhere, including toilets, “Brave New World” is the USA, entertaining itself to death. Huxley’s society needed no force.
In Chapter three of this little darling, two females fuss over their synthetic clothes, flaunting outfits of “bottle green acetate” and “green viscose fur.” They brag about their “authentic fake” clothing, all feeling so proud. Brain-washed to believe that anything natural is undesirable, they chant, “Ending is better than mending,” urging each other to discard and replace rather than repair. The dialog of this scene is A+.
This was published in 1932 my little darlings…
We too have been taught to see these items as stylish and virtuous and we signal our commitment to sustainability – but they are far from harmless. Instead, they’re part of a cycle that distances us from genuine materials, pushing us to embrace fabrics that disturb our skin’s microbiome, disrupt hormones, and may even contribute to rising infertility rates.
In this world of virtue-signaling plastics, we must question if society has, like Huxley’s, traded the real for the synthetic under the guise of progress. After all, the cost of synthetic clothing extends beyond the dollar – it’s a hidden cost to our health, our authenticity, and our connection to nature.
Vegan Leather Is Poisoning Our Planet and Ourselves
Virtue Signaling with Vegan Leather
“Vegan leather” is the ethical, sustainable, and cruelty-free choice, right? But pull back the shiny facade, and you’ll find it’s basically plastic in disguise. Yes, that stuff polluting our earth and bodies for all of eternity. PU, PVC, and other synthetic blends might be your closet’s best frenemies.
Those trendy “leather” sneakers you strut around in? Hard pass. They may be sneakily marinating you in synthetic hormones, taking you one step closer to that lifetime membership to Hormone Chaos Anonymous. Polyester/nylon/rayon socks? Let the washing machine keep them. Those cleverly named plastic sets of underwear? Let us hope that the underwear gnomes keep them for good.
“Vegan” fabrics don’t just put on a show, they leach chemicals for a lifetime, filling landfills and oceans alike. Let’s get real: Isn’t it time we peel back the marketing spin, see these fabrics for what they really are, and prioritize science over slogans?
Let’s break down the physics of petrochemical pretenders.
The Plastic Problem: Microplastics Everywhere – Including Your Lungs
Vegan leather mostly equals plastic. Recycled polyester? Even worse. As they break down, these materials transform into microplastics: indestructible glitter dust that sprinkles everything from your morning coffee to the deepest ocean trenches. Spoiler alert: they’re also moving into your lungs, like a roommate who pays no rent and leaves a mess.
Microplastics, once they check into your body, never check out. The average person inhales about 11 pieces of microplastic per hour indoors. Your lungs? Let’s just say they didn’t sign up for this glittery invasion.
Estrogenic Effects: Absorbing Synthetic Estrogens Through Your Skin
Vegan leather products are infused with endocrine-disrupting chemicals like phthalates and BPA. These synthetic estrogens are like uninvited guests that just won’t leave, clinging to your eco-chic jacket and seeping into your bloodstream every time you wear it.
Fertility rates are dropping faster than the last season of “Love Island.” Globally, the fertility rate has plummeted, and IVF has taken the stage as the new norm. Meanwhile, estrogen-dependent conditions like PCOS and endometriosis are on the rise, causing hormonal chaos. And for the guys? Well, sperm counts and testosterone levels are tanking faster than a missed market trend.
Here’s where it gets alarming:
Fertility rates are plummeting.
The infertility rate in the United States is 40%. Compare that to 10% in 1960.
The global fertility rate has dropped from an average of 4.7 children per woman in 1950 by nearly half: 2.4 in 2017. It's also projected to fall below the replacement level of 2.1 by 2050.
In the United States alone, birth rates have hit a 35-year low, with a 4% drop just from 2019 to 2020.
In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) usage is skyrocketing. With fertility rates in decline, the use of assisted reproductive technologies (ART) like IVF has surged. IVF usage has increased by more than 70% in the last decade alone. In 2019, over 2.5 million ART cycles were performed worldwide, with birth rates from ART increasing from one percent of all births in 1990 to nearly three percent in 2020.
Hormonal conditions are also on the rise.
70% increase in 20 years in PCOS (Polycystic Ovary Syndrome). PCOS now affects one in ten women of childbearing age.
Endometriosis, a painful estrogen-driven condition, now affects an estimated one in nine women, up from one in twenty just 50 years ago.
Estrogen-dependent cancers, like breast and uterine cancer, have risen dramatically. Breast cancer rates, for example, have increased by over 30% since the 1970s.
Earlier Onset of Puberty: Girls are starting puberty earlier than ever before. The average age of onset of menstruation has dropped from 14.6 years in 1900 to 12.4 years today. Early puberty is linked to higher risks of breast cancer, endometriosis, and mental health disorders
An Equal-Opportunity Hormonal Carnage
Male Hormones & Microplastics
Testosterone levels in men have been declining at a rate of one percent per year since the 1980s, with younger men experiencing levels comparable to what their fathers faced in their 60s.
Lower testosterone levels are closely associated with reduced libido and increased rates of E.D. Lower testosterone also presents in males with depression or aggression.
Sperm counts in Western men have dropped by over 50% in the past 40 years.
A study published in Human Reproduction Update found that between 1973 and 2011, sperm concentration fell from an average of 99 million per milliliter to just 47 million per milliliter.
Sperm quality is tanking, too, with a 40% decrease in motility (how sperm move) reported over the same period.
Male reproductive cancers, like testicular cancer, have doubled. It is now the most common cancer in young men.
Erectile Dysfunction:
Microplastics as Endocrine Disruptors: Microplastics are essentially hormone hijackers. These pesky particles carry or attract chemicals like phthalates and BPA, which throw hormone levels off-kilter and could play a big role in the increasing rates of E.D.
Systemic Inflammation from Microplastics
Microplastics don’t just cause inflammation – they set up a five-alarm fire in your bloodstream, which can damage blood vessels, even those supplying blood flow to sensitive areas.
Increase in E.D. Rates:
E.D. rates have nearly doubled since the 1990s.
Correlations with Low Sperm Count and E.D.: A study in Human Reproduction Update revealed that sperm counts in Western men have dropped by over 50% in the past 40 years. The EDC study found microplastics lower sperm counts, reduce testosterone levels, and increased E.D. rates. Phthalates and BPA, both of which are found in microplastics, have been directly linked to declining sperm quality and quantity.
Your skin is a giant sponge, absorbing these synthetic estrogens day after day. The more we wear, the more we’re exposed.
Vegan Leather and the Environment
On my first trip to Greenland, I ventured high into the Arctic Circle, far enough north that it took five separate flights, each to a different town, to reach my final destination. Nearly a week into this journey, as I prepared to begin a dog sledding expedition, I met a woman from Alaska, an experienced National Geographic photographer. She showed me her hands, red and cracked with frostbite. Her entire body was visibly suffering, and her expression was strained with discomfort. She was dressed head-to-toe in layers branded for “Arctic” conditions, yet every piece was synthetic, plastic-derived polyester. It was supposed to be designed for warmth, but in truth, plastic can’t hold heat in the unforgiving cold of the Arctic.
I, on the other hand, was wearing clothing steeped in Greenlandic tradition: seal fur, fox fur around my face, muskox wool, possum fur, and layers of silk knit. My boots were seal fur, gifted by my Greenlandic friends. Not once did I feel the bite of the cold; I was wrapped in the insulating power of nature. Had it been another season, I would have worn polar bear fur – an absolute necessity for survival during the Arctic winter (this would have been borrowed as it is not legal to purchase).
Traditionally, Arctic communities have depended on these natural materials, trading and sharing leathers and furs in a sustainable cycle that has preserved both their culture and survival. But today, these trades are restricted, often with undertones of moral judgment. The message sent is that the practices that have sustained them for millennia are wrong. In reality, they are the epitome of sustainability, each polar bear fur or leather product crafted to last generations, supporting life through frigid seasons.
Meanwhile, our polyester “Arctic fleece” lasts a season or two before filling up a landfill, its degradation releasing microplastics that pollute our water and air. This judgment of traditional methods and materials – the tendency to impose modern moralism on ancient practices – is not only misplaced but also shortsighted.
By discarding the wisdom of generations, we’re sacrificing our ecological future, all while filling our lungs and oceans with plastic residue. In the Arctic, where survival depends on understanding the land and using its resources wisely, we see a truth that modern consumerism has long since forgotten: sustainability is woven into tradition, not stamped out in plastic.
Real leather could last a century, but vegan leather is shedding plastic particles long after your TikTok fame has faded.
Ah, humans. We are the pinnacle of evolution, wrapped in recycled plastic, chugging spinach juice, and priding ourselves on our moral superiority. We strut around, patting ourselves on the back for saving the planet one vegan leather boot at a time, blissfully unaware that nature might be rolling her eyes. We could indulge in delectable dinners of lamb chops while wearing soft buttery lamb leather pants, shoes, and belts and soft merino wool sweaters. We could thrive in perfect health as we’ve done for millennia, but no. Instead, we cling to our synthetic, virtue-signaling armor as if petrochemicals are the new holy grail. And while we’re at it, we down green sludge that tastes like punishment, our hormones spiraling as fast as our fertility rates drop. It’s like we’ve traded life’s rich, natural bounty for a plastic-wrapped facade of wellness, believing that if we recycle enough, we’ll be rewarded with a longer life – or at least a bigger Instagram following.
Have you assumed that vegan leather is the greener choice? There is a lot of dialogue in our culture that would have given you that impression. If you spend a few minutes investigating though, you might come to a surprising conclusion. Real leather lasts for generations, aging beautifully, and biodegrading naturally. Plastic-based vegan leather? It cracks, peels, and degrades faster than your last relationship, all while shedding microplastics into the environment for an eternal encore.
Oh my little microbes, please do not fall for the plastic recycling ruse. Vegan leather is nothing more than a short-lived, environmental toxic bomb.
References:
1. Galloway, T. S. (2015). Micro- and Nano-plastics and Human Health. Marine Anthropogenic Litter, 343-366. Springer International Publishing. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-16510-3_13.
2. Wright, S. L., & Kelly, F. J. (2017). Plastic and Human Health: A Micro Issue? Environmental Science & Technology, 51(12), 6634-6647. DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.7b00423.
3. Barboza, L. G. A., et al. (2018). Marine Microplastic Debris: An Emerging Issue for Food Security, Food Safety, and Human Health. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 133, 336-348. DOI: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.05.047.
4. Matuszczak, E., et al. (2019). The Impact of Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals on Human Health. Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy, 111, 1113-1121. DOI: 10.1016/j.biopha.2019.01.009.
5. Rochman, C. M., et al. (2013). Ingested Plastic Transfers Hazardous Chemicals to Fish and Induces Hepatic Stress. Scientific Reports, 3, 3263. DOI: 10.1038/srep03263.
6. Talsness, C. E., et al. (2009). Components of Plastic: Experimental Studies in Animals and Relevance for Human Health. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1526), 2079-2096. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2008.0281.
7. Swan, S. H., et al. (2005). Decrease in Anogenital Distance among Male Infants with Prenatal Phthalate Exposure. Environmental Health Perspectives, 113(8), 1056-1061. DOI: 10.1289/ehp.8100.
8. Halden, R. U. (2010). Plastics and Health Risks. Annual Review of Public Health, 31, 179-194. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.012809.103714.
9. Oehlmann, J., et al. (2009). A Critical Analysis of the Biological Impacts of Plasticizers on Wildlife. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1526), 2047-2062. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2008.0242.
10. Frye, C. A., Bo, E., Calamandrei, G., Calza, L., Dessì-Fulgheri, F., Fernández, M., … & Åkesson, A. (2012). Endocrine Disruptors: A Review of Some Sources, Effects, and Mechanisms of Actions on Behaviour and Neuroendocrine Systems. Journal of Neuroendocrinology, 24(1), 144-159. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2826.2011.02229.x.
11. Gallo, F., et al. (2018). Marine Litter Plastics and Microplastics and Their Toxic Chemicals Components: The Need for Urgent Preventive Measures. Environmental Sciences Europe, 30, 13. DOI: 10.1186/s12302-018-0139-z.
12. Manikkam, M., et al. (2013). Transgenerational Actions of Environmental Compounds on Reproductive Disease and Epigenetic Biomarkers of Sperm. Epigenetics, 7(8), 838-842. DOI: 10.4161/epi.21230.
13. Sharma, S., et al. (2019). Impact of Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals on the Brain. Journal of Neuroendocrinology, 31(8), e12709. DOI: 10.1111/jne.12709.
14. Patel, S., & Sontakke, A. (2019). Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals and Their Impact on the Male Reproductive System. Frontiers in Endocrinology, 10, 794. DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2019.00794.
15. Tran, T. M., et al. (2017). Plastics: The Threat to Animal and Human Health. Journal of Environmental Health Science and Engineering, 15(1), 1-8. DOI: 10.1186/s40201-017-0273-2.
16. Muncke, J. (2011). Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals and Behavioral Implications: A Mini Review. Environmental Health, 10(1), 44. DOI: 10.1186/1476-069X-10-44.
17. Kojima, H., et al. (2019). Estrogenic Activities of 353 Industrial Chemicals. Journal of Environmental Science and Health, Part A, 54(13), 1283-1295. DOI: 10.1080/10934529.2019.1638243.
18. Kumar, S., et al. (2021). Microplastics in the Human Food Chain: A Threat to Health. Trends in Biotechnology, 39(8), 845-847. DOI: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2020.12.010.
19. Campanale, C., et al. (2020). A Detailed Review Study on Potential Effects of Microplastics and Additives of Concern on Human Health. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(4), 1212. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17041212.
20. Anastasopoulou, A., et al. (2013). Assessing the Impact of Plastic Debris on Marine Megafauna. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 83(1), 92-99. DOI: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.03.032.
21. Prata, J. C., et al. (2020). Solutions and Integrated Strategies for the Control and Mitigation of Plastic and Microplastic Pollution. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(20), 7877. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17207877.
22. Erythropel, H. C., et al. (2019). Leaching of Potentially Hazardous Chemicals from Plastics. Environmental Science & Technology, 53(6), 3969-3980. DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.8b06046.
23. Smith, M., et al. (2018). Microplastics in Seafood and the Implications for Human Health. Current Environmental Health Reports, 5(3), 375-386. DOI: 10.1007/s40572-018-0206-z.
24. de Souza Machado, A. A., et al. (2019). Microplastics as an Emerging Threat to Terrestrial Ecosystems. Global Change Biology, 25(3), 1221-1239. DOI: 10.1111/gcb.14520.
25. Rochman, C. M., et al. (2014). Long-Term Field Measurement of Sorption of Organic Contaminants to Five Types of Plastic Pellets: Implications for Plastic Marine Debris. Environmental Science & Technology, 48(10), 5425-5432. DOI: 10.1021/es405521g.
26. Trautwein, C., et al. (2020). Analysis of Microplastic Fibers in Domestic Washing Machine Wastewater and Their Implications for the Environment. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(23), 29135-29141. DOI: 10.1007/s11356-020-08968-0.
27. Groh, K. J., et al. (2019). Overview of Known Plastic Packaging-Associated Chemicals and Their Hazards. Science of the Total Environment, 651, 3253-3268. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.10.015.
28. Winkler, A., et al. (2019). Role of Microplastic Particles in Metals’ Chemical Reactivity: The Case of Marine Manganese Oxides. Science Advances, 5(2), eaav5016. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aav5016.
29. Pitt, J. A., et al. (2018). Microplastics as Contaminants in Human Food. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 374, 694-707. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2018.04.085.
30. Bergmann, M., et al. (2019). White and Wonderful? Microplastics Prevail in Snow from the Alps to the Arctic. Science Advances, 5(8), eaax1157. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aax1157.
Can you point us readers where to purchase natural sources. I have shopped at Goodwill, but would like to purchase from stores offering natural materials. Trying to replace all offending materials from my closet, but it is expensive.
Hi Mary! Where do you find your leggings?