Again, source? I don't believe silica based dust is common to breath in at any measurable amount on a beach. If it's really common, then you'd have sources. The prior source was dealing with glass contamination of ampules. You can follow these comments back for context.
Repeatedly stating that something is common, does not make it so.
This source mentiones if something is smaller than some arbitraty limit there's no sense counting it because it's probably just sand not something that came from the glass ampule. Therefore small sand is common enough that it would skew their result to be something nonsensical.
You need to read between the lines because apparently nobody researched how much sand average person has in their bodies because it's not interesting.
Why don't you show me research supporing your claim that body doesn't contain sand particles in amounts at least comparable to amounts of microplastics detected?
"Why don't you show me research supporing your claim that body doesn't contain sand particles in amounts at least comparable to amounts of microplastics detected?"
Because that's not what is being discussed. What is being discussed is breathing in sand, that beach sand can cause silicosis, etc.
None. But they might have some because it's a new thing, therefore it's interestiing and fashionable to research that.
Nobody expects any symptoms from the substance humans are in contact with since our species came to be.
It's not a problem to find random garbage in our bodies. It is there because we came to be from dirt, metaphorically speaking. It's just that not all garbage is worth a grant.
