An assessment of evidence on the health effects of nano- and
microplastic particles and fibres in the environment.
From: UK Health Security
Agency
Published 2 October 2025
Documents
Statement on airborne nano- and
microplastic particles and fibres
PDF, 248
KB, 17 pages
Interim assessment for the
Synthesis and Integration of Epidemiological and Toxicological
Evidence (SETE) for the population health effects from the
inhalation of environmental airborne nano- and microplastic
particles and fibres (NMPs)
PDF, 241
KB, 7 pages
Interim assessment for the
Synthesis and Integration of Epidemiological and Toxicological
Evidence (SETE) for the population health effects from the
inhalation of traffic-related air pollution (TRAP)
PDF, 245
KB, 7 pages
Details
Nano- and microplastics (NMPs) are tiny plastic particles
and fibres. They have been found almost everywhere, including in
the air we breathe, both indoors and outdoors. This discovery has
sparked concern about how these particles might affect our
health, especially over the long term. As a result, research
into NMPs has grown rapidly.
However, scientists face major technical challenges in studying
them, which makes it hard to draw clear conclusions.
Currently, there is not enough reliable data to say whether
breathing in the NMPs in our air is harmful
to our health, nor whether they are more or less harmful than
other particles found in air pollution. There is evidence from
historical studies of workers in plastic and textile industries
that suggest the plastic particles they inhaled can affect lung
function and lead to disease. However, the workers in these
studies were exposed to much higher levels than the general
public. Most of the existing experimental studies in laboratories
use plastic beads. Neither of these types of studies reflect the
types of plastic, or levels, that people are exposed to from the
environment, which are likely to be much lower. Also, current
technology struggles to detect the smallest plastic particles in
the air or inside the human body, making it difficult to confirm
whether they are present or causing harm. Scientists are also
concerned that the methods used to detect NMPs in human tissues might
not be reliable and might over-estimate them.
Because of these gaps, COMEAP currently
advises against trying to assess population health risks from
airborne NMPs until the evidence
base has improved. Instead, COMEAP calls
for better research methods, more realistic experiments, and
improved tools to detect and study these particles. This will
help understand how NMPs behave in the body and
whether they pose a potential risk to health from typical indoor
and outdoor exposures. Although the human health implications
of NMP remain under
investigation, there is good evidence of their adverse effects on
the environment, and efforts aimed at reducing plastic pollution
should also help reduce human exposures.
