Methodology
Every figure in the Body Burden calculator is derived from peer-reviewed research. This page documents each data point, its source, and our confidence level.
How the calculator works
The calculator presents 12 questions covering the major documented pathways for human microplastic exposure: drinking water, food preparation, diet, clothing, and indoor air. Each question is linked to a peer-reviewed study that measured microplastic release or concentration for that specific source.
Because each study measures things differently — particles per litre, per gram, per wash cycle, per cooking session — we do not attempt to convert everything into a single weekly total. Instead, the calculator uses each answer to generate a relative risk score, weighted by the significance of that exposure pathway. The full reference table below shows the measured values from each source study with their original units.
Where a single high-quality study exists for a particular pathway (e.g. plastic tea bags, bottled water), we use that study directly. Where evidence is more limited, we note a lower confidence level. Individual exposure will vary depending on consumption volumes, product types, and geographic factors not captured by these questions. Figures should be understood as documented estimates, not precise measurements.
Microplastics vs nanoplastics
This calculator covers microplastic particles only (1 micron – 5mm). Nanoplastics (<1 micron) are excluded because consistent data does not yet exist across all exposure pathways covered here, making fair comparisons impossible. All scores should be understood as documented minimums — true total particle exposure including nanoplastics is likely significantly higher.
Primary sources
Synthetic Polymer Contamination in Bottled Water
Mason et al. · Frontiers in Chemistry · 2018
Used for: Drinking water question — 325 particles/litre average across 259 bottles from 11 brands in 9 countries (93% of bottles contaminated).
Plastic Teabags Release Billions of Microparticles and Nanoparticles into Tea
Hernandez et al. · Environmental Science & Technology · 2019
Used for: Plastic and nylon tea bag figures
Assessing the Release of Microplastics and Nanoplastics from Plastic Containers and Reusable Food Pouches: Influence of Microwave Heating
Hussain et al. · Environmental Science & Technology · 2023
Used for: Microwaving food in plastic containers
Release of microplastics from disposable cups in daily use
Chen et al. · Science of the Total Environment · 2022
Used for: Disposable cups question — 675–5,984 particles/litre released into hot beverages from PE-lined paper cups, tested across 90 commercial cup batches at 95°C.
Raman imaging for the identification of Teflon microplastics and nanoplastics released from non-stick cookware
Luo et al. · Science of the Total Environment · 2022
Used for: Non-stick pans question — ~9,100 PTFE particles released per cooking session from a single surface crack; up to 2,300,000 from a broken coating area.
Release of synthetic microplastic plastic fibres from domestic washing machines: Effects of fabric type, washing temperature and spin speed
Napper & Thompson · Marine Pollution Bulletin · 2016
Used for: Synthetic clothing question — ~700,000 microplastic fibres released per wash cycle from a 6 kg acrylic load.
Human exposure to PM10 microplastics in indoor air
Yakovenko et al. · PLoS ONE · 2025
Used for: Indoor air quality and car commute questions — residential median 528 MPs/m³, car cabin median 2,238 MPs/m³. Measured using Raman spectroscopy in France.
Microplastics in bivalves cultured for human consumption
Van Cauwenberghe & Janssen · Environmental Pollution · 2014
Used for: Mussels and oysters question — 0.36 particles/g in mussels, 0.47 particles/g in oysters (wet weight). Microplastics accumulate in digestive tissue consumed whole.
The presence of microplastics in commercial salts from different countries
Karami et al. · Scientific Reports · 2017
Used for: Salt type question — Raman-confirmed microplastic counts across sea salt, rock salt and table salt. Most rigorous available methodology for salt MP analysis.
Cutting Boards: An Overlooked Source of Microplastics in Human Food?
Yadav et al. · Environmental Science & Technology · 2023
Used for: Cutting board question — microplastic release from plastic cutting boards during food preparation.
Microplastics in take-out food: Are we over taking it?
Bai et al. · Environmental Research · 2022
Used for: Takeaway food question — mean of 639 MPs/kg across 146 takeaway food samples (rice, noodles, meat, beverages). Approximately 170–638 MPs per order.
Further reading
Landmark studies on microplastics in the human body — supporting context for this calculator
Microplastics and Nanoplastics in Atheromas and Cardiovascular Events
Marfella et al. · New England Journal of Medicine · 2024
Found microplastics and nanoplastics in human arterial plaques. Patients with detectable particles had a 4.5x higher risk of heart attack, stroke, or death over 34 months.
Discovery and quantification of plastic particle pollution in human blood
Leslie et al. · Environment International · 2022
First study to detect and quantify microplastic particles in human blood. Found plastic particles in 77% of people tested.
Plasticenta: First evidence of microplastics in human placenta
Ragusa et al. · Environment International · 2021
First study to detect microplastics in human placental tissue, demonstrating that particles can cross the placental barrier.
Human Consumption of Microplastics
Cox et al. · Environmental Science & Technology · 2019
Estimated that the average American ingests 74,000–121,000 microplastic particles per year — and notes this is likely a significant underestimate as many exposure pathways remain unstudied.
Microplastics in Drinking-Water
World Health Organization · WHO Report · 2019
Comprehensive global review of microplastic contamination in drinking water sources, treatment processes, and human health implications.
Full reference table
Every question and the measured value from the source study. Units vary by question — some are per litre, per gram, per wash, or per session depending on what the study measured.
| Question | Measured value | Study | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Drinking water | ~325 particles/litre (bottled water) | Mason et al. (2018) | High |
| Plastic tea bags | 11.6 billion particles/cup | Hernandez et al. (2019) | High |
| Disposable cups | 675–5,984 particles/litre released into hot beverages | Chen et al. (2022) | Medium |
| Microwaving in plastic | 4.22 million particles/cm² per use | Hussain et al. (2023) | Medium |
| Non-stick pans (scratched) | ~9,100 particles per cooking session (single crack); up to 2.3 million from broken coating | Luo et al. (2022) | Medium |
| Plastic cutting board | 14.5–79 million particles/year | Yadav et al. (2023) | Medium |
| Takeaway food | 170–638 particles/order | Bai et al. (2022) | Medium |
| Mussels & oysters | 0.36 particles/g mussel tissue (~90 per 250g serving) | Van Cauwenberghe & Janssen (2014) | High |
| Salt type | Sea salt: 0–10 particles/kg; rock salt: lowest contamination | Karami et al. (2017) | High |
| Synthetic clothing | ~700,000 fibres released per wash cycle (6 kg load) | Napper & Thompson (2016) | Medium |
| Car commute | 2,238 particles/m³ (car cabin median) vs 528 particles/m³ (residential indoor) | Yakovenko et al. (2025) | Medium |
| Home air quality | 528 particles/m³ (residential indoor median) | Yakovenko et al. (2025) | Medium |
Limitations and transparency
Microplastics research is a rapidly evolving field. Many exposure pathways remain unstudied, and study methodologies vary significantly. The figures presented here represent best estimates at the time of publication and will be updated as new research emerges.
Some exposure pathways are not captured here: plastic cooking utensils were excluded because no peer-reviewed study directly quantifies particle release under normal use conditions; nanoplastics are excluded due to inconsistent measurement coverage across pathways; and airborne indoor exposure is only partially represented by the Yakovenko et al. data. The calculator likely understates total exposure as a result.
This tool is intended for educational purposes only. It does not constitute medical advice and should not be used to inform clinical decisions.