Bangkok: The news of British Hollywood actor Orlando Bloom sharing photos of himself receiving a blood transfusion to remove toxins from his body, claiming it could remove 90-99% of microplastics, has sparked widespread criticism. This has been met with strong opposition from the medical community, who argue that the claim is ineffective in removing microplastics and that there is no evidence to support the harmful effects of current microplastic intake on the body.
According to Thai News Agency, the decision by the 49-year-old actor to undergo a blood transfusion to remove microplastics reflects public concerns over current media reports linking microplastics to health problems. A 2022 study published in the journal Environment International found that nearly 80% of blood samples tested were contaminated with microplastics. These microplastics can potentially invade the body's immune system and cause inflammation, increasing the risk of various health problems such as cancer, hormonal disorders, infertility, and chronic diseases.
A 2024 survey of 30,000 people in 31 countries found that 66% were concerned about the accumulation of microplastics in their bodies. While research from 2020 estimated that the amount of microplastics in the environment would increase 1.5-2.5 times by 2040. However, these concerns stem from preliminary research. Currently, the medical community doesn't know exactly what effects microplastics have when they enter the human body, including their reaction to tissues, how they accumulate in the body, and how much of it can be eliminated.
Amid the uncertainty, a blood transfusion process to remove microplastics has been publicized, using public figures as spokespersons, even though the expensive procedure, costing up to £10,000 or 439,624 baht, is unlikely to completely rid the body of microplastics as claimed. Apheresis is used for therapeutic purposes, not for detoxification.
Blood transfusion for microplastic removal is similar in principle to apheresis, a procedure that uses a device to suction blood from the body to treat patients with autoimmune diseases or those with excessive blood cells or proteins. However, blood separation is not a medically approved method for detoxification. A comparison has been made between blood transfusions for microplastic removal and hemodialysis, a treatment method for patients with end-stage renal disease, which involves passing blood through a filter to remove waste products and excess water, and then returning the clean blood to the body.
However, a side effect of hemodialysis is the increased chance of microplastics from the dialysis equipment entering the bloodstream. While dialysis is more important for patients with kidney failure than the risk of microplastic exposure, the general public who hope to use blood transfusions to remove microplastics will instead ingest more microplastics through the process.
In addition, blood transfusions come with various risks, such as transfusion infections, bruising, and decreased blood pressure. Therefore, most doctors believe that blood transfusions to remove microplastics are inadvisable because, in addition to being expensive, there is no evidence to confirm that blood transfusions permanently remove microplastics from the body.
The public is advised to address the problem at its source by reducing plastic use in daily life. This includes avoiding plastic with hot food, drinking water from reusable cups or stainless steel bottles instead of plastic bottles, consuming natural foods instead of highly processed foods, wearing natural fiber clothing, and avoiding busy roads to reduce exposure to plastic waste from worn tires.