• Umbrias@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Plastics are not rocks in funny shapes. We are made of plastics. They’re just unusual compounds which no primary decomposer has developed yet.

    That’s not to say we shouldn’t address the issue, but it’s important to understand what the issue actually is. The fact that plastics are familiar yet unfamiliar compounds is actually what causes the problems.

    • stoneparchment
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Where do you get the idea we are made of plastics? Not necessarily throwing shade, just… I’m a molecular biologist and at first pass that seems like a stretch. I’d be excited to be wrong

      Thermosets and thermoplastics, right? Not sure that we have that going on in there…

      • Kale@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Cellulose, starch, and chitin are all sugar polymers in plants and crustaceans (may be a broader group, I used chitosan from crustaceans though).

        In mammals, collagen is a polymer. It’s like 30% of a humans non-water weight. Bones are composites that are tough collagen binding hard and strong fibers of apatite (mostly calcium apatite/ hydroxyapatite). I don’t think the apatite system is considered a polymer, though.

        Triglycerides aren’t polymers in adipose tissue. Although plant triglycerides can split and polymerize. Which make beautiful wood stains.

        • stoneparchment
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah but like… not all polymers are plastics, right? Like… they aren’t synonyms?

          Wikipedia says acrylics, polyesters, silicones, polyurethanes, thermoplastics, and thermosets are plastics. Do those exist in organic tissue? Am I missing an obvious group?

        • interolivary@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          All plastics are polymers, but I really don’t think it’s a commonly held view that all polymers are plastics

          • Kale@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Ah ok. That’s probably true. I was under the impression that a polymer that is solid at room temperature is a plastic.

      • Umbrias@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Plastic as a term only makes sense to not include biological polymers if we define it to only be man-made polymers. It’s arbitrary semantics, so I find it’s better to be inclusive to help show the chemical quirks than to be exclusive on arbitrary lines.

        • stoneparchment
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s fine if you want to draw some conceptual comparisons between biological and synthetic polymers, but it’s 100% not true that “plastics” as defined as synthetic, organic polymers (I.e. acrylics, silicones, polyesters, polyurethanes, halogenated plastics, thermosets, thermoplastics et al.) are the same on a chemical basis as most biological polymers.

          Like… where are you drawing the line? Are proteins a plastic? Is starch plastic? Is DNA plastic? RNA? Clearly not, by multiple definitions (bioavailability, reactivity, structure and function, persistence in the environment, etc.). Even biological compounds closer to synthetic polymers (cellulose, chitin, etc.) are definitively different, even if they do have longer persistence, lower reactivity, etc. And bioplastics (like what people mean when they say biodegradable plastics) are heat-modified biological polymers. They don’t come out of a living thing that way; they are fundamentally altered from their previous form.

          I guess I just… disagree that the distinction is “arbitrary semantics”?

          • Umbrias@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            All of these types of plastic you’re using as counterexamples are more distinct from each other than they are from biological polymers.

            Plastics are a ridiculously diverse group of chemicals, not including naturally occurring polymers is anthropocentric and not always useful.

            • stoneparchment
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              What, in your opinion, is the semantic difference between the words plastic and polymer?

              What is your word of choice to distinguish between naturally occurring and lab-made polymers?

              • Umbrias@beehaw.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                It depends on the context. Sometimes plastic is good for that, but in this case I don’t believe that it is.

                Plastic is not a rigorous term. When discussing specific plastics it’s petty much always better to describe specifics, because plastics are too diverse of chemistry to do anything else.