The yearly SOT/EUROTOX debate was held Monday evening at the 2026 SOT Annual Meeting and ToxExpo. This year’s topic, “Do the Societal Benefits of Plastic Outweigh the Risks of Microplastic Contamination?,” was introduced by Robin Tanguay, Oregon State University. Our first contender was Phoebe Stapleton, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, representing SOT and arguing on the benefits of plastic. Dr. Stapleton was pitted against Raymond Pieters, Universiteit Utrecht, representing EUROTOX and arguing the risks of microplastic.
Dr. Stapleton kicked things off with an opening statement on all the ways that plastic has improved our world (while sipping from her metal water bottle emblazoned with the words “PLASTIC SUCKS”). Dr. Stapleton pointed to the countless lives saved through the use of plastic in healthcare and technology, as well as making bullet proof vests possible. She also argued that the lightweight nature of plastic cuts down on the energy consumption of shipping goods across the world, which also enhances our food supply. “I don’t know where dragon fruit is grown, but I know I can buy one in my local grocery store,” Dr. Stapleton explained (side note, Vietnam is the world's largest exporter of dragon fruit).
Dr. Pieters then took the stage and delivered some hard facts. More than half of plastic ever produced has been since the year 2000. At this rate, he said, “We will drown in plastic.” Dr. Pieters addressed Dr. Stapleton’s argument on shipping costs, arguing that plastic production itself takes up a large chunk of the global economy. Most plastic is not truly recyclable due to the extra chemicals that are added in the process, which also add to the potential risks to human health. Dr. Pieters concluded that we should lower plastic production to mitigate economic cost and risk. “Kids don’t need new plastic toys,” Dr. Pieters stated, “I still have the same Lego set from 50 years ago.”
In rebuttal, Dr. Stapleton addressed the harm to human health associated with microplastics: Human studies are only able to establish correlation, not causation. “What if it’s actually a benefit to have microplastics in us?” she declared. This statement was met with laughter.
The debate then moved to a Q&A format with the audience. One attendee asked, “Is recycling helping or hurting?” Both speakers dropped the pretense of the debate to answer candidly. Real recycling, meaning chemical recycling, which converts hard plastic back into raw materials, is helpful. But classic recycling, melting and reusing plastic, just creates more microplastics. Dr. Pieters reiterated that we should reduce the number of chemicals that are added to plastic during production to make it easier to chemically recycle.
The winner of the debate was decided by audience applause, and although one lone voice called out, “Go plastic!”, Dr. Pieters on the anti-plastic side had a sweeping victory. Dr. Stapleton congratulated him—I assume relieved to no longer have to argue against the evidence of her own research on the health consequences of microplastic contamination. Stay tuned this September, when the debaters will swap positions at the EUROTOX 2026 meeting in Vienna, Austria!
This blog reports on the Featured Session titled “Do the Societal Benefits of Plastic Outweigh the Risks of Microplastic Contamination?” that was held during the 2026 SOT Annual Meeting and ToxExpo. An on-demand recording of this session is available for meeting registrants on the SOT Online Planner and SOT Event App.
This blog was prepared by an SOT Reporter and represents the views of the author. SOT Reporters are SOT members who volunteer to write about sessions and events in which they participate during the SOT Annual Meeting and ToxExpo. SOT does not propose or endorse any position by posting this article. If you are interested in participating in the SOT Reporter program in the future, please email SOT Headquarters.
#SOTReporter