This is veering close into MAHA territory, in my view...treating minor lifestyle details and major health factors.
You just stated a lot of what appears to be impressive scientific data. While I don't WANT microplastics in my blood, how can I quantify the actual risk? I know that's not YOUR job, you're just the messenger presenting what appear to be facts, but that's why I am skeptical. Having been burnt by bullshit science + media hysteria telling us red wine will prevent heart attacks and tooth decay causes them, I am not ready to get alarmed. You say, people with above-threshold level of nanoplastics are more likely to get heart attacks, but given I've heard a half dozen of these bullshit things in my life, I have to ask the correlation vs causation question.
Much like red wine drinkers...in that Americans who enjoy wine are more likely to be wealthier or have lower stress in life than those who don't (the poor can't afford it and blue collar folks drink other things). Are microplastics worsening their cardiac health?...or are people with more realistic contributors just likely to be exposed to more microplastics. For example, if you're poor, you're probably not replacing plastic food containers that's heavily worn down. And being poor or stressed out will kill you waaaay faster than microplastics can...I am sure we both can agree on.
So my question to the scientific community, and I know you're just the messenger, is can we show epidemiological among regions? I think it's safe to say that not every region is exposed to microplastics at the same rate. Do the Southern Europeans use as much plastic? When I visit France and Italy, they seem to prefer glass...do they have less microplastics in their blood than North Americans or the Chinese? What about Africa or rural Asia...do they have higher levels or lower ones? Can we see holistic trends there?
The world spent 20 years chasing down trying to figure out the Blue Zones paradox...only to find out it's just coincidence and bad record keeping. Food is not medicine. I know the MAHA crowd would like to disagree, but it's true. Abusive eating can be poison, but switching to the Mediterranean diet from an otherwise reasonable American diet is not going to cure your heart disease. Similarly, if microplastics really caused heart attacks, it would be quite easy to prove.
In the end, I know microplastics aren't good for you, but I also am not convinced they're highly harmful. I will wager that if scrutinized, the data will show a much stronger correlation between the classic heart disease factors, which to my knowledge, in order are: genetic predisposition, smoking and drug abuse (booze, illegal stuff), stress, obesity, being-out-of-shape, prescription-drugs(like ritalin) and legal stimulants...then a far, distant.....EVERYTHING else, including microplastics or environmental toxins.
In the end, I am all for avoiding microplastics, but I put that in the category of things that "MIGHT" be bad for you, but we're not certain it's significant, like artificial sweeteners, caffeine, non-organic produce, etc.