Dr. Scott Coffin
banner
ecoboffin.bsky.social
Dr. Scott Coffin
@ecoboffin.bsky.social
Enviro' Toxicologist | Research Scientist @OEHHA | #Microplastics | @ToMExApp dev | @ThePlastiverse founder | RYT:200 | DJ | Surfer | Views Own | he/him | 🌈∞
Thank you to authors:
@magdalenammair.bsky.social @analeticiav.bsky.social, Stephanie Kennedy, Anna Kukkola, Ezra Miller, Andrew Yeh, Towsif Ahmed, Lidwina Bertrand, Andrew Barrick, Win Cowger, and Darragh Doyle
November 14, 2025 at 9:11 PM
Huge thanks to all collaborators who made this possible. This project was truly a labor of love - no funding, 100% volunteer-run, with authors from all over the world!
More to come soon! 🌎✨
November 14, 2025 at 9:11 PM
Some good news-

By harmonizing data across particle types, exposure conditions, species, and effect endpoints, we created the most comprehensive quality-assured dataset to date for microplastic ecological risk assessment (i.e., ToMEx 2.0)!
microplastics.springeropen.com/articles/10....
The Toxicity of Microplastics Explorer (ToMEx) 2.0 - Microplastics and Nanoplastics
In 2021 the Toxicity of Microplastics Explorer (ToMEx, https://microplastics.sccwrp.org ) was released as an open source, open access database and web application for microplastics toxicity. Since the...
microplastics.springeropen.com
November 14, 2025 at 9:11 PM
This means we can't judge a book by it's cover (or it's age)! High-quality microplastic effects data remain relatively rare, and just because a paper is newer or is published in a 'good' journal doesn't mean it's reliable!
November 14, 2025 at 9:11 PM
We also found that while 'better' journals (i.e., ⬆️impact factor & Altmetric score) correlate with higher quality studies, there are MANY exceptions, with some of the best studies in mid-impact journals like ES&T and STOTEN.
November 14, 2025 at 9:11 PM
• Widespread issues with particle characterization, dose reporting, and experimental design.

• Many studies lack the information needed to determine whether observed effects are real, reproducible, or relevant for risk assessment.
November 14, 2025 at 9:11 PM
What we found: despite explosive growth in the literature, only a small fraction of studies meet minimum standards for use in health-protective risk assessment.

We found:
• A significant negative trend in study quality over time, despite more papers being published each year :/
November 14, 2025 at 9:11 PM
This collaborative project was borne out of the 2019 #PFASDatathon I led with colleagues at the
California State Water Board and CDPH.
Kudos to Toki Fillman and Kathleen Attfield for spearheading this groundbreaking work, and the many others who contributed!
waterboards.ca.gov/pfas/pfas_da...
October 31, 2025 at 8:33 PM
Among 563 adults, those served by water systems with PFAS detections had up to 80% higher serum PFHxS and elevated PFOA, PFOS, and ∑5 PFAS.
These links persisted even in communities without industrial PFAS sources.
#PFAS #DrinkingWater #PublicHealth
October 31, 2025 at 8:33 PM
Unfortunately this behavior is far too common. While I understand the desire for researchers to sometimes commercialize their science (especially in this funding climate), if a publication claims their data will be made available upon request, it should be honored or amended!
October 17, 2025 at 6:17 PM