Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article provides a thorough overview of the sources, transport mechanisms, exposure routes, and potential health impacts of microplastics (MPs) and nanoplastics (NPs). This makes it a valuable resource for understanding the broader implications of these contaminants.

The amount (or percentage) of waste plastic generated or released into the ocean is crucial information, as cited in the literature [1,2,3]. However, the references provided are not the original sources of this data. It would be more accurate and reliable to cite the original data sources directly.

Additionally, the section describing the transportation of microplastics (MPs) and nanoplastics (NPs) in the aquatic environment lacks specific data directly related to MPs and NPs. The particle sizes mentioned in the references are considerably larger than those of MPs/NPs. I recommend conducting further literature research to strengthen this section, similar to the thorough approach taken in the section on the terrestrial environment.

Author Response

Please see attached file

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The review by Khanna et. al. is devoted to one of the most pressing problems of today, micro/nano plastic pollution of the environment and the resulting risks to human health. The authors focused on 3 key issues: 1) migration of micro/nano plastics in the environment; 2) exposure routes and their entry into humans and other biota; 3) impact on health and associated aspects.

The article needs significant improvement. The findings and conclusion should, in fact, be re-write and should be made on the basis of the analysis. As it stands, the conclusions are a statement of the current situation of micro/nano plastics in the world.

 

1) Table 1: What was the reason for the limited selection of references by soil? Only 7 references from 2016-2018 are provided. The cited soil data are mainly for China. Meanwhile, a search of the Scopus database for 2024 year for the words microplastics AND nanoplastics AND Soil alone yields 179 articles and 130 reviews (accessed on 03.09.2024). Could be expanded and improved.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301479724000252

2) The section 4 with the effect on human body and the mechanism of micro/nanoplastics should be improved.

Some recent references about impact of micro/nano plastics for human health: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0045653524018800#cebib0010

https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/toxicology/articles/10.3389/ftox.2023.1193386/full

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/ebiom/article/PIIS2352-3964(23)00467-X/fulltext

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/envhealth.3c00052

https://microplastics.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s43591-024-00089-3

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301479724000252

3) Conclusions stating that we should reduce plastic waste are not, in my opinion, a promising way of solving the problem. It is not clear what other ways of solving the problem the authors see? In the proposed conclusion I did not see what the authors propose to solve the problem!

4) P. 10-11, In Section 5: The sentences “Modern healthcare has a critical dependence on single use plastic and ultimately generates a largecale waste problem within any hospital and/or healthcare facility.” and “Modern healthcare has a critical dependence on single use plastic and ultimately generates a largecale waste problem within any hospital;” are duplicates.

Author Response

Please see attached file

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I have no more questions for the authors.