Private clinics in London now offer paid microplastic blood screens (£250) and an advertised plasma filtration procedure (£9,750) intended to remove tiny plastic particles. Scientists have detected microplastics in the environment and human tissues, but health implications remain uncertain and current tests can be only suggestive. Experts recommend practical, low‑cost precautions — glass or stainless food storage, avoid reheating in plastic, and consider tap‑water filters — while stronger evidence is developed.
London Clinics Sell Microplastic Blood Tests — And Costly Plasma Filtration Procedures
Photo Credit: iStock
Private clinics in London’s Marylebone district are now offering paid blood screening for microplastics — and, in some cases, plasma‑filtration procedures claimed to remove those particles from circulation. The move reflects growing public anxiety about microplastic contamination and a market that is moving faster than the science.
At Reborne Longevity, a microplastic blood screen costs £250 and uses a finger‑prick sample collected with plastic‑free materials to reduce contamination risk. Dr. Dorsa Jalaei, the clinic’s Preventive Health Coordinator, says the test can sometimes help when a patient has an unusual exposure history but is rarely necessary for generally healthy people.
“We had one patient who had been in Los Angeles during the fires last year and was experiencing symptoms of inflammation,” Jalaei said. “For her, the test did show an elevated level of microplastics, so it was a useful piece of the puzzle in her diagnostics. But for a healthy person without a specific high exposure event, it adds very little to the picture.”
For clients seeking interventions beyond testing, Clarify Clinic advertises a plasma filtration procedure priced at £9,750. The clinic says the treatment filters plasma outside the body and returns cleaned blood to the patient, a process marketed as removing most microplastics.
Researchers have detected microplastic particles in remote places such as Mount Everest and inside human tissues, including the brain and breast milk. However, what those detections mean for human health remains unsettled. Early studies have suggested associations with inflammation, organ dysfunction, bone problems, reproductive effects, and links to cardiovascular disease and cancer, but evidence is preliminary.
Several experts warn the commercial market may be outpacing reliable science. Dr. Leon Barron, who leads the Emerging Chemical Contaminants team at Imperial College, cautioned that "single, simple tests are not likely to provide unequivocal proof, but rather tentative or indicative evidence which sits at a lower level of certainty." He also noted that some methods may not reliably distinguish plastic particles from other materials.
Dr. Stephanie Wright, an Imperial microplastics specialist, urged stronger methods and data: "Over the next few years, we need this evidence base to grow — underpinned by rigorous methods and robust measurement data — to determine whether there is a threat or not, and what concentrations in blood mean in the context of our health."
Practical Advice
Clinics and scientists recommend simple, low‑cost steps to reduce routine exposure while research continues: store food in glass or stainless‑steel containers, avoid reheating meals in plastic, and consider filtering tap water. These measures are far less invasive and far cheaper than clinic procedures and may help lower everyday exposure without relying on tests or treatments that have uncertain benefit.
Bottom line: If you are worried about a specific exposure event or unexplained symptoms, discussing testing with a clinician may be reasonable. For most healthy people, however, experts say the current tests and costly filtration treatments offer tentative evidence at best, and consumers should weigh the unsettled science before paying for expensive procedures.
Help us improve.
