This page is referenced by:

• 1 2016-03-09T09:40:36-08:00 How are the Actors in the Microbead Debate Connected? 39 The Network of Actors in the Microbead Debate. plain 2016-04-03T13:57:44-07:00

  Academic Search of Microbeads Visualized:

  Above is a network image generated in Gephi displaying the relationships and relevancy of keywords and authors in academia in the scientific debate surrounding microbeads. Keywords and authors increase in size with their relevancy and connectedness to the search of “microbeads” in the academic search engine Scopus.
  
  Upon reviewing this image generated by the networking tool Gephi, it becomes evident that there are a few key words and authors that stand above the rest. There are clearly some other debates occurring surrounding this topic since “microbead” is not the only word jumping out. One can also note “microfluidics, alginate, chitosan” with a small separate debate occurring on the bottom of the diagram through the key term “transplantation”. These terms can be defined as follows:
  
  Microfluidics: “a multidisciplinary field intersecting engineering, physics, chemistry, biochemistry, nanotechnology, and biotechnology, with practical applications to the design of systems in which low volumes of fluids are processed to achieve multiplexing, automation, and high-throughput screening.” Wikipedia
  
  Alginate: “a salt of alginic acid, extracted from marine kelp. The calcium, sodium, and ammonium alginates have been used in foam, cloth, a thickening agent for foods, pharmaceutical preparations, and gauze for absorbent surgical dressings. Soluble alginates, such as those of sodium, potassium, or magnesium, form a viscous sol that can be changed into a gel by a chemical reaction with compounds such as calcium sulfate; this makes them useful as materials for taking dental impressions.” (Mosby's Medical Dictionary, 8th edition. 2009)
  
  Chitosan: “is a linear polysaccharide composed of randomly distributed β-(1-4)-linked D-glucosamine (deacetylated unit) and N-acetyl-D-glucosamine (acetylated unit). It is made by treating shrimp and other crustacean shells with the alkali sodium hydroxide.” Wikipedia
  
  It is unclear whether the key words appearing in the search are linked to the microbead debate since the chemicals were not outlined as chemicals of concern by environmental groups noted in my introduction. There appears to be other microbead research appearing in the biomedical field that may be taking priority to the research on environmental impacts and harm of microbeads. Another thought is that microbeads are often referred to as microplastics by environmental researchers - this may be impacting the results yielded in my Scopus search.
  
  When examining the authors that stand out as being the most published in microbead research, Zhang, I., Gao, Y., Park, J.O., Park, S., Cho, S., and Li. S. Their affiliations are as follows:
  
  Zhang, I. – Harbin Institute of Technology, School of Materials Science and Engineering, Harbin, China.
  
  Gao, Y. – Institute of Biomaterials and Biomedical Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
  
  Park, J.O. – Chonnam National University, School of Medical Engineering, Gwangju, South Korea
  
  Park, S. - Chonnam National University, School of Medical Engineering, Gwangju, South Korea
  
  Cho, S. - Chonnam National University, School of Medical Engineering, Gwangju, South Korea
  
  Li. S – Northwestern Polytechnical University, School of Materials Science and Engineering, Xi’an, China
  
  As one can see, the majority of the debate generated by this network diagram is occurring in Asia in biomedical and engineering fields. One could hypothesize that Asian dominance in global microbead research is due, at least in part, to research dedicated to the use of microbeads in the field of healthcare and the recent industrialization of Asian countries. This has led these countries to be largely export driven, with many of their target markets being in North America - this theory is further backed up by the fact that all of these Asian studies were published in English scientific journals. Microbeads seem to be not only used in personal hygiene products, but are becoming a way in which to deliver medicine - this is something being heavily researched in Asia when observing my results from my Scopus search. With respect to microbead research in engineering, this could be related to the need to further develop and/or refine the design of the microbead for various uses. With such a great deal of microbead research in the fields of biomedicine and engineering, one can speculate that microbead use is heading towards a growth phase with increased usages. It is unclear if enough research is being carried out to determine potential ill-effects of microbead use on the global environment and those living within it.

  Flow Chart of Various Players in the Microbead Debate:

  Scientific research and subsequent literature laid the foundation for the current microbead debate. The first article published that outlined microplastics as a possible pollution source was written by Murray Gregory at the University of Aukland, New Zealand. This paper titled Plastic ‘scrubbers’ in hand cleansers: a further (and minor) source for marine pollution identified sounded the alarm on microplastics and is largely believed to be the paper that started the debate. However the topic really began to gain momentum in the mid 2000's when further research was done into the ability of microplastics to accumulate toxins and their bioavailability to marine fauna. This is further explored on the microbead controversy over time page. Following research on microbeads, scientists have been able to learn and provide information on the nature of microbeads and potential hazards to the environment and living organisms. Science enlightened us to the tendency of microbeads to absorb surrounding toxic substances, becoming significantly more toxic than the waters around them. According to science, toxic microbeads are then ingested my animals and carried through the global food chain, all the way to human beings. 
  
  Following the publishing of scientific research, activist groups and news outlets then become involved in the debate. Activist groups play a role in formulating opinions on the matter at hand - microbeads in this case - and advocating for their positions; the general public may become interested at this point. If activist groups are unsuccessful in reaching out to the general public, chances are that news outlets will gain attention on the matter. News outlets are far-reaching, but one must be cautious when presented with news on any subject, even scientific research. To gain popularity, news outlets will present stories and information in the most interesting light, not necessarily an objective stance. When presented with the most captivating details of microbeads, the public may grow concerned with respect to microbead use. Enough public concern can translate to pressure on government to make a change. Government involvement in an issue, like the microbead debate, can lead to the the passing of bills and possibly laws. Scientific research, public support and government attention is the root of much change in our society.