The next paragraph in the article is:

The institute said those figures support the possibility that CBA3656 reacted with nanoplastics in the intestine and promoted their excretion from the body, thus exhibiting high nanoplastic biosorption efficiency.

Essentially "we see a lot more nanoplastics freely moving around instead of embedded where they're hard to measure."

Normal scientific asterisks are in play: this was bacteria isolated from kimchi, not kimchi itself. For all I know, kimchi could introduce more nanoplastics than the bacteria remove. The bacteria could also not have the same behavior when they're on kimchi and have other things to eat. There isn't much information on the process used, so it could be that the samples they used were contaminated with nanoplastic and that's why they saw more. This was also published by "The World Institute of Kimchi". Not that they couldn't find a real effect, just that this isn't remotely unbiased.

The next paragraph says:

The institute said those figures support the possibility that CBA3656 reacted with nanoplastics in the intestine and promoted their excretion from the body, thus exhibiting high nanoplastic biosorption efficiency.

We are now quoting the world institute of Kimchi.

Eat kimchi, shit kimchi.

Eh. It's easy to be jaded about it, but that doesn't make the study bad.

You have a team of scientists who study kimchi for years and years. They tried it with Alzheimer's and it failed. They tried it got weight loss and it failed. Eventually they find something that works.

The real issue is that the group doesn't seem trustworthy because they don't publish their negative results. If they published both positive and negative, it'd be harder to claim they're simply shills.

The World Institute of Kimchi is an affiliate institution of Korea Food Research Institute, which is government-funded. (per Wikipedia)

Now you need to pay for the Microplastic 365 aka Plastics as a Service.

Stupid Kimchi and Its fishiness. Probably different bacteria

Oh crap. My hope was to read the paper as I'm quite intrigued.

Sigh.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0960852426003159

I agree, but there's hope: It says they injected the mice, which implies that a hypodermic needle could be an option.

I have no love of needles, but given the alternative...