Peter Grove
RefChat Addict
I'm not sure why we would surmise that. Incidentally, the definition of surmise is, "suppose that something is true without having evidence to confirm it."
That's the thing - there is no evidence to support such a conclusion. Meanwhile, here are links to two reports published in 2017 & 18 on the US National Library of Medicine/National Institutes of Health website, and their conclusions.
Comprehensive multipathway risk assessment of chemicals associated with recycled ("crumb") rubber in synthetic turf fields.
Incidence of malignant lymphoma in adolescents and young adults in the 58 counties of California with varying synthetic turf field density.
The second link is to a properly-conducted epidemiological study of the incidence of lymphomas in individuals exposed to synthetic turf fields, as opposed to the EHHI data generated from (in their own words) only those who "have known to contact Amy with their cancer case."
Now, as Julie Foudy mentioned in those videos, California is currently carrying out a more comprehensive study of the risks associated with the crumb rubber infill used in synthetic fields so when that is completed we should have a better picture.
However, as things stand, there is no scientific evidence to support an increased risk of cancer associated with synthetic fields. In fact, according the HHRA study mentioned above:
That's the thing - there is no evidence to support such a conclusion. Meanwhile, here are links to two reports published in 2017 & 18 on the US National Library of Medicine/National Institutes of Health website, and their conclusions.
Comprehensive multipathway risk assessment of chemicals associated with recycled ("crumb") rubber in synthetic turf fields.
CONCLUSIONS:
This HHRA's [Human Health Risk Assessment] results add to the growing body of literature that suggests recycled rubber infill in synthetic turf poses negligible risks to human health. This comprehensive assessment provides data that allow stakeholders to make informed decisions about installing and using these fields.
Incidence of malignant lymphoma in adolescents and young adults in the 58 counties of California with varying synthetic turf field density.
CONCLUSION:
Our findings in the state with the greatest number of such fields and a large, diverse patient population are consistent with those of a prior study observing no association between individual-level exposures to turf fields and cancer incidence. Avoidance of synthetic turf fields for fear of increased cancer risk is not warranted.
The second link is to a properly-conducted epidemiological study of the incidence of lymphomas in individuals exposed to synthetic turf fields, as opposed to the EHHI data generated from (in their own words) only those who "have known to contact Amy with their cancer case."
Now, as Julie Foudy mentioned in those videos, California is currently carrying out a more comprehensive study of the risks associated with the crumb rubber infill used in synthetic fields so when that is completed we should have a better picture.
However, as things stand, there is no scientific evidence to support an increased risk of cancer associated with synthetic fields. In fact, according the HHRA study mentioned above:
... cancer risk levels for users of synthetic turf field were comparable to or lower than those associated with natural soil fields.