Concerns about 3G pitches

[WaspInWales]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/35585392

I hope the lad makes a full recovery but it's an interesting 'link' regarding the pitches.

Could it be a coincidence? Has there been any other cases involving amateur or professional players?

[Puja]

Shocker - Father in desperate need to find rationale for son's cancer.

It's possible his claims may have some merit, but I'm highly dubious.

Puja

[Guwuffle]

There's been a bit more about it in the US - see this ESPN story http://espn.go.com/espnw/news-commentar ... where-play.

No proper studies and the examples in that article suffer for small sample sizes / being anecdotal but there's a reasonable argument that more research is warranted.

[Eugene Wrayburn]

There's been a bit more about it in the US - see this ESPN story http://espn.go.com/espnw/news-commentar ... where-play.

No proper studies and the examples in that article suffer for small sample sizes / being anecdotal but there's a reasonable argument that more research is warranted.

I never have a problem with more research. I have a bit of a problem with stopping the world until that mythical magical point when it is proved "safe".

[Mellsblue]

I understand his concerns and I feel incredibly sorry for him and his family but, using my incredibly limited knowledge, it seems a bit of a stretch that these pellets have caused a problem in such a short space of time. As with inhaling asbestos, the illness would take years and years to delevelop, surely.

Having said that, research should be done if these pellets are easily swallowed and contain carcinogens. Nobody would consciously make the decision to swallow rubber - that they are made from recycled tyres blows my brains.

[Which Tyler]

Before banning anything on health grounds - it seems fair to ask that health grounds be proven?

So far I've seen extremely poor quality correlation, and no signs of any causation, so if I had to estimate risks, I'd put it at approximately 1/1000th that of living in Cornwall for a decade (radon radiation).

AKA feel free to do some research - increased knowledge is always a good thing; but don't worry about it yet. Any calls for avoiding rubber crumb at the moment seems like pure knee-jerk hysteria.

[16th man]

Before banning anything on health grounds - it seems fair to ask that health grounds be proven?

So far I've seen extremely poor quality correlation, and no signs of any causation, so if I had to estimate risks, I'd put it at approximately 1/1000th that of living in Cornwall for a decade (radon radiation).

AKA feel free to do some research - increased knowledge is always a good thing; but don't worry about it yet. Any calls for avoiding rubber crumb at the moment seems like pure knee-jerk hysteria.

Devils advocate:
Smoking, Asbestos, Thalidomide, injecting Mercury as a cure for various ailments, Lead water pipes / in petrol.

Actually had an interesting chat with a guy working at a materials company, who has done some interesting stuff with Graphene, who pointed out that a lot of the chat around it sounds similar to the amazement around asbestos' properties back in the day.

[Eugene Wrayburn]

Before banning anything on health grounds - it seems fair to ask that health grounds be proven?

So far I've seen extremely poor quality correlation, and no signs of any causation, so if I had to estimate risks, I'd put it at approximately 1/1000th that of living in Cornwall for a decade (radon radiation).

AKA feel free to do some research - increased knowledge is always a good thing; but don't worry about it yet. Any calls for avoiding rubber crumb at the moment seems like pure knee-jerk hysteria.

Devils advocate:
Smoking, Asbestos, Thalidomide, injecting Mercury as a cure for various ailments, Lead water pipes / in petrol.

Actually had an interesting chat with a guy working at a materials company, who has done some interesting stuff with Graphene, who pointed out that a lot of the chat around it sounds similar to the amazement around asbestos' properties back in the day.

That sort of chat happens with anything new. You'd probably find similar chat with Uranium etc. Nothing wrong with a bit of scientific excitement

[Mellsblue]

Before banning anything on health grounds - it seems fair to ask that health grounds be proven?

So far I've seen extremely poor quality correlation, and no signs of any causation, so if I had to estimate risks, I'd put it at approximately 1/1000th that of living in Cornwall for a decade (radon radiation).

AKA feel free to do some research - increased knowledge is always a good thing; but don't worry about it yet. Any calls for avoiding rubber crumb at the moment seems like pure knee-jerk hysteria.

Devils advocate:
Smoking, Asbestos, Thalidomide, injecting Mercury as a cure for various ailments, Lead water pipes / in petrol.

Don't forget Turkey Twizzlers.

[16th man]

Before banning anything on health grounds - it seems fair to ask that health grounds be proven?

So far I've seen extremely poor quality correlation, and no signs of any causation, so if I had to estimate risks, I'd put it at approximately 1/1000th that of living in Cornwall for a decade (radon radiation).

AKA feel free to do some research - increased knowledge is always a good thing; but don't worry about it yet. Any calls for avoiding rubber crumb at the moment seems like pure knee-jerk hysteria.

Devils advocate:
Smoking, Asbestos, Thalidomide, injecting Mercury as a cure for various ailments, Lead water pipes / in petrol.

Don't forget Turkey Twizzlers.

Nah, everyone knew they were bad for you, they just didn't care.

[Lizard]

I trained on this stuff for a few years. It got in your socks and hair but I can't see how you would end up swallowing it. If you've got wounds, then cover and strap them. The risk of legionnaires disease from a soil pitch would seem higher.

[Which Tyler]

Devils advocate:
Smoking, Asbestos, Thalidomide, injecting Mercury as a cure for various ailments, Lead water pipes / in petrol.

How many were banned without any evidence?

I'm certainly not saying that there's nothing harmful that we don't know about; of course there is, loads of stuff. But I see no benefit from banning stuff because someone somewhere is upset and lashing out without any actual evidence.
Collect the evidence, and then look at it. Establish an actual correlation, then we can suspend using the stuff whilst we do more research.
So far all we've got is speculation based on grief; we don't even have a rational theory as far as I can tell (closest I've seen is a list of hazardous compounds that haven't been found in rubber crumb*).


* not found, but then, because it's recycled material, it's components will be extremely variable; so the 2-3 tests require before going to market simply aren't enough to go on yet; but I'm not going to advocate banning it before conducting these tests - which would add a couple of hundred quid for each pitch already laid whilst taking a week or so to get the results. Hardly bank breaking.

[Lizard]

Coincidentally, I met a bloke in a bar last night who is in the rubber recycling business. Most of it is apparently used for "TDF" (Tire Derived Fuel, which actually produces more energy than burning coal). I asked him about rubber crumb and he knew a bit about it so I mentioned the article and alleged cancer link, he was aware of the issue and seemed perhaps a bit nervous about it.

[WaspInWales]

Coincidentally, I met a bloke in a bar last night who is in the rubber recycling business. Most of it is apparently used for "TDF" (Tire Derived Fuel, which actually produces more energy than burning coal). I asked him about rubber crumb and he knew a bit about it so I mentioned the article and alleged cancer link, he was aware of the issue and seemed perhaps a bit nervous about it.

Fwcking 'ell. Hope you didn't mention me at all!

[Lizard]

I've just emailed him a link to this thread.

[Epaminondas Pules]

There is a bigger study in either the US or Canada regarding this, as it's the same stuff used on a lot of kids playgrounds. I'll see if I can find it. The study was quite alarming. I read it fairly recently, but I've drunk lots of beer since then.

[Epaminondas Pules]

Here's a few. There seems to be rising concerns in this space:

[1] US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Fact Sheet-The Use of Recycled Tire Materials on Playgrounds & Artificial Turf Fields. http://www.epa.gov/nerl/download_files/ ... crumbs.pdf Accessed September 5, 2012.

[2] Claudio L. Synthetic Turf-Health Debate Takes Root. Environmental Health Perspectives, 2008; 116(3):A117-22.

[3] New York State Department of Health. . Fact Sheet: Crumb-Rubber Infilled Synthetic Turf Athletic Fields. August 2012 (last revised). http://www.health.ny.gov/environmental/ ... _sheet.htm Accessed September 21, 2012.

[4] State of California-Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), Contractor’s Report to the Board. Evaluation of Health Effects of Recycled Waste Tires in Playground and Track Products. January 2007. http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/publicatio ... 206013.pdf Accessed September 5, 2012.

[Epaminondas Pules]

[5] US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Wastes-Resource Conversation-Common Wastes & Materials – Scrap Tires (Frequent Questions). http://www.epa.gov/osw/conserve/materials/tires/faq.htm Accessed September 5, 2012.

[6] Earth 911.com. Benefits of Recycling Tires. http://earth911.com/recycling/automotiv ... ing-tires/ Accessed September 5, 2012.

[7] Llompart M, Sanchez-Prado L, Lamas JP, Garcia-Jares C, et al. Hazardous organic chemicals in rubber recycled tire playgrounds and pavers. Chemosphere. 2012; Article In Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2012.07.053.

[8] US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)-Fact Sheet. January 2008. http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/wastemin/ ... s/pahs.pdf Accessed September 5, 2012.

[Epaminondas Pules]

[9] Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons. September 1996. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts69.pdf Accessed September 5, 2012.

[10] Environment and Human Health. Synthetic Turf. http://www.ehhi.org/turf/findings0815.shtml and http://www.ehhi.org/turf/new_study_jun2015.shtml

[11] Environmental Protection Agency. The Use of Recycled Tire Materials on Playgrounds & Artificial Turf Fields. http://www.epa.gov/nerl/features/tire_crumbs.html

[12] National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Cancer Institute. Reducing Environmental Cancer Risks (What We Can Do Now), 2008-2009 Annual Report of the HHS President’s Cancer Panel. April 2010. http://deainfo.nci.nih.gov/advisory/pcp ... 09_508.pdf Accessed September 17, 2012.

[Epaminondas Pules]

There's also a Spanish study I think that found particles could become airborne at 20 or 25 degrees C. Can remember exactly.

[Epaminondas Pules]

Early days in terms of research. This is quite a good one:

By Jim Novak
Turfgrass Producers International

I’M not a big fan of articles that pose a lot of questions and offer few, if any, answers. Listening to conspiracy theories, hearing “what if” scenarios, or reading articles that make unfounded claims and present mere speculation often do little more than ruffle the feathers of a few people and enrage others.
The debate over the health safety of synthetic turf fields has gone back and forth for years. Concerns about toxic metals, silica sand, staph infections, dangerously high surface temperatures, proper methods of disposal, etc., are just a few of the significant issues that have come under scrutiny.

However, there are times when information comes to light that requires broader attention. Such is the case with a growing concern expressed by many health care professionals and research scientists regarding the possible health consequences of carbon black nanoparticles present in tires that make up tire crumb; the most common infill used on artificial turf fields.

Nanoparticles are particles less than 100 nanometres in diameter. A nanometer is a billionth of a metre, about the size of six carbon atoms in a row.

For comparison, a human hair is about 80,000 nanometres wide and a strand of DNA is two nanometres wide. To visualize it another way, a nanometre is to one inch as one inch is to 400 miles.

Whether you are for or against artificial turf, this subject is important; especially if you have children who play on artificial turf fields or visit playgrounds that use tire crumb for cushioning; or if you are a student or professional athlete who plays football, soccer, rugby, lacrosse or baseball on fields that use tire crumb as an infill.

The concern: Carbon black nanoparticles make up 30 per cent or more of car tires; the same tires that are pulverized for creating the tire crumb used on artificial turf playing fields and on playgrounds for children. Engineered carbon nanotubes and other engineered nanoparticles (zinc, titanium, etc.) are often made in specific shapes to give added strength and durability to tires and other goods. It is the long thin nature of engineered carbon nanotubes that has some scientists drawing a comparison between the possible health hazards of tire crumb with asbestos.

How do carbon nanotubes affect lung tissue?

The study Greenemier referenced was posted by Nature Nanotechnology led by the Queen’s Medical Research Institute at the University of Edinburg/MRC Center for Inflammation Research in Scotland. Their research showed that long, needle-thin carbon nanotubes could lead to lung cancer and inhaling carbon nanotubes could be as harmful as breathing asbestos.

A carbon nanotube is a carbon molecule that resembles a cylinder made out of chicken wire that is one to two nanometres in diameter by any number of millimetres in length. Nanotubes have a tensile strength 10 times greater than steel and they are considered the strongest material for their weight known to mankind. It should be noted that carbon black is a natural although manufactured material made up of carbon nanoparticles; carbon nanotubes are created/engineered by scientists and are much rarer although apparently highly toxic at low concentrations.

The study suggested that inhaling carbon nanotubes could lead to the same cancer and breathing problems that prompted a ban on asbestos as insulation in buildings.

The research scientists observed that long, thin carbon nanotubes look and behave like asbestos fibres, which have been shown to cause mesothelioma, a deadly cancer of the membrane lining the body’s internal organs (particularly the lungs) and can take 30 to 40 years to appear following exposure.

Asbestos fibres are especially harmful, because they are small enough to penetrate deep into the lungs yet too long for the body’s immune system to destroy. Just how small are carbon nanotubes? They are no thicker than an atom, or one billionth of a metre wide, or approximately 10,000 times smaller than a human hair.

Andrew Maynard, the study’s co-author and chief science adviser for the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholar’s Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies based in Washington, D.C., has been researching and warning of the potential health and environmental risks of carbon nanotubes since 2003 and is quoted as saying there had been no coordinated effort to date to analyze the findings of carbon nanotube toxicity studies.

Since the initial release of the MRC study other researchers have expressed their concerns as well. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) reported their research methods demonstrate that breathing nanoparticles may result in damaging health effects.

NIOSH scientists invented a way to suspend nanotubes in the air so the concentration of particles could be carefully controlled. Mice were placed into a carefully-controlled environment where they could breathe the air containing the particles. Scientists studied the effects of exposure after one, seven, and 28 days. The research showed that carbon nanotubes were more potent when inhaled than when aspirated. In addition, the research showed early indications of serious health outcomes that may have longer term effects such as cancer, and therefore, ongoing research is important to more clearly understand the implications of exposure to carbon nanotubes.

In May 2008, Nature Nanotechnology reported a similar finding, “Carbon nanotubes introduced into the abdominal cavity of mice show asbestos-like pathogenicity in a pilot study.”

The study reported, “Carbon nanotubes have distinctive characteristics, but their needle-like fibre shape has been compared to asbestos, raising concerns that widespread use of carbon nanotubes may lead to mesothelioma, a cancer of the lining of the lungs similar to that caused by exposure to asbestos.

“Exposing the mesothelial lining of the body cavity of mice, as a surrogate for the mesothelial lining of the chest cavity, to long multi-walled carbon nanotubes results in asbestos-like, length-dependent, pathogenic behaviour. This includes inflammation and the formation of lesions known as granulomas. This is of considerable importance, because research and business communities continue to invest heavily in carbon nanotubes for a wide range of products under the assumption that they are no more hazardous than graphite. Our results suggest the need for further research and great caution before introducing such products into the market if long-term harm is to be avoided.”

How do carbon black nanoparticles get to brain tissue?

Peter Gehr, a professor of histology (the study of tissue) and anatomy at the University of Bern in Switzerland, stated that synthetic nanoparticles can penetrate tissue and cells, and spread throughout the body—even to the brain.

Gehr is astonished that potential health risks of synthetic nanoparticles are barely acknowledged outside the scientific world and government agencies. “If nanoparticles are not solidly bound to another material, there is a risk that we could inhale them. They can enter the bloodstream and spread throughout the entire body. The mere fact that particles penetrate into the body is a problem.”

Carbon black nanoparticles: what about the children?

Environment and Human Health, Inc. has asked the following questions about nanoparticles in the tire crumb infill used as mulch for playgrounds used by children:

1. How does the knowledge that carbon black nanoparticles are added to rubber tires affect the risk assessments done on synthetic turf and the rubber mulch used in toddlers’ playgrounds?

2. Because none of the risk assessments done up to the present time on rubber tire crumbs or playground mulch have taken into consideration the fact that carbon black nanoparticles have been added to rubber tires—how does this fact affect the claim by some jurisdictions that rubber tire crumbs and rubber tire playground mulch are safe for children to play on?

3. As children play on synthetic turf fields and playground mulch, dust develops. Are nanoparticles in the dust? If so, are they capable of being aspirated into the children’s lungs? Who is researching this? Rubber tires are designed for cars and trucks; they were never designed for grinding up and putting where children play. How does this fact affect some jurisdictions’ approvals for putting used tire crumb where children play?

4. Could this be another example of a toxic material getting out into the environment without enough testing?
Perhaps neuroscientist, Dr. Kathleen Michels summarized it best: “Carbon black is the proverbial 800-pound gorilla in the room that no one wants to talk about, or take notice of, but it has the potential to wreck everything in its path. First, It has been declared a possible carcinogen by the U.S. government and by the World Health Organization. Then, carbon black used in tires consists of the purest, smallest (ultrafine) nanoparticles, giving them a unique potential toxicity throughout the body.

“Normally this might not be a problem for any individual, since most of the carbon black is trapped inside a tire. However, when you pulverize tires for use in children’s playing fields, whether done at ambient or cold temperatures, everything in them (including carbon black particles) becomes more available to interact with the environment and people since the surface area to volume increases exponentially as you go from whole tire, to pulverized tire granule to the dust that becomes airborne with weathering and the impact of each child’s footfall and body. Finally, the sheer concentrated volume of this pulverized carbon black material should get serious attention: tires are 30 per cent or more carbon black so a 200-ton tire crumb-laden sports field contains around 60 tons of carbon black—an unprecedented exposure that deserves serious attention and research.

“But carbon black is not the only nanoparticle containing component of tires. Engineered nanoparticles such as carbon nanotubes, which may have asbestos-like toxicity, are also being added to tires. But how much and to which tires is difficult to determine. Which highlights a main problem with tire crumb: the recipe of any company’s tires is proprietary so we never know exactly what the ingredients are for any individual tire much less a bag of tire crumb (and even less the 30,000 or so tires in a sports field!).

“Some schools which have tire crumb on fields or playgrounds close to their classrooms report a fine grey dust on school surfaces inside when windows are open. Most artificial turf fields with tire crumb are still relatively young. There is no evidence yet of long-term harm from this unprecedented, often chronic, exposure of children to carbon black or other tire components from playing on tire crumb; but then again there are no studies on children exposed chronically to tire crumb over time. But there are worrying studies on exposure to carbon black particles in the air. Shouldn’t we be asking the questions and following up on the exposed children with research?”

Important: There are different types of nanoparticles made of different building blocks, and each type of nanoparticle can be unique in its actions and effects, and act differently in engineered products as well as in the body.

It is true that frequent exposure to nanoparticles from many consumer products means some nanoparticles are getting into us.

It is also true that cell studies suggest that some types of nanoparticles can damage the DNA or cause cell death in different parts of the body, such as the brain, the lungs or blood vessels.

The term “nanoparticle” is not intended to apply to all nanoparticles but, in this case, carbon black nanoparticles.
“People either have no idea about nanoparticles or do not regard them as a problem,” said Dr. Peter Gehr, professor of histology and anatomy at the University of Bern.

“The potential risks are also of little interest at the political level. People are simply not reacting to the possible harmful aspects of synthetic nanoparticles right now. The mere fact that particles penetrate into the body is a problem, but this is barely acknowledged outside the realms of science and government agencies.”

The aforementioned comments were based on research reports and articles from numerous health care organizations, research scientists, health care professionals and nanotechnology experts who represent a wide variety of non-biased and reputable sources. Because the subject matter is likely to stir interest and create some controversy, we have provided a partial list of numerous reference materials so readers can reach their own conclusion. — J. Novak

References

• “Study Says Carbon Nanotubes as Dangerous as Asbestos.” New research shows long, needle-thin carbon nanotubes could lead to lung cancer.
Scientific American
http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... ube-danger

• “Association of Black Carbon with Cognition among Children in a Prospective Birth Cohort Study.” Harvard School of Public Health published in American Journal of Epidemiology
http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/167/3/280.full

• “As Nanotech's Promise Grows, Will Puny Particles Present Big Health Problems?” Amid the great promise nanotechnology offers, big questions remain on health dangers posed by exposure to tissue-penetrating particles.
Scientific American
http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... thproblems

• “How dangerous are carbon nanoparticles?” Fraunhofer Institute for Toxicology and Experimental Medicine
http://www.item.fraunhofer.de/en/press- ... nblack.jsp

• “NIOSH Research Methods Demonstrate that Breathing Nanoparticles May Result in Damaging Health Effects.” National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2010-158/ ... ticles.pdf

[Mr Mwenda]

Training on one of these pitches tomorrow. Cheers lads!