Remember this exchange between Charlotte Stephenson and Dave Brumfield?
From: David Brumfield <dbrumfield@mtlebanon.org>
Date: May 3, 2014 5:06:53 PM EDT
To: Charlotte Stephenson
Cc: Commission <commission@mtlebanon.org>
Subject: Re: Studies
Date: May 3, 2014 5:06:53 PM EDT
To: Charlotte Stephenson
Cc: Commission <commission@mtlebanon.org>
Subject: Re: Studies
Ms. Stephenson,
Please find attached links to the studies I have mentioned to a few residents.
There are of course others, but I believe these are the only studies I referenced to residents or at meetings.
Additionally, though I do not believe I referenced them there are a number of studies that show turf is equal to or better than natural grass as to likelihood of athletic injury.
Dave Brumfield
Please find attached links to the studies I have mentioned to a few residents.
http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Newsroom/News-Releases/2008/CPSC-Staff-Finds-Synthetic-Turf-Fields-OK-to-Install-OK-to-Play-On/
http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.syntheticturfcouncil.org/resource/resmgr/docs/nysdec_study_on_leaching_off.pdf
http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.syntheticturfcouncil.org/resource/resmgr/docs/dr._johns-bainbridge_island_.pdf
Additionally, though I do not believe I referenced them there are a number of studies that show turf is equal to or better than natural grass as to likelihood of athletic injury.
Dave Brumfield
*********
I forwarded Dave Brumfield's links to Dr. Phil Johnson, one of the speakers from the April 30 Educational Forum on Turf, from which John Bendel left early.
Here is Dr. Johnson's response:
To: egillen476 <egillen476@aol.com>; dbrumfield <dbrumfield@mtlebanon.org>; stephensoncs ; commission <commission@mtlebanon.org>
Sent: Tue, Jun 3, 2014 10:10 AM
Subject: RE: Studies
I have reviewed each link provided below.
(The Manex Consulting study did not include direct access, however, only a press release.)
My main area of focus is limited to possible human exposures and health risk.
Regarding the EPA study, please note that EPA recently retracted its 2009 press release from the agency’s study.
Below are my summarized findings.
Sincerely,
Phil Johnson, PhD, MPH, MESc
Mt. Lebanon
Summarized findings:
(1) The studies collectively indicate (e.g., in their methods and limitations sections) that sampled fields and materials cannot be extrapolated. Findings cannot be extended beyond the particular study sites and used to reach broad conclusions with respect to other fields because these studies are not representative.
A variety of reasons contribute to this outcome, including:
a. Wide diversity of materials and ingredients in fields (studies are only specific to areas studied);
b. Diversity of construction;
c. Diversity and variability of real-world factors including ambient weatherizing (e.g., solar radiation) and wear conditions (e.g., physical activity patterns); and
d. Variation with respect to components monitored, sites sampled and samples taken.
In order to determine whether the proposed fields in Mt. Lebanon may pose a health risk to humans – and especially to our susceptible populations – decision makers and the community require (a) full and complete lists of ingredients and materials in the artificial fields (including fill and synthetic grass blades) and (b) full and complete lists of ingredients and materials to be used to maintain the artificial fields, including for example any pesticides, biocides or cleaning agents.
With this information in hand, the community and its leadership can begin a process to ascertain potential exposures and the possibility of associated adverse health effects to humans on and using the fields toward a deliberative decision-making process about whether to undertake an activity with the potential to harm public health.
Without this information, there is no way to characterize public health risk and make an informed decision because information will be incomplete, limited and subject to excess uncertainty.
Given this uncertainty, the health and well-being of our populations – including pregnant persons, infants, children, those with respiratory disease including asthma, those with allergies, those with neurodisabilities or disorders; those with cancer or surviving cancer; and those at risk of developing cancer – may be at risk.
(2) Overall, with respect to human exposures and ability to develop risk analysis, the studies collectively either report or do not mention significant methodological limitations, including:
a. As noted above, cannot extrapolate findings to other fields: the studies are acknowledged as non-representative.
b. Do not adequately quantify the potential for exposures to some susceptible human populations such as neonatal populations, persons with neurodevelopmental disorders and diseased populations;
c. Do not adequately simulate real-world exposure conditions – including sustained and diverse physical activity, as well as field disturbance (e.g., compression and degradation) under a range of conditions (e.g., field age, solar radiation) that may affect release of chemicals into the environment;
d. Do not consider multiple possible chemical exposures that field users would experience from the many possible chemical ingredients in the fields or used to maintain the fields;
e. Provide inadequate simulation of typical field use and condition factors in both core field and ambient air;
f. Do not adequately sample for worst-case exposures from newly installed fields;
g. Do not adequately address potential for chemical exposure synergies and interactive effects;
h. Do not adequately focus on possible chemicals (such as lead) in synthetic turf fibers/blades;
i. Focus only on one component of the field (such as infill crumbs), and within this subset are unable to consider diversity of such components among other fields;
j. Do not adequately consider chemicals and other materials used to maintain fields;
k. Use averaged threshold values to screen out reported measured chemical concentrations rather than full distributions including peaks – and therefore eliminate relevant data from further evaluation;
l. Have limited or no VOC and SVOC sampling;
m. Rely on air sampling techniques limited by variability of monitors, short duration sampling and staff activity interference; and
n. Recommend further study given limitations and inadequacies.
*********
I am trying a new way to share the podcast of the June 5, 2014 Sports Advisory Board Meeting.
I have also uploaded the podcast to Lebo Citizens and is available here. The SAB threw residents to the wolves during Citizen Comments. There were three residents who spoke. The first resident was told that there will be no more super secret Turf Project Task Force meetings. Their work is done. Dave Franklin said that they are at $245,000. The second resident had shared her followup research with the Parks Advisory Board, which the PAB liaison Dave Franklin chose not to share with the SAB. She tried to share her research with the SAB. She instead was met with hostility. What a group. The third resident was able to get the breakdown from Franklin. The $245,000 is made up of $125,000 pledged by the Sports Associations, $93,000 in cash, and $27,000 in corporate commitments with $5,000 of that $27,000 will be paid in December.
It was announced that there will be only Dr. Andrew McNitt with no mention of a toxicologist at the June 12 meeting. This is the PIO Press Release. Do you see the words "artificial turf" ANYWHERE in the press release or on the municipal website? Nope. Not there.
