|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Although a consultant hired by the Menlo Park City School District says the artificial turf playing fields at Hillview Middle School and Kelly Park pose only an insignificant risk of cancer, parents have asked for more study of the safety of the ground-up recycled tires used in the fields.
After hearing a report on Nov. 14 from the consultant hired to test the fields, school board members asked district administrators to get them more information.
The report by David Teter of Oakland’s Millennium Consulting Associates concluded that the additional cancer risk from exposure to substances found in samples of Hillview’s crumb rubber was less than one in a million and is “below the estimated additional cancer risk from playing soccer on urban and rural surface soils.”
A group called the Committee for Safe Fields for Menlo Park had another consulting firm review Mr. Teter’s report. Among the concerns was that the report did not test for a chemical called 1,3 butadiene, used in the manufacture of tires and a component of urban air pollution.
The Safe Fields group said the consultant also did not test for dangers to children from inhaling crumb rubber and the gases it releases. The crumb rubber is used as infill in artificial grass fields.
District officials plan to take these actions: talk with officials from neighboring jurisdictions, some of which have replaced the crumb rubber in their fields with materials such as cork; check in with the city of Menlo Park, which shares use and management of the Hillview field; and investigate the costs of testing for inhalation dangers from the fields.
“We want to know now … so we can take action,” said board member Terry Thgysen.
“We want your professional opinion – is this safe?” board member Joan Lambert asked district administrators. But Superintendent Erik Burmeister told the board that he is not an expert in determining the safety of the field materials. The experts hired by the district “have said nothing can be deemed safe,” he said.
“This is not going to be an empirical decision,” Superintendent Burmeister told the board. “I think it’s going to be a political decision.”
What the board does is also going to be a budget decision. The district heard from a second consultant, Devin Conway of Santa Clara’s Verde Design, who said the cost to replace the crumb rubber with another substance is between $250,000 to $375,000.
Completely replacing the field would cost $750,000 to $850,000. The field is expected to last at least eight more years before it needs replacement, he said.
Later in the meeting, the board did agree to set aside a little more than $59,000 from one-time state funds toward a future replacement of the playing field. However, replacing the crumb rubber or the field earlier than planned may mean cutting some other program to pay for it.
“I feel like we need to have a conversation about how important this is compared to some of these other” budget priorities, board member Caroline Lucas said.
The district had asked for the testing after receiving a San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury report about the possible health dangers of artificial turf playing fields. The city of Menlo Park joined in, hiring a consultant to test both the Hillview field, which the city manages during non-school hours, and its artificial turf field at Kelly Park.
The school district also joined in a state study of the safety of crumb rubber, but the results of that study may not be released for several years.
In a letter sent to the Menlo Park City Council as well as the school district, the Safe Fields group wrote that as air quality becomes worse with development and changes in the climate, it is important to try to “improve the air quality our children breathe, especially when inhaling large amounts of that air while exercising on sports fields. One step in that direction is removing the hazardous waste, also known as shredded recycled tires, from the fields on which our children play.”
Mr. Teter said that he believes the most significant dangers from artificial turf fields are not from the chemicals used to make them. He said his own child often uses the fields and what he worries about is head injuries and things such as the discarded needle his child once came in contact with on a field.
The Hillview and Kelly Park fields are relatively safe for head injuries, he said, because they both use good quality shock pads below the turf.
—
Redwood City attorney sues ‘First Amendment auditors’ after Menlo Park disputeApril 2, 2026 11:31 am
When assessing risk, there is a reflexive response by some to zero in on risk events which have the potential to cause serious harm even if that risk event is exceptionally unlikely to occur. And it is okay to want to mitigate these risks. That is not necessarily a bad thing. As parents, our hardwired protection mechanisms compel us to act. However, we need to be practical and — the hard part, objective — in our response to risk events, and consider both the severity of the potential harm in relation to the probability.
From the perspective of exposure, from a toxicology perspective, there is no cause for concern. If you still feel compelled to reduce harm, then don’t focus on your kids, focus on the people who manufacture the artificial field materials. People at the factory who handle it, touch it, breath it, when all of the volatile gases are off-gassing at peak-rates. Worry about the people who ship it, who install it, who are on their hands and knees cutting in and working with it while it is still new. Worry about the workers standing next to the machine that is pulverizing old tires to form the rubber filler material, all-day, every day. The relative exposures for these workers are millions of times higher that what kids playing on the field will experience. The fact that there is no health/cancer crisis for these manufactures/installers should give you peace of mind. If you are still concerned, good news, you’re in luck. There are many things you can do at home, both quick, easy, and cheap, to lower your child’s overall cancer risk by similar amount to the case where they never stepped foot on that field again — like skipping that trip to Hawaii to avoid the extra exposure to background radiation during flight. Or, to avoid exposure to background chemicals, never let your child ride in a new car, spend time in a newly build house, sit on a new couch, sleep on a new mattress, sit near a campfire, or spend time in a newly painted room. All of these events pose, more-or-less, the same risk-weighted threat to their health than this issue at Hillview.
Let’s test the field when it’s 95 degrees out and the fumes can be seen coming up from the field made of tires! Our kids are panting out there breathing it all in, too – as we all are on the sidelines….it cannot be healthy….no way. Sad, because Hillview’s field is beautiful and a part of a great school and the kids are so lucky to have space like that, but if it’s a health risk, something has to be done.
There is a strong case for erring on the side of caution with this. The main source of concern is the abnormally high incidence of cancer among goal keepers (who are more likely to get their faces in the ground) playing on artificial turf. From Oxford University Press:
https://blog.oup.com/2017/01/artificial-turf-cancer-risk/
Science takes a long time to adjudicate questions like this. Think of DDT, asbestos, even smoking. A determination that the field is “safe” just means scientific studies have not yet demonstrated that they are dangerous. Science takes many years answer questions like this: think of grant writing, designing appropriate studies, peer review, conflicting studies, and the emergence of an academic consensus. Even if the soccer fields are carcinogenic, we won’t know definitively for perhaps a decade.
In the meantime, we are asking our children to roll around daily on recycled tire fragments that contain numerous toxic substances. If/when science ultimately demonstrates that these fields are carcinogenic, a few hundred thousand dollars in replacement costs will seem trivial compared to the personal and healthcare costs.
Recommendations for individuals from the new EHHI Report, Synthetic Turf: Industry’s Claims Versus the Science (http://www.ehhi.org/artificial-turf.php) –
Individuals should work with their school PTAs and school boards to educate schools about the dangers of synthetic turf fields with crumb rubber. Parents should do more to support and recommend the installation of natural grass fields.
If a school, nursery school, or town has a playground with rubber tire mulch as its surfacing material, keep your young child off that playground.
Encourage the school to remove the rubber mulch and replace it with sand or wood chips.
Do not use a synthetic turf field in the heat because it gets too hot to be safe to use. In addition, the heat causes the toxins in the fields to outgas at a greater rate, which increases chemical exposures.
If your school already has a synthetic turf field with crumb rubber installed, you should insist that the school place recommendations for using the field where they can be easily seen by those who play on the fields. The following recom mendations should be posted:
Shower after using the field. If you cannot shower, wash your hands, face, and any open skin areas.
Wash your clothes, making sure there are no crumb rubber particles in your socks, pants, or other articles of clothing.
Be careful not to bring crumb rubber particles into the school building.
Always wear shoes on artificial turf.
Clean any cuts or abrasions immediately.
Brush your hair thoroughly after play.
This is utterly absurd. These people need to find something productive to do with their time.
Watch the District end up wasting a ton of money replacing the field unnecessarily, and then come crying to taxpayers for yet another bond measure to cover a deficit. They should be mindful that the plea could be met by a much less willing community, given that the federal deduction may soon disappear.
Artificial turf fields have a life expectancy of about 10 years before they need to be replaced. There are organic materials (cork and/or the ground shell of the coconut) that can be used in lieu of ground rubber infills.
Might I suggest that given the initial high cost of installation of the field that we plan now for its replacement and use of safer materials for the next iteration of the field?
The current risk is extremely low. When coupled with the post-field use precautions mentioned by Ms. Taylor, this is a reasonable approach until the end-of-life for the field.
Steve Taffee
WIllows
@ but when it’s HOT?,
Multiple separate gas sampling studies have been performed from different fields. The consensus finding is that if off-gases are present, they are below detectable limits. Modern gas analyzers are exceptionally sensitive with detection limits many orders of magnitude greater than what is required to measure gases with concentrations high enough to be detectable by eye. The visualized fumes are not coming from the rubber filler material or the field. A 95 F day will not materially effect this.
No Way! I’m going to pick up my participation ribbons and move on. Certainly not going to play outside on a field like, only natural organic grass for me!! , timmy
An organic soccer field! Wow this one’s a doozy — Even for the overprotective shelter parents of the South Bay.
While we’re at it, let’s also push for “natural nylon” uniforms, maybe Lulu Lemon can do the custom tailoring. Substandard synthetic materials can have devastating effects on kids, such as increased sweating during physical activity.
And of course the soccer balls are very dangerous especially when kicked. Let’s use organic recycled sponges instead, but only ones that were used to clean composted materials.
Meanwhile our kids need more books and better teachers….
We pushed the community at the time this field was installed to use grass. It is cheaper and better especially since we live in an area that does not suffer from extreme weather issues. This turf field is ridiculously expensive and will become another large contribution to landfill in a short time. Why we choose to leave perfectly good natural options for expensive toxic options remains a mystery to me.
Turf crumb rubber is black and absorbs heat; the temperature above the field can be 30 F higher than a grass field. I played on the Palo Alto Mayfield turf field for many years, including many mid-day games. My experience is that on hot days there was a strong odor from the turf.
https://www.health.ny.gov/environmental/outdoors/synthetic_turf/crumb-rubber_infilled/fact_sheet.htm
First everybody (including the parents) all wanted to have that Man-Made “ARTIFICIAL” turf, well knowing that it was made of “recycled materials”.
And now suddenly they claim ignorance over what that term actually implies?
As soon as they have replaced that 1 Million Dollar expensive field (payed for by taxpayers who had no say and do not even get to use it) with natural turf, there will be lawsuits as children roll an ankle on the naturally uneven field….. and then we go round again!?
Mentality of people who need to remodel their home every 5 years and have no problem suing their neighbors over window dressings.
Lovely!
For those interested in facts:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5615587/
https://blog.oup.com/2017/01/artificial-turf-cancer-risk/
Peter:
None of these people are interested in facts. They’re interested in what they believe are “facts”.
Bottom line; they want to believe what they think. Facts be damned.
“In this investigation, we found no evidence that playing matches or training on AT raises the risk of soccer players sustaining injury. In fact, the evidence suggests that the risk of some injuries and some subgroups might be lowered. However, until more is known about how issues such as altered playing styles affect injury incidence, it is difficult to make firm conclusions regarding the direct and indirect roles of AT in player safety.”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4590909/
Same people whining about the poisonous fields are most likely the same people that are ok with the expansion and growth of business and traffic in MP.
Same people that think it’s too dangerous for the kids to play on a muddy field cause they’ll slip- or they’ll muddy up moms new Lexus.
Study says it’s safe– what are you going to do?? Let’s go fight chemtrails, men in black, big foot and find the magic JFK bullet.