|
Post by allthingsoccer on Jan 27, 2017 14:28:10 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by SoccerMom on Jan 27, 2017 14:49:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by footy on Jan 27, 2017 15:53:54 GMT -5
Thank you both for sharing these documents. I found the conclusion of the Washington report reassuring: "Using Coach Griffin’s list to identify soccer players with cancer, this investigation found less cancer among the soccer players than expected based on rates of cancer among Washington residents of the same ages. This finding does not suggest that soccer players, select and premier soccer players, or goalkeepers in Washington are at increased risk for cancer compared to the general population. In addition, the currently available research on the health effects of artificial turf does not suggest that artificial turf presents a significant public health risk. Assurances of the safety of artificial turf, however, are limited by lack of adequate information on potential toxicity and exposure." The other thing that I find reassuring (as a keeper's mom who is in some denial about possible turf dangers) is that there does not seem to be an increase in cancer among football players, and it seems they spend just as much if not more time in artificial turf as soccer players do. That all being said, my son hates playing on turf and I would hope that programs use natural grass or at least organic products as much as possible in the future!
|
|
|
Post by soccerfan30 on Jan 27, 2017 22:20:27 GMT -5
I've read a number of reports about this topic over the last few years and I have some difficulty making the connection between the two. How come we never hear about the connection of turf fields and football players? Their exposure and risk would be significantly higher as they are on the ground more often than soccer players, I'm sure they accidentally inhale those rubber pellets and it gets in their nose and ears.
Really not trying to be cynical but just asking an honest question.
|
|