\u201cThe actual situation is not that bad, but we want to guarantee that these lower levels will be ensured for the future\u201d \u2014 Martijn Beekman, Dutch researcher<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n \u201cMy son was playing on these \u2026 pitches three or four times a week,\u201d Nigel Maguire said. \u201cHe was very into his football, and the thought that possibly it was the football that was his demise, kind of makes you think, We need to get to the bottom of this.\u201d<\/p>\n Its those kinds of worries that are driving lawmakers to take a closer look at the possible dangers of recycled rubber \u2014 even though several scientific studies have indicated theres no risk to health.<\/p>\n Scientific committees in the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) are debating a proposal<\/a> presented last week by the Netherlands to lower the allowed limits for these chemicals.<\/p>\n An earlier study<\/a> by a Dutch consultancy found that the levels of chemicals present in the rubber pellets are safe.<\/p>\n But that came under renewed scrutiny in a 2016 documentary on Dutch television. The Zembla investigative program found<\/a> that the study, commissioned in part by the rubber industry in 2006, took less than three hours to perform and involved just seven players. A toxicologist told the broadcasters that he \u201cwould not play in those fields, because we cannot adequately assess the risks.\u201d<\/p>\n Artificial football pitches are prevalent in Europe, from Manchester in the west to Moscow, pictured, in the east | Kirill Kudryavtsev\/AFP via Getty Images<\/p>\n The findings set off a wave of public concern, eventually prompting an inquiry by RIVM, the Dutch national research institute for health and the environment. Football clubs began taking precautionary measures, banning the rubber pellets on pitches, and later that year the European Commission asked ECHA to also assess the safety of rubber turf.<\/p>\n But those follow-up studies by RIVM and ECHA both once again found football pitches to be safe.<\/p>\n ECHAs studies looked at several hundred samples of rubber pellets, taken from different countries, to measure the concentrations of dangerous substances. It analyzed the risk from those concentrations against different scenarios of exposure, for football players as well as workers and spectators who come into contact with the rubber pellets.<\/p>\n \u201cThere is, at most, a very low level of concern,\u201d ECHAs conclusions read,<\/a> and it found the risk to be \u201cnegligible\u201d or nonexistent for most substances.<\/p>\n For one group of potentially carcinogenic chemicals, called polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), it found concern for cancer to be \u201cvery low\u201d even for worst-case scenarios \u2014 such as professional players who practice five times a week for four hours a day, and young goalkeepers who touch the ground more often.<\/p>\n \u201cTheres today still no evidence for health risk when using end-of-life tires, but theres a need to reassure, because the emotional impact is so high\u201d \u2014 Fazilet Cinaralp, rubber association chief<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n However, the agency did highlight a potential risk with the eight PAHs it analyzed. Although 99 percent of the samples taken didnt exceed 21 milligrams per kilogram, which is considered a safe level, the concentration of PAHs legally allowed in football pitches is much higher, set at either 100 mg\/kg or 1,000 mg\/kg depending on the individual chemical.<\/p>\n The agency suggested the Commission and countries consider lowering those limits to prevent any potential harm.<\/p>\n Last weeks proposal by the Netherlands would do just that. It recommends setting the limit for the eight substances at 17 mg\/kg, which 95 percent of the samples examined in the proposal complied with.<\/p>\n \u201cThe actual situation is not that bad, but we want to guarantee that these lower levels will be ensured for the future,\u201d said Martijn Beekman, who was responsible for the proposal at RIVM. \u201cIts really a preventative measure.\u201d<\/p>\n Another reason for the proposal is to set the publics mind at ease.<\/p>\n \u201cI think the measure makes sense,\u201d Fazilet Cinaralp, the secretary-general of the European tire and rubber manufacturers association ETRMA, said. \u201cTheres today still no evidence for health risk when using end-of-life tires, but theres a need to reassure, because the emotional impact is so high.\u201d<\/p>\n But the question is if peace of mind justifies the cost.<\/p>\n \u201cIts always a difficult debate,\u201d Beekman said. \u201cYoure talking about many euros, millions of euros, and then about health gains and environmental gains. Its very difficult to compare these things.\u201d<\/p>\n According to critics of the artificial surfaces, goalkeepers are the most vulnerable to potential dangers of rubber pellets | Jan Kruger\/Getty Images<\/p>\n Lowering the limit to 17 mg\/kg would cost up to \u20ac70 million over 10 years, and avoid a maximum of two cancer cases. An even more stringent restriction to set the limit at 6.5 mg\/kg would cost \u20ac3.1 billion, with a maximum of 12 cancer cases avoided, the RIVM estimated. Setting the PAH limit that low would effectively mean discontinuing the use of scrapped tires for artificial turf \u2014 only 14 percent of the samples in ECHAs study were below that level.<\/p>\n The proposal recommends the first option, calling the potential costs \u201crelatively limited and affordable.\u201d The proposal is now with ECHAs socioeconomic and risk assessment committees, which will evaluate it and give their opinions next year.<\/p>\n \u201cWe prepared the proposal and fully support the proposal,\u201d Beekman said. \u201cIts finally up to SEAC [ECHAs socioeconomic committee] to debate what is proportional.\u201d<\/p>\n A member of SEAC, weighing in on the proposal, said the second option would mean \u201cthe end of the market for rubber granules in artificial turf.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cIm not satisfied that there is the research that its safe\u201d \u2014 Nigel Maguire, former executive in the U.K. NHS<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n \u201cOf course every cancer case is one too many,\u201d the member said, speaking on condition of anonymity. \u201cBut if you compare two to 12 [cancer cases], and look at the monetized impact and keep in mind that the assessment they did is looking at realistic worst-case scenarios \u2026 [the second option] is not really proportional.\u201d<\/p>\n The committee member said that nevertheless, the discussion about acceptable risk will be \u201cvery difficult,\u201d and comes down to the question: \u201cWhat can we accept as a society and what not?\u201d<\/p>\n Despite the doubts over the cost-effectiveness of more rigorous measures, Maguire wants stricter regulations. Hes still not convinced theres been enough research on the type of long-term exposure that his son experienced.<\/p>\n \u201cIm not satisfied that there is the research that its safe,\u201d he said. \u201cAnd Heaven forbid in 10-20 years time, when theres more epidemiological research that suggests there might be a link, that we should have not taken the precautionary [approach].\u201d<\/p>\n Original Article<\/a><\/p>\n [contf] How much should society spend to save a life?<\/p>\n Thats the issue facing EU and national regulators as ..<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":90474,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[48],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-90472","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-health"],"yoast_head":"\nTurf wars<\/h3>\n
![](\"https:\/\/www.politico.eu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/GettyImages-900020074-714x476.jpg\"\/)
<\/p>\n\n
The affordable option<\/h3>\n
![](\"https:\/\/www.politico.eu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/GettyImages-998018190-714x476.jpg\"\/)
<\/p>\n\n
Read this next: Britains new (Romanian) working class<\/a><\/em><\/h2>\n
\n[contfnew]
\n <\/p>\n
<\/a><\/h5>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"