To the Editor:
It’s certainly positive news that three federal agencies have announced they will work together to conduct a study on fields with infill made of recycled rubber. In the scientific community, additional research is always welcome. But on the same token, a substantial body of scientific data already exists and does not find any reason for health concerns associated with recycled rubber infill.
In fact, there are dozens of scientific studies from leading universities, toxicologists, and government agencies that conclude that there is not a connection between these fields and health concerns.
It is understandable for parents and community members to seek prudence and precaution when it comes to their children, but the discussion of potential health risks posed by recycled rubber should be informed by science.
The evidence most often cited by skeptics is a report from Connecticut-based Environment & Human Health, Inc. (EHHI), which purported to identify a number of carcinogens in recycled rubber, using particularly harsh extraction methods. This report, however, has not been peer-reviewed — a key measure of credibility among scientists — nor is there any published manuscript in circulation. As a toxicologist with nearly two decades of experience in human health risk assessment, it’s my belief that the EHHI report does not present strong scientific evidence to substantiate its claims.
The health departments in Connecticut and Massachusetts conducted their own evaluations and concluded that the available data do not provide evidence of possible health effects, so hopefully the upcoming federal study will finally provide closure on this issue for the general public.
Michael Peterson
The writer is a board-certified toxicologist at Gradient, an environmental and risk sciences consulting firm. He serves as scientific adviser to the Recycled Rubber Council.