According to the CDC:
Taking too much zinc into the body through food, water, or dietary supplements can also affect health. The levels of zinc that produce adverse health effects are much higher than the Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDAs) for zinc of 11 mg/day for men and 8 mg/day for women. If large doses of zinc (10-15 times higher than the RDA) are taken by mouth even for a short time, stomach cramps, nausea, and vomiting may occur. Ingesting high levels of zinc for several months may cause anemia, damage the pancreas, and decrease levels of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol.
Eating food containing very large amounts of zinc (1,000 times higher than the RDA) for several months caused many health effects in rats, mice, and ferrets, including anemia and injury to the pancreas and kidney. Rats that ate very large amounts of zinc became infertile. Rats that ate very large amounts of zinc after becoming pregnant had smaller babies. Putting low levels of certain zinc compounds, such as zinc acetate and zinc chloride, on the skin of rabbits, guinea pigs, and mice caused skin irritation. Skin irritation from exposure to these chemicals would probably occur in humans. EPA has determined that because of lack of information, zinc is not classifiable as to its human carcinogenicity.
- Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
4770 Buford Hwy NE
Atlanta, GA 30341 - 800-CDC-INFO
(800-232-4636)
TTY: (888) 232-6348 - New Hours of Operation
8am-8pm ET/Monday-Friday
Closed Holidays
Contact CDC-INFO
Mr. Turfstein, I am looking forward to a video of Dave Brumfield next. Thank you for sharing this.
Link to the YouTube video
33 comments:
WOW!
How much zinc can a person absorb from 60 minutes on a field? Without an answer to that what you posted is meaningless. I'm sure it's extremely minor though. I'm also sure you never gave a second's thought to carrying around a bunch of pennies all your life.
Of course, Ms. Linfante meant the amount of zinc one absorbs from minor sources like consumer products is not harmful. So -1 on her for not supplying you the proper context. But you choose to interpret what she said in the most exaggerated possible context. So -10 on you.
The funny thing is, I thought conservatives hated the EPA and you laughed at the hippies quoting CDC, and now here you are doing it.
http://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/Zinc-HealthProfessional/
Anon 9:57
Me thinks that if Linfante admits elevated zinc levels from the runoff of this field are harmful to fish then your ears should perk up.
Of course, if you could point to a study that says the artificial turf and crumb rubber contain no known carcinogens (ie materials that are KNOWN to cause certain types of cancer) then you should take over this blog right now.
Fact is there is no Material Safety Data Sheet that comes along with grass seed. There are reams of MSDS when it comes to artificial turf.
It is a complete misnomer to think Conservatives are anti-environment or anti-EPA. How the hell else are we going to be sure the deer we kill and eat won't have too much zinc in them?
It's the over reach of the EPA that gets most of us.
Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry:
This public health statement tells you about zinc and the effects of exposure to it. Zinc is an essential element needed by your body and is commonly found in nutritional supplements. However, taking too much zinc into the body can affect your health.
If you are exposed to zinc, many factors will determine whether you will be harmed. These factors include the dose (how much), the duration (how long), and how you come in contact with it. You must also consider any other chemicals you are exposed to and your age, sex, diet, family traits, lifestyle, and state of health.
Children living near waste sites containing zinc are likely to be exposed to higher environmental levels of zinc through breathing, drinking contaminated drinking water, touching soil, and eating contaminated soil. It is unlikely that a child would ingest enough zinc from eating soil to cause harmful effects. However, parents should supervise to see that children avoid eating soil and wash their hands frequently, especially before eating. Parents should consult their family physicians about whether (and how) hand-to-mouth behaviors in their children might be discouraged.
Children and adults require a certain amount of zinc in the diet in order to remain healthy. However, overuse of some medicines or vitamin supplements containing zinc might be harmful; these medicines should always be used appropriately. If you are accidentally exposed to large amounts of zinc, consult a physician immediately.
To protect workers, OSHA has set an average legal limit of 1 mg/m� for zinc chloride fumes and 5 mg/m� for zinc oxide (dusts and fumes) in workplace air during an 8 hour workday, 40 hour work week. This regulation means that the workroom air should contain no more than an average of 1 mg/m� of zinc chloride over an 8 hour working shift of a 40 hour work week. NIOSH similarly recommends that the level of zinc oxide in workplace air should not exceed an average of 1 mg/m� over a 10 hour period of a 40 hour work week.
Certainly our Commissioners have reviewed all of this scientific data and performed a detailed analysis as well as researched the off-gassing content of toxic substances under various temperate scenarios - right?
I feel much better, how 'bout you?!
957: you're a special kind of stupid. The EPA was founded under the administration of thar flaming liberal Richard Nixon.
I attended the hearing. Linfante's response was to a question about the turf.
Since you fancy yourself an expert, exactly how much zinc do you think is healthy?
"Putting low levels of certain zinc compounds, such as zinc acetate and zinc chloride, on the skin of rabbits, guinea pigs, and mice caused skin irritation. Skin irritation from exposure to these chemicals would probably occur in humans. " what's your spin on this 9:57?
I actually am less concerned about what Commissioner Linfante said specifically about zinc than some other the other factors related to her statement.
First, the original plan for this turf DID NOT INCLUDE THE FILTER. The pro-turf commissioners and municipal engineer were not concerned about the filtration system. They were forced to add the filtration system via the permit.
Second, she states that the EPA "has given the all clear on the specific product we have chosen and everything it contains". But that is not true either... the EPA has said that synthetic turf warrants further study. The EPA doesn't monitor what is going into this turf and this product is not regulated for child-use.
Third, she states that the filtration system will be necessary but "not because the water will be contaminated with toxins". However, that is exactly why the filtration system is going to be used. The Zinc is toxic to aquatic life. Further, the filtration system will not help with mitigating the impact of other toxins in the run-off. Zinc is just the "low hanging fruit" . The impact of the other toxins on the watershed warrants additional scrutiny.
Doesn't anyone in this town have any common sense? Elaine is keeping all of us informed about all of the toxic chemicals in crumb rubber turf. The whole mess should have gone to a referendum!!! Nobody has the right to decide for other parents whether or not their child is exposed to chemicals on a public ball field. If the 3 nincompoop comissioners and the sports cabal want their kids playing on turf, then move somewhere else. The public has a right to a healthy playing field!
11:37 I think you mean 4 nincompoops.
11:37: You're right! 4 nincompoops!
To 10:33 - Grass does have an MSDS. In fact olive oil has an MSDS. There is hardly a product in this country that doesn't come with an MSDS. The recommended personal protective equipment for handling olive oil include the wearing of chemical safety googles and that a respiratory protection program be put in place in certain conditions. Olive oil! Who knew the dangers. I need to get a hazmat suit for the kitchen! https://www.fishersci.ca/viewmsds.do?catNo=AC416540250
Let’s talk about zinc leaching from the field, shall we?
Zinc in small amounts is obviously not toxic. Remember the Centrum multivitamin tagline, “From A to Cyanide?” Sorry, that’s “From A to Zinc,” as zinc is a mineral humans require.
And too much zinc is obviously a bad thing. Zinc toxicity seems to begin at ingestion of 225 mg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zinc_toxicity).
So let’s do the math. The City of San Francisco’s Department of the Environment posted a paper about zinc and turf:
Zinc is a necessary human nutrient that has relatively low toxicity to humans but is more toxic to aquatic life. A recent study for the Norwegian government used data from laboratory measurements of zinc leachate from artificial turf fibers and rubber infill to calculate total zinc leached from a hypothetical turf pitch. A measured leachate concentration of 3290 ppb lead to a prediction of 18.95 grams of zinc leached per year, assuming a field of 7,200 m2 and annual rainfall of 800 mm (31.5 inches). The authors concluded that “the concentration of zinc poses a significant local risk of environmental effects in surface water which receives runoff from artificial turf pitches.”
http://sfrecpark.org/wp-content/uploads/rptsyntheticturftesting1007.pdf
Ok. So a 7,200 square meter field leaches 18.95 grams of zinc per year presuming a 31.5 inch yearly rainfall (Pittsburgh gets 38.2 inches per year). For the sake of simplicity, let’s assume the field leaches zinc at a consistent rate. Let’s determine the runoff zinc concentration in gallons, since we’re Americans damnit and these colors don’t bleed.
800 mm = 0.8 m
0.8m * 7,200m2 = 5,760m3
5,760m3 = 1,521,630 gallons of annual rainfall on the field
18.95 grams = 18950 mg
18950 mg / 1,521,630 gallons = 0.01245375 mg per gallon
And so, to reach human toxicity at 225 mg, a Mt Lebanon twerp would need to ingest 18,066.85 gallons of turf leachate (225mg / 0.01245375 mg/gal). I hope Madison and Tyler are thirsty!
So, it would appear that you and your community again are more interested in engaging in petty tiffs than actually sticking to important topics. You’re more interested in getting a win over Evil Linfante than you are in accurately making a case. And there is a case to be made here! It’s just you smelled red meat on a pedantic matter when you thought that your nemesis misspoke. It’s pathetic.
Stick to the important issues. Why even address zinc (which the filter will presumably handle for wildlife) when the field will leach lead? Why perpetuate cattiness when there is a substantive case to be made?
To the 11:37PM poster. Nobody is deciding "for other parents whether or not their child is exposed to chemicals on a public ball field." You have still retained the right to determine whether or not your child plays on these fields. If you don't want your child to play on turf, that's your choice and no one is going to stop you from making that decision.
Sign them up for activities that don't involve the turf fields. There are plenty; baseball/softball, swimming, track (though it is near the HS turf), martial arts, rowing. The list goes on and on. There are plenty of choices for our youth that don't involve potential exposure to turf fields.
However, if you claim that they should be allowed to play soccer and not be exposed to turf, I can understand that argument to a degree. But you also then need to consider what happens if they really enjoy soccer and happen to be skilled enough to play after grade school. At that point their exposure to turf after grade school is completely unavoidable if they wish to compete.
Under the scenario that exposure to turf is unavoidable in future years - and I felt it unhealthy as a parent - I would be seeking for my children activities that would the exposure (now and future) and choose instead from a myriad of activities that are available for exercise, companionship, teamwork and fun that do not involve turd. Avoid those activities that could involve situations or circumstances you do not believe are right or proper for your child. Parents make these types of choices all the time for their children. This is just another of them.
You might disagree with me, which is your right and which is fine. But I do think that whether you are a person who agrees or disagrees with the decision of the commissioners, you should agree that they have done nothing illegal as commissioners from what I can see.
If you don't like what they have done, you can complain - which you are doing - and if you think it has risen to the level of illegality, I suggest bringing it up with the Attorney General (or some other type of investigative body that handles these matters).
But I guess my point is that you have choices at this point. You can:
1. Bring legal action to stop the construction.
2. Bring legal action against the commission if they followed an process not permitted.
3. Decide not to have your child pursue activities that utilize the fields
4. Vote out-of-office (or help) those commissioners you think should be removed.
Choices....we all have choices.
8:28--
You are leaving out one of the obvious points of this whole debate. The commission willingly (and I would argue underhandedly) decided to spend tax dollars on something that isn't a necessity but rather a wish list for their friends. Your entire statement supports that. "Parents make these types of choices all the time for their children. This is just another of them." Exactly. Just like parents make the choice to allow their kids to play multiple sports. It's all a choice, not a mandate and not a necessity.
If the sports daddys want to push junior toward some fantasy of a sports scholarship, fine. But don't do it on my dime. That's the point. Why should the MAJORITY of parents in Mt. Lebanon have to make a choice based on the wishes of just a select few?
And yes, as you concluded, we all have choices. As a parent, you have the choice to tell your child "No". In fact, you have a responsibility to do so lest you abdicate your authority as a parent and set unrealistic expectations for your child. I have a choice to oppose wasteful spending and point it out to others in the community.
It's unfortunate that you have enough ability to write a salient comment but not enough conviction to sign your name.
740
I read your MSDS on olive oil. Are you kidding me with your crap? Obviously you think you can poke fun because you haven't read any of the MSDS for the turf. Educate yourself before you become so flippant about these kinds of exposures.
The MSDS for crumb rubber says Chronic exposure cause skin cancer in mice. Evidence suggests that exposure to ground rubber may aggravate dermatitis. Some rubbers contain intros amines which have been shown to be carcinogenic to animals in the laboratory.
Under the section "Carcinogenicity" the box is marked "Yes".
The MSDS lists Carbon black, talc, zinc oxide, and sulphur chemicals found in the material.
Olive oil my ass.
It's clear that Linfante the Narcissist is only riding out the remainder of her term to keep up with appearances. Behind the curtains I suspect an overwhelming abundance of fear, self-pity and frustration- not in having to live with the harmful decisions she's made for the community- but in knowing that a growing number of constituents think she's a pretty terrible person. I bet it's getting pretty difficult for her to continue to put on her face each day. And when the point is reached that it's simply too hard? Well, I'd say that'll be when she abruptly skips town for good.
8:28 AM sure sounds like another commissioner who "doesn't read the blog."
Same with the olive oil comment, yet another commissioner.
In another post, I am getting personal attacks. Attack all you want. I'm flattered that you think I am such a threat. The focus is all on the commissioners. We're coming up on November sweeps. The commissioners are doing their part to contribute to ratings with their asinine comments. It's all about Brumfield, Linfante, Silverman and Bendel. They're the decision makers. They are the ones who are responsible for this mess.
Elaine
From musician to a toxicologist or scientist. I guess President Linfante is very full of herself.
Is it not true that the 16,000mg/Kg level of zinc in the crumb rubber infill is well over the California Title 22 TTLC regulatory limit of 5000mg/Kg? Isn't that proof that it is hazardous waste going into Pennsylvania waters requiring regulation?
Source: "MSDS and Metals Testing Request" at
http://mtlebanon.org/DocumentCenter/View/10364
2:24 pm She's very full of what are commonly referred to as road apples.
8:28: The ball fields are public. Any and all children in this wealthy community have a right to be able to play on fields that do not expose them to toxic chemicals. Period. As to the way this came about, I believe that decisions that were made were pernicious. Too many back door decisions, ethics violations, public intimidation, and secrecy. A big waste of taxpayer money.
You summed it up well 7:42.
Nick M.
8:28 errs in stating that you can sign your kids up for baseball/softball and avoid artificial turf.
That shows how little attention they're paying.
Wildcat Middle infield ball diamonds are being turf in a dirt color and they will have at least one removable pitcher's mound.
8:28 AM, of all people, should be paying the most attention.
You're correct, 12:05 AM. I completely missed that. The entire field will be turfed. When the players start sliding into bases, they are going to get infill in their eyes and mouths.
Elaine
The public, especially the parents and young players need to decide, need to evaluate for themselves -- are these commissioners— deceivers, liars, or thieves. Could they be all three?
8:28, following Brumfield's flawed argument, writes: "Nobody is deciding "for other parents whether or not their child is exposed to chemicals on a public ball field." You have still retained the right to determine whether or not your child plays on these fields. If you don't want your child to play on turf, that's your choice and no one is going to stop you from making that decision."
Yes, they are correct, no one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to sign your kid up to play a sport on turf.
But if you want your kid to play a field sport in MTL they have taken away any opportunity to enroll your kid in a non-turfef field sport.
Currently, all baseball and softball fields in MTL are natural grass. Once WCM is turfed, that won't be true.
So Brumfield and friends are forcing parents to make a choice!
It is now limited to 'do I enroll my kid in a turfed field sport or do I keep them off the fields!'
They've taken away any oppprtunity to avoid it.
I for one, never voted to give the commissioners that much power over my kids extracurricular activities or health!!! Did you?
Just an FYI, three very important meetings are scheduled this week.
Monday, November 3, 2014 First Budget Review 6:30 p.m., Mt. Lebanon Municipal Building
Tuesday, November 4, 2014 Second Budget Review 7:00 p.m., Mt. Lebanon Municipal Building
Thursday, November 6, 2014 Sports Advisory Board Meeting 8 p.m., Meeting Room C, Mt. Lebanon Municipal Building
Elaine
How come Feller's Budget document appeared very briefly ibn a post on Lebomag.com then was yanked almost immediately?
It was about the same time as the protest at Wildcat was going viral on Lebocitizens.
Turns out Feller's budget preview wasn't yanked but immediately buried under a slew of new post.
It is there but buried about five pages in. You'd think it would be top of the page since budget discussions this week.
One question is how does the Rec Dept show a profit of $157,000 when the pool improvements went way over budget and the turf project isn't $750,000-$900,000 as first proposed, but is now $1.05 million?
How does it happen that a public official manipulates other officials to deliberately set up and make decisions and contract to increase toxic chemicals in a public, municipal park which in the end result, expose any child in the municipality to increased levels of lead exposure, and cause multiple health complications including respiratory, different kinds of cancers now, and years down the road? This are civil rights environmental violations, as well as unethical municipal and ethics violations. No sports groups should have to be bribed for money in order to participate because of some corrupt municipal commissioners!!
Did any commissioner's name get posted as a donor to CANCER for KIDS?
4:45 I hear you. It reminds me of the days I spent "canning" for PSU's THON in which all of the money goes to pediatric cancer; it's the largest student run philanthropy in the county.
Perhaps, the pro-turf folks could make some substantial donations this year. Or maybe Gateway? Or maybe Matt Smith? Or maybe Fieldturf? Or...
Correction: country not county @5:38
Post a Comment