In response to the Jan. 20 letter “South Portland turf debate misunderstands risks,” all built environments, such as sports fields, significantly affect health and should be assessed for safety, rather than being overlooked because they are considered “unnatural.” The sports fields where children play should not be made from toxic petrochemical plastics that can harm them.

Every few years, the artificial turf industry introduces a new “safer and better” version when research demonstrates the harms of its products. Then it claims there isn’t yet any research showing its latest product to be unsafe. However, there is already strong evidence that the production and use of plastics — including polypropylene in these proposed fields — significantly increases the risks of cancer, reproductive issues, heart attack and stroke.

Microplastics from these fields also enter our environment, creating lasting, negative impacts on human health. The specific company for South Portland also says that its product is PFAS-free. Still, we’ve seen the testing data. They are only testing for a few of the thousands of PFAS chemicals, and without a Total Organic Fluorine test, they can’t say their product is PFAS-free.

Even if some people aren’t worried about these long-term hazards, they should consider the other costs — financially and in increased serious injuries — that these products present. The NFL’s players union, among many others, wants to practice and play only on real grass, not plastic. Why should we risk the health of our children when even professionals say that we should steer clear for safety and performance reasons?

Sarah Woodbury
Freeport