Natural protesters

Children chanting "No turf, no turf" and toting picket signs adorned with ladybugs and bumblebees helped their parents protest Thursday afternoon against plans to install synthetic turf at Heather Elementary ...

[Dean G]

Mr. Abramson,
Rather than retread an old story and interviewing the most recent obviously biased indivisuals on both sides, how about doing a little research and interview several peninsula or south bay cities that have had turf for a number of years and let the empirical evidence of the injuries or medical problems do the talking? The quotes from these children is usurious and self serving for their obviously biased parents. Maybe you could actuaually look for an independent study that supports or refutes the claims of "respiratory problems or developmental defects?"
Is a little work to balance the article too much to ask? Or were you absent that day in communications school?

[bssplitter]

Dean is right. The writer of this article pretty much allowed himself to be used by some obviously disreputable parents who provided zero evidence to back up their claims and then brainwashed and rehearsed their children to speak to a reporter. No mention that the current Heather field is a gopher holed disgrace nor any mention that the reason little Luke has to play lacrosse in RWC on an articial grass field is that paranoid nimbys like his mother have prevented new fields, artificial or natural from being built in San Carlos resulting in a terrible shortage of playfield space versus demand in the town.
It says a lot about San Carlos that their children have to go to Redwood City to find good playing fields.

[stanley]

take a look at what a toxicologist from the State of Connecticut's office of environmental health has to say aboout synthetic turf.

http://video.google.com/videoplay...

[tseneca]

Sorry, this report is not convincing at all. First, this group is not connected with the state of connecticut. It provides all sorts of hypothetical problems, such as skin irritations, but provides no statistics as to how many people actually have suffered from these. Keep in mind these types of fields have been in use for over ten years and now number in the thousands. There is plenty of information on how they effect players, so where is it in this report? Guess what, regular grass fields can be dangerous too, Heather has a bad problem with gopher holes (or are broken ankles in 8 year olds acceptable because the hole is caused naturally?); there are sprinkler heads, dog shit, bird shit.
Naturally, there is no perfect field, but the report ignores some very positive aspects to artificial grass. ONe is you don't need to irrigate them, a tremendous savings in water (which I believe is a good thing), very low maintenance costs, and vastly increased field capacity because they can be used year round. In other words, kids can be more active and get more exercise(what is unhealthy about that?). It is interesting that these types of fields are enormously popular at our local high schools, like Carlmont. I haven't heard of any athletes there wanting to go back to natural grass. Until someone comes forward with real statistical evidence that shows these fields are actually causing problems (as opposed to this study which merely talks about potential hypothetical problems) I think they should be a legitimate option and we should not be panicked by a few ( and it is a few) paranoid parents who treat their children like political puppets.

[Ed Ebbers]

The San Carlos Council, having failed force artificial turf on unwilling school kids, is now trying to ramrod turf on a neighborhood park against the protest of its residents. A clandestine vote was made, and a public protest is planned for a city council meeting this coming Monday, April 28.