A fact from Artificial turf–cancer hypothesis appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 10 March 2016 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that agencies of the U.S. Federal government are investigating a possible link between artificial turf and cancer?
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occupational Safety and Health, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to occupational safety and health on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Occupational Safety and HealthWikipedia:WikiProject Occupational Safety and HealthTemplate:WikiProject Occupational Safety and HealthOccupational Safety and Health articles
I have to call foul on the stuff about the Vet. It is just a terrible passage in so many ways. Firstly, considering how long the stadium was in use, that 8 players developed cancers is purely within statistical likelihood. So even if correlation implied causation – wait, that's right, it doesn't. So the entire premise of the passage is faulty, as it's implying that without any evidence whatsoever.
Oh, and there also the fundamental issue that the supposed cancer link arises from the crumbled vulcanized rubber infill in the turf. But the Vet used AstroTurf, which has no rubber infill. The whole passage is half truths that don't add up to anything and uses insinuation to lead readers to a conclusion that has no possible basis in reality. I am removing the passage outright, as it is inherently fatally flawed. oknazevad (talk) 14:55, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
