Never liked the idea of microchipping and......

.... this is yet another reason why.
Microchips cause tumors in animals
I won't have *any* of my animals micro chipped nor will I purchase from a breeder or adopt an animal from a rescue that does it or makes it mandatory to be done.
As far as micro chipping myself or my kids.... HECK NO!
*and these were my decisions long before this little tid bit of news came about*

I don't really believe in microchipping people but for animals, I find it to be ok with me. Both of my cats are microchipped. As will all of my cats during my lifetime unless they find it is causing tumors in cats. For me, I would hate to loose my babies. They are my children and the thought of losing one is terrible as all of the cats of my past got out and were never found again. With this chip, I can verify that the cat is mine in case she is ever stolen and then recovered later. Shelters can scan for her chip in case she ever gets lost. Its almost painless (like a shot).

You can do as you please. I'm not trying to change your mind, but I am putting the benefits of this technology out there. As far as breeders go. They just want to make sure that the animals are well cared for and that the owner is willing to do everything in thier power to make sure the cats stay safe and at home. I've looked on breeders sites before that require that they get microshipped, spayed/neutered, kept indoors, ect. To me, that just shows they care about the animal and want to make sure you do too. All of my dogs and cats will have microchips.

Oh I'm fully aware of the benefits of micro chipping pets.... and even children for that matter. After all, Amber alert would be pointless if all we had to do was punch in our child's GPS tracking number and find them. ;)
I'm not against the idea of micro chipping. It *does* have its benefits and for those who choose to utilize them, great.
I, however, have a lot more anks with micro chips than just the possibility of them causing/creating tumors and thus, won't ever utilize them.
But for that matter, I would not get a GPS system in my car (if I had one) either. :)

Personally I think that "study" is BS. It's akin to the ones that say that eating peanut butter causes cancer.
Microchips are basically inert materials, since it's contained fully within the outer casing. It's like a teeny bit of glass embedded. The worst it should cause is minor irratation, or possibly scar tissue.
I've worked around animals and vets for many years, and I have never yet seen or heard of any pet having a tumor due to a microchip. A phone call to the local vet university resulted in laughter at the idea, and a bit of advice to "not believe the supermarket tabloids". I'd guess that means they don't believe it's a concern.
As far as whether or not any particular person wants information embedded in their pet, child, self, or car, I'd say it was a personal decision.
My pets are microchipped, and I will continue getting them microchipped. I think if there were a system in place for microshipping children, and I had children, I'd have my kid microchipped too.
Most chips only are the equivalant of "bar codes". They don't really 'transmit' and you can't track them via satilites and such. I've been told fantastic stories by clients about them, you wouldn't believe. Some of them still believe that a microchip can train the dog.. no.. seriously.
All in all, it's a high-tech I.D. tag that can't easily be discarded. I'd love to see more snakes embedded. You certainly could I.D. a particular individual snake easier than comparing photos to markings.
Cheers!
Theresa

I have to say, I've yet to see any consequences of microchipping, and I've chipped hundreds of animals. As Wolfy said so succinctly, it's just a very high-tech ID tag. My kids are chipped, and I will continue to chip future ones until I see something more compelling than "1% of the mice chipped developed tumours somewhere on their bodies over the course of a year".

Considering that the technology has been out for a couple of decades, I'd expect to see better data.

Quote:

---

Some of them still believe that a microchip can train the dog

---

Well heck, when/if they develop one that *can*.... I'm camping out to be first in line for that bad boy! Get one for my cats and kids too.... they NEED training!

Quote:

---

"not believe the supermarket tabloids".

---

If the Associated Press is a "tabloid" then the world has some problems. ;)
I'm not trying to start a ruccus but, did you guys read the article?

Quote:

---

Most chips only are the equivalant of "bar codes". They don't really 'transmit' and you can't track them via satilites and such.

---

Perhaps a study in nanotechnology and the micro chips themselves would be good. They are radio transmitters and yes, they *can* be tracked by sattalite... if the code is entered into the proper program.

Quote:

---

My kids are chipped, and I will continue to chip future ones until I see something more compelling than "1% of the mice chipped developed tumours somewhere on their bodies over the course of a year".

---

You forgot some.

Quote:

---

Published in veterinary and toxicology journals between 1996 and 2006, the studies found that lab mice and rats injected with microchips sometimes developed subcutaneous "sarcomas" _ malignant tumors, most of them encasing the implants. _ A 1998 study in Ridgefield, Conn., of 177 mice reported cancer incidence to be slightly higher than 10 percent _ a result the researchers described as "surprising."

_ A 2006 study in France detected tumors in 4.1 percent of 1,260 microchipped mice. This was one of six studies in which the scientists did not set out to find microchip-induced cancer but noticed the growths incidentally. They were testing compounds on behalf of chemical and pharmaceutical companies; but they ruled out the compounds as the tumors' cause. Because researchers only noted the most obvious tumors, the French study said, "These incidences may therefore slightly underestimate the true occurrence" of cancer.
_ In 1997, a study in Germany found cancers in 1 percent of 4,279 chipped mice. The tumors "are clearly due to the implanted microchips," the authors wrote.

---

Just so y'all know, I'm not trying to start a ruccus. I saw the article, thought it was interesting so I shared it.
Remember, the article is to show the relation, or rather, lack thereof, between animal chips and human chips. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shadowspider

Perhaps a study in nanotechnology and the micro chips themselves would be good. They are radio transmitters and yes, they *can* be tracked by sattalite... if the code is entered into the proper program

---

Ummm....what?

Perhaps you are confusing active chips with passive?

A passive RFID chip can, at the furthest, be read around 6-8 meters. Active chips can be read much further, but we aren't discussing those. Passive chips require an active reader to send an electronic pulse...the pulse resonates off of any nearby chip, and the scanner picks up on that resonance. There is no way for a satellite to read that accurately.

You're probaly looking at different chips than are used on pets by companies like "Avid".
These chips don't transmit, and can't be tracked by satilite. Nanotechnolgy is great, but it's not the typical chip being used.
I'm sure they have some sort of teeny implantable microchip that can be tracked, but a google search didn't show any legitimate sources, or legitimate accounts.
The comment about tabloids was from the vet university about the idea, NOT from me about that AP article. BUT.. the AP doesn't get it right all that much either. They report a lot of stuff. They are media, not science research, and I'll point out again, there's a research study that was reported not that long ago that said eating peanut butter causes cancer. Mice and rats get tumors. It's accepted fact. Most pet mice and rats seen at the two places I have been that treat rodents(pets) are there for tumors of some sort, or are found to have tumors as a primary or secondary problem. Rodents are prone to it.
When I see something legit regarding people or canines or felines, maybe I'll look into it deeper. But I still eat peanut butter, and I'll still microchip.
I don't consider it a ruckus, it's just a discussion. I just happen to have been around when microchips for pets were introduced. I have three relatives that work at the vet college, and an aunt who IS a vet. I worked next to a vet for 7 years and now work next to a vet, so I can go over and chat them up about various subjects. I would ten times rather go by what actual experts think, than an article that states lab mice(rats) got tumors from ANYTHING. According to most of their studies, EVERYTHING causes cancer or tumors in rodents.
Thanks for bringing it up though, because I'd bet we'll have someone popping into the shop quoting part of the article soon. Now I'll have read it.
Grins. I prefer potato chips myself, and I have those in me a lot.

EDIT: I found THIS article
http://www.infowars.com/articles/bb/...h_verichip.htm
This article is probaly what confuses people. It mentions a implantable "device" that can be tracked via satillite. The prototype was developed by a company in conjunction WITH Verichip, but the device is NOT a microchip.
It then discusses the microchips, which cannot be tracked. Read quickly, it seems to imply that they have a prototype microchip that can be tracked. In fact, the tracking devices have been around a while, but they are not microchip sized. They are a bit larger. They alos caught tons of flak over the idea that they were GOING to design a micro-device, and said "No, we weren't" then said "Yes, we will be". Typically, the company PR department can't make up their mind.

*Looks at her peanut butter.... mmm, cancer or not, peanut butter and banana sandwiches are the bomb!*
Oh heck, like you said, *everything* gives ya cancer, peanut butter, diet soda, blue M&Ms.... inhaling....:D

There is indeed a whole lot of conflicting "evidence?" and "conspiracy theories" as to micro chips, what's what, what's not, what's coming, what has been, what's in the works.....
But then again there was a lot of conflicting "evidence?" about the conspiracy theory that we now commonly refer to as the stealth bomber. There's also the "fantisy" of a computer fitting on a single table, much less in the palm of someone's hand, then of course there was the insane idea of rockets flying to the moon and let's not forget that loon that must have been on crack for thinking that an explosive could be developed of such magnitude that it could blow up and entire city... by just splitting an atom. But my favorite is the hallucination of a jet being able to take off like a helicopter... straight up rather than needing a run way and the people who *swore* they had either worked on one or had actually seen one of these Ray Bradbury imaginatory devices actually take off, fly and land which the government, military and contractors emphatically denied was true.
People and their crazy conspiracy ridden ideas.

People thought that all of those things were BS, not from "credible" sources, etc. and the government denied and side stepped answering questions regarding them when information was "leaked" to the media. That's what they do, that is no secret. Nothing is de-classified until there is something else in the works that is bigger better and badder, to replace it. Then they make public knowledge of the "latest technology"... but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that what we have today is *not* the "latest" technology; it is simply the technology that has been made available to the public because the government, science, NASA, whoever, are done with it and are working on something better.
It's no different with micro chips than it is computers. Is the "latest" technology being used with micro chips, nope, not yet, it is still in the test phase and is very expensive to develop. When the testing and refining are done and they can be developed at a lower cost, *then* the "latest" technology will be introduced to the public at large.

Do they have micro chips that are so small they can pass through the needle of a syringe that can be tracked by satalite with full video *and* audio, yes. Are they in mass circulation? No. Will they be? Yes.
Do they use those types of chips in people's pets as well as in people? Yes. As a "standard", no. Are they made by different companies and a lot more expensive than the common chips used, yes.
How do I know? Because that's what my husband is studying (nanotechnology) and is what he does for a living.

As far as "expert" vets go. They'd tell you to feed your pets gasoline through a straw if the oil companies were offering them a nice commission on every pint they sold and a free 2 week vacation. Vets are *paid* to give the "advice" and to "prescribe" the garbage they do because the drug companies and pet food companies pay them for every one they sell. Don't believe me, go to vet school and see who you get your grants, loans, scholarships etc. from.
One of my cousins is a vet as are many of my friends and even the vet I take my babies to will *all* tell you the same thing; because that's what they've been offered.
That's no secret either though. Heck everyone knows (or at least should) that vets are no different than any other medical "professional". They take the money no matter where it comes from. Are all vets like that, of course not, but are no vets like that... not hardly.