[Smiling_Shepherd]

Came across this Press Release of a lawsuit regarding tracking chips in animals.

I hope this will help provide additional information to people so we are better informed and can investigate the products we choose to use with our pets. We chose not to use them in our own animals. I've always wondered about the potential adverse of microchips which use RFID (Radio Frequency ID) technology as I've read various articles that reference studies that show they can cause cancer.

This could possibly be the cause of this cat's cancer. This would help raise awareness about a potential huge problem that will only get bigger. Countries around the world, including the US, are more and more starting to use these tracking chips (often enclosed in badges) to track the location and movements of children.

AP Report On RFID Chips And Cancer Raises Concerns

Chip Implants Linked to Animal Tumors - washingtonpost.com

PRESS RELEASE
http://www.chipmenot.org/mercksued.htm

 

[GSD Fan]

This is making me reluctant to get my future puppy chipped. I've never had a microchipped pet before.

 

[KZoppa]

if we live in base housing we're required to have our pets microchipped. I hate the idea. Its another excuse for yet another company to get money from us. Our dogs are microchipped because they're the large noticable ones.

 

[Montana Scout]

i call BS myself... there are THOUSANDS and THOUSANDS of these chips put in place.. what are the odds that there could have been a tumor seed in place before the chip was in place? the RFID chips do not produce their own radiating signals like a cell phone or radio... I don't see to many people suing cell phone companies for ear cancer.
most people, and long living animals will get some sort of tumor, whether malignant or not. So who's to say that these chips cause cancer?

just BS IMHO

 

[Good_Karma]

I have to agree with Montana Scout. There's a small chance your dog could get a cancerous growth at the site of the chip implant. There's a much bigger chance you and your dog could get separated and need this chip to be identified and returned to you.

And think about all the things in your life that are proven to cause cancer, and yet you continue to expose yourself to them. Sunlight, BBQ. Life is a series of risks.

 

[Dainerra]

I look at it as a calculated risk. There are hundreds of thousands of chips in the US, let alone the rest of the world. The number of cases of cancer are very small. The number of lost/stolen pets is a much greater risk.

Any time you put something in your body, there is a risk of reaction. An animal that is prone to this would be the most likely to get cancer around the injection site. Then again, if that is the case there is a good chance they would get cancer in another spot or a different type of cancer.

I think that the numbers are so vast that the chips aren't the actual REAL cause of the cancer. That it is an overly aggressive reaction in some animals to a foreign substance that has the end result of a cancerous tumor.

 

[Stosh]

My vet doesn't microchip and neither did the breeder- both said they weren't sure the chips were safe

 

[kiwilrdg]

Since the chips only emit an RF signal when in the magnetic field of the reader it is not really a significant source of RF radiation. A purse dog gets much more RF from the cellphone in their carrier/owners purse.

I looked at a few of the references and I saw several problems with the control groups (which I am being generous in calling some of them control groups). Do not fly off the handle until you have really looked at the studies. I would proceed with caution, but it doesn't look like it is a problem.

 

[Rerun]

All of our dogs are microchipped....I agree with the others that said it before me. We have no way of knowing if that cat already had a small seed of cancer starting that no one knew about. Or consider that the cancer could've stated at a later date and just happened to be in that area.

Going with the theory that the chip caused the cancer - that is such a small percentage of a chance that it's a calculated risk one must decide for themselves. We've never lost one of our pets, but I want every possible bit of ID on and in them as possible. Having done so much rescue for so long (over a decade), I can not TELL you how many of my fosters were strays with no identification that couldn't be reunited with their owners.

edited...actually thanks for the reminder. Dante isn't chipped yet. Will be doing that ASAP!

 

[Jessiewessie99]

Tanner was chipped when he got to the shelter, and they changed the information for contact to our info. Molly also got it, advice from our vet.

I think the cancer is from another source, more researched needs to be done. I hear of cell phones causing cancer more than I do of micro chips causing cancer.

 

[Wildtim]

I'm sorry but that entire site is creating a mountain out of a molehill. No study has ever actually significantly linked chips to cancer with enough certainty to even suggest causation.

From what I can tell the percentages of animals in the cited studies that even came down with cancer are lower than the cancer incidence in the general population. That's pretty much no increased risk to me.

In fact the chances of an animal ending up in a shelter and needing to be identified are much higher than the numbers of cancer cases in those studies. It isn't even jump out of the frying pan of chips to the fire of loss it is more like step off the nice cool safe counter right into the fire.

Do I have issues with chipping people, heck yes, but they are more freedom related than medical in nature. As far as chipping a pet I will continue to do so for my own piece of mind and it would take a lot more the suspect anecdotal evidence I've seen so far for me to lose any sleep over it.

 

[Konotashi]

Out of the number of animals who are microchipped, how many get cancer? My guess is not very many. I think the benefits of microchipping outweigh the risks. I'm going to have Ozzy chipped.
I know of too many people who were washing their dog outside, so their collar was off, and the dog bolted off and was never seen again.

 

[unloader]

Who is to say the crappy pet food isn't to blame?

I know that the genetically modified, pesticide ridden food that I eat puts me at a higher chance of getting cancer.

And what about the cancer causing chemicals, hormones, and prescription drugs in tap water?

Then there is the air we breath, not all of us are lucky enough to live away from large cities.

I'm all for doing things to limit getting cancer, for myself, family and my pets. But the risk of losing my dog to cancer due to a micro-chip is one I am willing to take if it could potentially save his life from being put down in a shelter.

 

[Jax08]

I would like to see further proof that it is indeed the chip that caused the cancer.

When you look at how many pets get cancer at vaccine injection sites, it makes me wonder if it is the injection that causes it. What kind of cancer? Is it mast cell? Was it a tumor completely surrounding the chip? In the control group, how many instances were there? Was it a fluke thing or was it occurring repeatedly.

I just don't see the proof and a repeatedly high incidence to disregard microchipping. If my dog ends up at our local shelter, more than likely I'll get the call anyways to help find a rescue, but I want to make sure they KNOW she's mine. If I'm at a trial and something spooks her and she runs off...I want her back. I think microchipping gives me the best chance of getting her back.

 

[Kris10]

"Came across this Press Release of a lawsuit regarding tracking chips in animals."

Press release for a lawsuit? I would immediately question this.

 

[Jax08]

Because this is a cat, I really want to know where the rabies vaccine was administered and whether it was a 1 yr or a 3 yr. It has been proven that there is a higher rate of cancer at the injection site of the 3 year rabies shot for cats. These shots used to be administered at about the same site as the microchip would be implanted.

 

[My2Furkids]

"Correlation does not equal causation." Plain and simple. After working at a vet for years and seeing dozens of dogs and cats with some type of cancer, I'm going to call BS and certainly get my new puppy chipped when he comes home. The more information we have, I think the more paranoid we can become... I'd rather live a life of calculated risks and enjoy myself than be locked up somewhere "safe" and miserable! That goes for my dogs too, obviously.

 

[Deuce]

I won't microchip my dog. I've heard of them possibly causing cancer from three different vets, that's enough for me.

 

[Montana Scout]

I won't microchip my dog. I've heard of them possibly causing cancer from three different vets, that's enough for me.

ask them for where they got the information from? whose to say that one found "bad" info and relayed it to the other 3?... seriously tho, i would consider it and keep an opened mind, but either way its your call and no one is going to disrespect that... but like other people have said before me, the risk of losing your pet HEAVILY outweighs the possibility of getting cancer from this implant... just do a little more independent research before you completely make up your mind

 

[Smiling_Shepherd]

I was a bit surprised by some of the responses that doubt the product's possibility of causing cancer yet site no evidence that proves that it doesn't, including legitimate clinical studies. Now your argument may be well you don't have the same evidence that proves that it does. The news articles didn't link to any studies but definitely referenced some. If I could have found an actual study I would have posted it.

IMO corporations are presumed guilty until proven innocent in my book, especially with new products and technology. Too many times companies have failed to protect the health and well-being of their customers, and in some cases hid or covered up known issues, based on a variety of reasons including profitability. And relying on the FDA approval to say that a product is safe is close to a sad joke looking at the industries they supposedly regulate.

Like many here, I treat my animals as a part of my family and afford them the same care and respect for their lives as I do my own kids. Until someone could prove beyond a reasonable doubt through detailed clinical trials (as unbiased as possible ie. non-industry sponsored etc) I wouldn't be willing to take the chance of it causing cancer with our animals any more than I would with our kids.

Caveat Emptor was a phrase created a long time ago for good reason. My Latin teacher would be proud I was able to remember & use something from the dead language he taught me.