Quote:
Originally Posted by lil fu fu girl  Actually, it is the same thing. Read further down on your article.
RFID's(or chips) used on animals are labeled "passive or inert" because they contain no internal power source and do not act until acted upon.They contain three components; a silicon integrated circuit board which is the memory that holds the owners info, and inductor which acts as the radio antenna, and a capacitor which works with the inudcutor to essentially form a tuner.
As for their safety, I will stick with my initial stand with Dr. Benezra.
But thanks for the info. |
Look at their uses; they are not used in dog's microchips. The chips they are talking about can be read from blocks/miles away, it's a completely different thing. Again, I believe some misleading information is being passed as fact, because commercial breeders don't want to have to just these. They think if they can pass enough of this propaganda, these laws won't pass. Commercial breeders aren't concerned with the safety of their dogs, they are concerned with the cost per dog, and also they don't like the fact that authorities will be able to to link dogs to breeders. The dog fighting enthusiasts are especially fighting this law, at the present time, they can be seen with a bloodied up dog, and just deny that they are the owner, microchips would be able to identity this as well. If you choose not to microchip you pet, that's your choice, the type used in dogs is different than this, and there are many studies that have proven their safety.