|
definitely microchip |
Quote:
Your thoughts on chips migrating have been addressed, and it's said that companies have learned of a way to keep this from happening. Again, have your vet check your microchip every year to see if it's has the data and isn't migrating. Concerning MRI etc. consult your vet, but here's what one place says about MRI's and microchips. Quote:
|
I'll be traveling internationally with ZoE so she HAS to be microchipped. I would have microchipped her anyway. It's cheap, painless if done while under anesthesia when being spayed and supports legal ownership. |
For one thing there will always be human error. It is a fact, however, I can't live my life fearful of things that there is no proof of. I trust my vet. She is a Cornell educated vet that reads all the studies and keeps up on all things concerning the animals she treats. She has her animals microchipped and advises others to do the same. There is a faction in society that feels that we should be afraid of everything. We have people living in the desert in holes in the ground because they are so fearful of modern society. While I think we certainly should not be open to everything that comes down the pike I also believe we cannot live in fear of everything new. I would be more concerned about what some dog food manufacturers have put in pet foods than a microchip. Obesity and cancer have increased in our pets but not because of microchips. There is a law that has been passed in our country that will require that all animals, both farm and domestic animals, be microchipped. This law is supposed to track disease in animals but when the government does something it is usually for control of some fashion. They keep putting back the enactment of this law mainly because they do not have the ability financially to get the program going. I am totally against forced microchipping. The government should not be able to tell us what we need to do with our animals but they will use a fear factor to get people to comply. I am against this not because of health reasons but because I am against government intrusion in our lives. The reality is this is a personal decision. No one should be made to feel badly either way about what they decide. |
To the op, I’m sorry if your thread was taken into a direction which wasn’t what you where asking about. I thought you wanted differing opinions as to whether a person would or would not choose to use a chip. Since you had received many replies promoting its use I thought I would give another perspective. Personally, I would like to have any info I could get when it comes to the health of my pet so I offered other view. I didn’t expect my view to be selected for a debate as to why my view is incorrect in your thread. Since this subject matter is for safety and not health I still stand by my view that we don’t have enough info as of yet to feel safe using a chip for *my* pets. This is a very personal decision we all have to make for our pets and I’m sure you’ll make the correct decision that is the right one for you and your pets…Good luck to you and again I’m sorry for side tracking your thread. gracielove, I find your post insulting to say the least. If I choose not to use the chip at this time it in no way indicates that I made my decision solely out of baseless fears. I based my decision on conflicting and incomplete or short term studies along with the reports of cancer/tumors that are being reported. I can't dismiss those concerns at this time. Since this product is for safety issues there is no reason for me to be made to feel bad for choosing not to implant.This in no way makes your opinion promoting it's use any more valid than mine for not using it. I'm just being cautious..... This is the last I will post in this thread, I'm sorry again to the OP. |
Quote:
|
Jp4m2 said: "To the op, I’m sorry if your thread was taken into a direction which wasn’t what you where asking about. I thought you wanted differing opinions as to whether a person would or would not choose to use a chip. Since you had received many replies promoting its use I thought I would give another perspective. Personally, I would like to have any info I could get when it comes to the health of my pet so I offered other view. I didn’t expect my view to be selected for a debate as to why my view is incorrect in your thread. Since this subject matter is for safety and not health I still stand by my view that we don’t have enough info as of yet to feel safe using a chip for *my* pets. This is a very personal decision we all have to make for our pets and I’m sure you’ll make the correct decision that is the right one for you and your pets…Good luck to you and again I’m sorry for side tracking your thread." Jp4m2....you have nothing to apologize for. The OP asked for EVERYONES opinion. Unfortunately, there are some here who feel Only their opinion is required when it comes to this particular topic, and if your opinion happens to be different, then you need to be pigeon-holed until you agree with them. They are a small minority, many of which have never been in a clinical R&D setting: most never truly understanding the mechanics, let alone the biological effects of RFID technologies. I, personally, am thankful for your invaluable research and effort into this topic. From all of us on the other side, thank you, and keep up the good work. :thumbup: |
The microchip technology and track record is far more stable than the FDA approval system for human medications and the side effects that have been misrepresented by research done by the developers. The bottom line here is CHOICE. In this country we do not have to chip. I go with my vet's opinion because I respect their knowledge in this area and I have had several dogs with chips with no problems. I do wish the vets would scan every new patient and record the data in case a lost/stolen pet come their way. You are so correct -- every opinion is of value, we learn from each other -- that is what is so great about Yokie Talk. I want to hear what EVERYONE has to say. |
I didn't get the feel at all that some thought their opinion was the only one that should be considered or taken to heart. I am glad to get all the good info, myself, and know the rest of us are as well, but until we start to hear this is really damaging dogs, I have to weigh the chances that my dog could get separated from me somehow over the course of the next 12 - 15 years being a tiny and adorable Yorkie that is impulsive(despite his almost constant behavior modification training) and adventurous; and weighing what looks most likely at this time to cause us problems, it is getting lost vs. tumors. If I start to hear credible evidence that tumors and cancers are being noted in other than negligible numbers, I will have the chip removed and any recommended treatment. Am glad for all the discussion and info I can get on this subject so thanks to all posters. Keep the info coming. |
Quote:
Reading the first sites Mission Statement : http://www.chipmenot.org/ourmission.htm• REPEALING LEGISLATION: To repeal laws, ordinances, and regulations that mandate the microchipping of animals. Makes me think there’s a strong possibility the site is sponsored by commercial breeders and dog fighting enthusiasts both groups want to see microchips banned. The second link is about horses, and not dogs, and I haven’t read enough of the literature on horses to discuss this. The third link I couldn’t read because you have to join before you can read, but just because someone is sueing a company, it doesn’t mean a thing the lawsuit has any credibility. In my opinion, these links can’t be compared to the opinions offered by the AVMA. For me, it not so much about the microchips themselves, that a personal decision, it's about not playing into commercial breeders/dog fighting enthusiasts hands. I seriously don't think many of you realize how big the dog fighting world is, I truly believe that is a real problem, and while Yorkies as a breed may not be "fighting" small dogs have been used for bait. As pet owners we should do everything help end the inhumane conditions for dogs in this country. Passing on information from sites such as this might help stop some of the legislation from being pasted, if enough pet owners overreact. I’ve also read how the groups are targeting conservative churches saying that microchips are the “sign of the beast”. :rolleyes: Remember, most of the legislation only applies to commercial breeders it won't affect pet owners, although I believe some states/counties would like to require it for a dog found wondering the streets three times, and I'm all for that too! |
I volunteer at the front desk for our local animal shelter, and take calls from frantic owners looking for their missing pets. I also greet the Good Samaritans who had find stray animals and bring them to the shelter. Animals that are micro-chipped are only two phone calls from being reunited with their owners. One call to the manufacturer to get the owner info, and one call to the owner telling them that their pet has been found. (But micro-chipping isn't enough. You MUST remember to update the manufacturer with your information every time you move, or when you get a new cell phone number.) There is a reason that shelters, rescue groups and vets promote micro-chipping, and it isn't because they make money off of them. It's because they know that they are a valuable tool in keeping owners and pets together. No matter how careful we are with our pets, there is always a risk that they will become lost. I won't bore you with all of the unlikely stories I've heard, but even the most loved and pampered animals get lost. Collars can come off, or be removed by pet thieves. I'd never heard that there could be health risks from the micro-chip itself, but that risk seems small in comparison to what can happen if any of my animals get lost or stolen. I will always microchip my animals. |
Physiciansforlife.org The link above provides sufficient medical information from numerous scientific medical studies and oncology specialists to raise concern about micro-chipping, as Jp4m2 has stated repeatedly. It also gives breadth to the appointment of Tommy Thompson to the board of VeriChip Corp, and his unusual "kick-back" in the form of cash and stock options, once the device was approved by the FDA; a division of HHS which Thompson headed. All in all an excellent read. I do believe in everyone's right to vocalize their opinion in such forums, especially concerning such a scholarly current topic. I especially find those fighting for animals to be exceptionally determined to express themselves; and I find much honor in that. Speaking out for those who cannot speak for themselves. However, continually berating someone who has a differing opinion then you to the point where they feel the need to leave a thread, hmmm, funny........ I somehow find no honor in that. :thumbdown |
Quote:
|
I've never lost my babies and hope to never have to go through it. However, both our babies are microchipped just in case :) I will be getting them scanned next time we go to the vet just to make sure the chip is still in. I heard they sometimes can fall out or something... |
Quote:
|
Quote:
2. So please explain to me who has made attempts to shut you up. 3. If the "berating shoe" fits.....well I assume you know the rest. |
Quote:
|
It was brought to my attention that my opinion is still at issue in this thread. I’m not sure why this is going on but I now feel the need to justify and defend my position further. Let me just clarify that I think chipping would be a wonderful thing for pets and their owners *if* the health of the pet is not put at great risk to do so. All I stated in my first post was I think more studies are needed in this area. As of yet many of the studies are with mice, and are short term to get a good picture as to the potential to cause cancer. The links I provided where added to give a person a tiny glimpse as to what is at issue, they were not posted as a complete summery of this situation. It’s just a tip of the iceberg as to what is concerning some pet owners. It is the opinion of a member that the first link I provided, Chip Me Not, *may* be run by commercial breeder advocates or people in the dog fighting business. There was no evidence included with this statement just a stated opinion ….. The site is run by a woman who is in the consumer advocacy field by the name of Dr. Katherine Albrecht, the following is her bio: Dr. Katherine Albrecht is widely recognized as one of the world's leading experts on consumer privacy. She regularly counsels policy makers and the media on the privacy, societal, and civil libertiesimpacts of new technologies, with an emphasis on RFID and retail issues. She has advised the Federal Trade Commission, various state legislatures, the Federal Reserve Bank, the European Commission, and the Office of the Canadian Privacy Commissioner, among others, and was recently appointed by NH Governor John Lynch to serve on that state's two-year RFID study commission. Dr. Albrecht is co-author of the book "Spychips: How Major Corporations and Government Plan to TrackYour Every Move with RFID" with Liz McIntyre. She is the Director of CASPIAN (Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering), a 15,000-member organization she founded in 1999 to advocate free-market, consumer-based solutions to the problem of retail privacy invasion. Sheholds a Doctorate in Education from Harvard University, with a research focus in consumer education,privacy and psychology. On her advisory board is: Professor Keith W. Miller Louise Hartman Schewe and Karl Schewe Professor Computer Science, University of Illinois at Springfield Editor-in-Chief, IEEE Technology & Society. 2008- Associate Editor for Ethics, IEEE IT Professional. 2008- IEEE Society on Social Implications of Technology His credential are quite long so I didn’t want to post them, they are here: https://edocs.uis.edu/kmill2/www/keith.htm This is a paper Dr. Albrecht put out: http://www.chipmenot.org/pdfs/albrec...full-paper.pdf Maybe it’s just me but as of yet I don’t see any reason to see their motives as suspicious. … There was also a statement made that a study was rigged with genetically inferior mice. If people are interested they can go to the link, that subject is addressed there. It was a statement put out by a chip co. CEO. I feel I have very valid points as to why I choose not to chip. I’m not telling anyone else not to do it, it’s just *my* decision. I don’t understand why when I state my opinion I’m being told how my concerns are wrong or unfounded without any research provided to the contrary by the opposing poster(s) yet I feel I have to provide research, links and case studies to show my reasons as valid???? :confused: Thank you lil fu fu girl for understanding.......I appreciate it..... For the interested parties this is an interesting article too: Chip Implants Linked to Animal Tumors - washingtonpost.com |
If I had my way, I would have marge Chipped so I knew when she was out spending money. Millions of chips have been used. If there was a problem, it would have surfaced. I am a strong believer if chipping and would not do anything to hurt my dogs. Everyone has an opinion. It is up to the Owner. I trust my Vet. If she felt it was bad, she would be the first one to tell me. |
It only takes one person to try to shut down someone else's opinion. It usually doesn't work but that doesn't mean it wasn't tried. Honest disagreement is to be expected because people and their concerns are so different but I don't think Miss Nancy is doing anything more than expressing her opinion and looks like she is considering the others, investigating and giving her opinion on those. It is good to know what info is out there and assess who is presenting it, comment pro or con and then we can each make up our minds for our own dogs. That is what a good forum is - lots of exchange of ideas and good, sometimes heated discussion of each issue. If someone disagrees strongly, I wouldn't take that as berating, just passionately responsive. And we need that here so we will get the best information. There is so much on the internet and magazines and the news about dogs, you really do have to do some homework or be pushed/pulled every which way several times in one hour of researching something. I hope we don't discourage each other posting passionately as that would be a disservice to our dogs and this very site. |
(quote)I don't think Miss Nancy is doing anything more than expressing her opinion and looks like she is considering the others(quote) yorkietalkjilly, no disrespect meant but the one of the reasons I felt that my opinion was dismissed and was not considered as you stated is because Nancy looked at one link and stated that it looked to be connected to commercial breeders and dog fighters. If that was true I would want to know that. But the statement was made with no reasons as to why the statement was made. I felt it reflected very negatively on me since I posted the link. I felt it made me look like I was providing unreliable information and hers opinion or statement was correct. As of yet there is no proof to the accusation, it appears to be run by someone who is very concerned about our pets health...Until I find out otherwise I don't think it should have been discredited like that..... |
Quote:
|
I am one of the people who have had a micro chip fail, and it was before the reported Hadden. My Beauceron Aramis was imported from Portugal and had a ISO chip apparently. The SPCA scanner didn't read his chip. They had his misted as a Dobe/Rot cross. He was euthanized. A cat breeder friend of mine has had chips pop out of cats. Not migrate, but actually pop out. She has found that it's better to insert them in at an angle, but even then, she had an adult cat pop out a chip. As in she scanned the cat (she has Siamese), it didn't have a chip, and she did chip this cat, she scanned the cage, and found the chip in the cage. I personally prefer to chip. Of all the various ID forms, I feel it is the best. Collars can be lost or removed. Tattoos can become illegible over time. No one method of ID is 100% effective, but considering my alternatives, I chip. |
Quote:
We are all no doubt watching the info about microchip side or bad effects but until there is a real consensus by a good deal of respected peer review veterinary groups about chip-produced tumors in dogs, I think we do want to be circumspect about info out there that might prevent some from considering chipping. But I know we are all watching as anything comes out and looking at each article and source very very closely. I pray the chips never are proven to be really harmful as they are such a good tool in helping reunite dogs and families!!! |
Nancy, I appreciate your understanding as to why I would have been upset. I would never want to intentionally put out false or incorrect info. I try and add links to my most of posts so people can get an idea as to what I'm talking about instead of just talking with nothing to back it up. I don't want people wondering what in the world I'm talking about because they may have not heard about it before. My links are only intended as a tool to start people thinking and searching on their own. You are correct that our pets health is what we all have in common on this forum. It's just that on some issues the topic has many pro's and con's, it's not always so black and white.Each one of us has to carefully weigh all the risks and/or adverse reactions that pertains to our dogs versus the benefits. We also have to take into consideration if the topic is relevant to our individual situation based on our location or/and risks of exposure. I guess this is a another case of strong opinions and love of the breed that tends to get us worked up at times.... ;) |
Quote:
|
This is a little off the subject matter and just a personal observation. I am concerned about ingredients that are put in foods and skin products, etc. I often go online to find information about various products, medications, and ingredients. At first glance it often appears that there is accurate substantiated information available. After closer examination it is evident that much of the information posted is there to support an agenda being put out by one side of the issue or the other. It takes time to sort through all the information to find unbiased research that has been done. In some cases there is no unbiased information because someone has to pay for good accurate research to be done and then publish it. Unless an unbiased research project has been conducted in a true scientific manner by a reputable organization over an appropriate period of time we are then forced to deal with observations that can be presented to represent either side of the issue. It is frustrating and in the end we all must examine the most trustworthy sources we can find and then make a decision based on what is best for our own personal situations. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:51 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2003 - 2018 YorkieTalk.com
Privacy Policy - Terms of Use