Microchip - yes or no?
 

After reading thru the neutering topics, we have decided to wait until our little guy is 7 months old, but we still have not decided whether to microchip or not - would appreciate your thoughts (and thank you!).

Both of my boys have one. It is not a guarantee for anything, but it could be helpful in identifying a dog and returning a lost dog. The health risks are arguably minimal. I don't see any downside.

defin YES! Microchipping is the single easiest way to get a dog back to an owner when it's lost. tags fall off but a microchip is in there for good. most vets and shelters will not take in new dogs without checking microchips first and if your dog were ever stolen it's the best way to prove that the dog is yours. it's like giving them something inside almost like providing DNA to a child so they are always your child. They don't feel them, it's easy to put in and both mine were done awake and didn't even yelp. great thing to protect your little ones.

I also am back and forth on this I would like some feedback too!

Seven months is the age the vet thought was good to neuter Joey, he wanted to wait until enough adult teeth were in so he could pull the remaining baby teeth. Some vets don't know this, but Yorkies usually have one or two teeth they can't lose on their own, and the cost to pull them while they are already out is minimal, 5-15 dollars a tooth, depending on the vet. However, if you wait, you have to pay for anesthesia again, and the real cost is the anxiety over anesthesia. I think getting a chip done at the same time makes sense, especially if you live in a highly populated area. Millions of dogs each year are returned because they've been chipped. It has given me great peace of mind.

Yes do micro-chip. It may help a lost dog be returned. My Vets office scans all new patients and notes micro-chip numbers on their chart. If a dog is lost or stolen you can post pictures and say this dog is micro-chipped. You can also give that chip number to vets, rescues, dog pounds, ect if the dog is lost or stolen. It is good too, if you do genetic or DNA studies at any point. It is 100% ID by the Vet, that this is the dog being tested.

Microchip and collar with tags at ALL TIMES! I just cannot stress this point enough. If you look on YT the dogs that have been lost and never found were not chipped and were not wearing their collars/tags when they went missing.

Recently, I was in contact with a woman in another state looking to surrender a yorkie. It is a very long and messed up story but the short version is this:

She caught this little girl in a trap because it running loose and she was worried it would be killed by coyotes (she lived in the country). There was no chip and no collar. She was not willing to place ads or give out her own phone number to look for her owners. It was obvious she was loved and well taken care of. She had the little girl for less than 36 hours and wanted to surrender her to Yorkie Rescue because she didn't want to bother any longer. I offered to help her and placed ads, called animal control, police etc but she was 2 states away. After 4 days she GAVE HER AWAY! There was nothing I could do to stop it either and I'm still bothers me.

I think it's a preference thing and it depends on where you live/if you are always outside on a leash with your dog/etc. I had intentions on microchipping Khloe when she was spayed, and my vet told me that the needle that they use to microchip was big and may cause her more pain than the spay surgery. However, it does serve as permanent identification. But go with your gut instinct; you know what is best for your situation.

Now that I live in NC, I feel safe that no one will take Khloe. She stays inside all the time unless I am outside with her, and my elderly neighbors are good about keeping a watch on the house when we aren't here (best security system ever). I had a Westie that was an indoor/outdoor dog, and he was microchipped. He was stolen from our backyard, and I haven't seem him for 4 years. ): I miss my sweet Max everyday, and I pray that vets are simply not scanning him. I worry all the time that poor little Max hasn't gotten vet care since, or if he is well and safe. I believe someone stole him to stud him out. Breaks my heart.

Oh wow, that kills me, I just can't imagine something like that happening to Joey. I agree with you about the tags too, especially when I had kids and no control over the opening and closing of doors and gates. Before everyone yells at me, the collars are just for tags, not for walking, please use a harness for that.

Both of the Spice boys got a chip when they were neutered! Caper also had a baby tooth pulled. They are back to nornal no time at all. Get the Chip!

YES YES YES! Micro-chip. There is no reason not to. It is another way to get your baby back, and whether you like it or not... it is possible for your dog to get out or be stolen. Peoples houses have been broken into and dogs have been stolen (search Find Baxter and Cooper on FB). If they have a micro-chip, it is more likely that eventually that dog will be scanned and returned to its owner.

I believe I have done everything in my power to ensure my dogs will never be stolen or escape. I built two dog-proof fences that they cannot escape from, put a security system in my home, have a security camera that watches our house, I never leave my dogs outside alone without me watching, and never ever leave them in the car alone.

It would be almost impossible for them to be stolen or lost, but I still have them wear tags at all times AND they are micro-chipped. I want them returned no matter what, and I am willing to do anything to ensure that. Please micro-chip your baby.

Yes microchip --- I got Thor done at 4 months, not a guarantee but if he ever gets lost it's just another thing on our favor!
Also just had Thor neutered and 4 teeth pulled he will be 8 months on the 25th of this month. He did GREAT - a little sleepy that afternoon but the next morning he was his normal self again.

I had Cali chipped at 9 months - she acted like nothing had happened. The results may be iffy (someone tried to steal her once and they would not have had the chip read, I'm sure) but if there is any chance it would bring her back to me if something did happen I would do it for sure.

I just wish we would all ask our vets if they read chips when they get a new patient -- this could help someone get their pup back if they were stolen etc. Seems like many vets don't bother to do it.

Yes, Yes, Yes micro-chip! I think it is a great idea and any chance of getting our little furbabies back should something happen can only be a good thing! Lexi had hers done when she was spayed...no problem at all and we can't feel it either. I know it is no guarantee but I find comfort in knowing we have done all we can :D

Since you asked for any opinions I thought I would give an alternate view so you can ponder all the info.......:) I'm most likely in the minority here, but no I don't feel comfortable inserting a chip in any of my boys. I just don't feel anyone has done any long term studies as of yet to see if the benefits outweigh the risks. Until then I'll rely on the old fashioned way, tags, and I'm also very careful when they're outside. They're always in a fenced yard and never out alone.

Here are some links to browse through......

chipmenot.com-homepage

Are Micro-Chips safe and what is your alternative? | The Pet Whisperer?

HomeAgain Pet Microchip Implicated In Cancer

Yes... just be sure that the place you get it done offers the ones that are widely recognized. I believe Banfield Hospitals were offering microchips that were only recognizable by their equipment. I know that at times those discount vaccination places offer them for $25.

It is one more thing you can do that give you a better chance of getting your dog back than if not chipped. Tibbe has one and while it is no guarantee I will get him back should he get lost, it increases my chances. That's all I needed to convince me.

I think people should know, that commercial breeders are being required to microchip their dogs and they are fighting this tooth and nail. They have put out so much propaganda and outright lies. They've shown studies that show rats getting tumors, when the rats were especially picked for their ability to make tumors, so that scientists could study how tumors first develop. Of course propagandist didn’t mention this. I believe of all the millions of dogs microchipped, there are only two cases that may have something to do with the microchip, and that isn’t certain. Some dogs develop tumors with just saline water injected. Commercial breeders think if they can convince enough people that this is dangerous they won't have to do it to their breeding dogs. Sad to say, they are usually the people who care about their dogs the least, but yet they are now so concerned about their dogs welfare. Why are they fighting it, two reasons, cost and dogs will be able to be traced back to them. Talk over the safty of it with your vet, and be sure and have it tested and inspected yearly.

Yes i think its a good idea we recently had Isabella spayed and microchipped.:)

I see your point as to why a commercial breeder would not want a pup to be traced back to them. They certinly would not want anyone to see the amount of pups produced along the ill and dying pups ...I am a bit confused by the bolded statement. Are you saying scientists doing cancer research are in cohoots with comercial breeders?

This is why I don't feel secure allowing any implants at this time. One one side the chip companies and any one else who stands to profit from the sale of chips will state how safe they are, put it in and forget it, and you have the added sense of security that you'll get your lost pet back.

One the other side are the advocates for not chipping saying there is the real potential of health risks of cancerous tumors forming around the implant....

Without a definitive unbiased long term study this debate will continue because no study exists, as of yet. At this point in time *I* just can't do it and feel I did a good thing for my pets health..

Tibbs and Bella both have tags always on outside always!

I would chip and take the chance. After what I just went through with the woman there is no way I would ever change my mind. I cried when she emailed me to tell me she gave the dog away.

As for your statement they are never out alone~neither are my three. But a gate was left open and my son was outside. They were all GONE in the blink of an eye. What about the other member who opened the door and two of hers blotted and only one came back. She had taken the collars off for a bath.

If the dog with woman I was talking with would have found a chip the dog would have been returned to it's owner. But without she handed it over to the neighbors mothers friend. :(

Yes!! With all the dogs being stolen out of yards and homes, this is just another way to be able to ID your baby if they are found! All my girls are chipped except Kissy and she will be done when i have her out for dental. I would NEVER have the chip inserted while they are awake. I've seen it done on big dogs and it hurts them, i can't image the pain to these little ones. I had all mine done at spay/dental time.
I feel like the risks are so minimal that it gives me peace of mind knowing that if any did get lost or stolen, i would have one of the best avenues to getting them back!

No, I'm not saying that scientists doing the studies are in cahoots with commercial breeders. I'm saying that lots of articles out there that are against microchips include studies where "rats" have gotten tumors from microchips. This leads pet owners to think, “oh dear, if it causes a tumor in a rat, it will cause a tumor in a dog.” However, this isn’t true. The studies were actually done, with a special breed of rats that create tumors extremely easily. If scientist wanted to know if microchips cause tumors, they wouldn’t have used this type of rat. The reasoning was so that could study how tumors develop, not if they would develop, but how? They wanted to know what happened in the very beginnings of a tumor. Studying the very beginnings can help us learn about tumor growth. . Yet these propaganda sites scream out “Scientists find tumors in rats with microchips.” Duh no kidding! In some animals, just an injection can cause a tumor, and let’s not forget that a tumor doesn’t automatically mean cancer. For the sites I’ve read, that are against microchipping, there’s lots of fiction mixed with lies to cause hysteria.


There are definitive unbiased studies, here and in other countries. Here's what the American Veterinary Medical Association has to say about microchips and their safety. Microchipping of animals FAQ I'm not recommending anyone doing anything that they aren't comfortable with, but for me, the benefits clearly outweigh the risks. Furthermore, there is actual science to back up that statement.

Here's a great study:



Implantable microchips have become a well-accepted means of pet identification
in the global veterinary community. Over the last 15 years, millions of dogs and cats
throughout the world have safely received an implantable microchip that can quickly and
reliably document the identity of a pet. As a result of this life-saving technology, some
8,000 dogs and cats are successfully reunited with their owners every month.
While the ability of microchips to drastically improve pet safety is unarguable, a recent
veterinary case report associated microchip implantation with sarcoma development
in 1 dog.1 Furthermore, in the context of microchip use in humans, sporadic reports
of sarcoma development in implanted laboratory mice and rats have received recent
publicity in the popular media.
Unquestionably, veterinarians would not continue to implant microchips if they believed
the devices presented significant, scientific risk of causing malignant tumors in dogs and
cats. However, because recent publicity has raised awareness and concern about this
topic, a review of the relevant database of research regarding both laboratory animals
and pets follows.


The use of microchips in pets is a safe, effective, and
durable means of identification that has been used
globally in millions of animals for nearly 2 decades. To
date, the entire global database of sarcoma development
in microchipped dogs is limited to a single case report
involving 1 animal. Furthermore, though low incidences
of vaccine-related sarcoma development have been
documented in cats (even more rare in dogs), microchipassociated
sarcoma development has never been
reported in felines. In the context of millions of microchip
implantations spread over many years, this near absence
of adverse event documentation comprises an impressive
and expansive safety record. Therefore, the benefits of
microchip implantation with regard to the safety and
welfare of pets should they become lost or separated
from their owner have proven to be infinitely greater than
the remote and unsubstantiated risk of tumor development
associated with microchip implantation.

http://www.digitalangel.com/document...%2002%2007.pdf

Surprise! Surprise! Rats bred to easily develop tumors do! You could probably give them a series of injections and they would develop tumors from that. I think by now, if dogs actually showed a propensity to get tumors from chips, we would be hearing about it on sites like this and in veterinary peer review journals, wouldn't we? And if a rash of those stories start, we can have inserted chips removed.

Good info, Nancy. Thanks.

Where I live there are people who come through every now and then and collect up dogs to sell to laboratories. They will find dogs that are running free but they also take dogs out of people's back yards and dogs that are tied out. In most states it is against the law for a laboratory to take a dog that has a microchip. That is one reason I had Gracie microchipped. She is never outside without being with me on her leash, but she has ran out the door when we were bringing things in from the store. She thinks it is a fun game. I always keep her collar with her ID tag on her in case she ever gets separated from us but I feel the microchip is also good to have just in case.

Sorry I had to disappear for a few minutes, I was in the middle of cooking dinner…..

I know we could trade links showing opposing views concerning safety in using a chip or the risks of cancer/tumor formation. The real problem is that we do not have a mandatory reporting system for these products. Right now it is strictly voluntary. I have seen stats concerning the reporting of adverse reactions of human products to be as low as 1% and at a high of 10%. Even if it is at the ten percent level this is totally unacceptable. The reporting for pet adverse reactions can’t possibly be higher than the rate for humans, so this is just as bad. As of now we really do not know how many cases are out there. Is it one or is it thousands?? At this point in time no one can really answer that, this is an unknown and depending which side the debate goes the numbers quoted will either be minimal or they will be large.

It would take a lot of time to investigate the studies and research papers to see if the author or researchers have any financial ties to the chip company, or if the chip company is funding the studies. That is why I specified that the research has to be done by unbiased parties. These types of things are very common in the medical field, it’s more common than not, sad to say.

I know many dogs have been returned to their owners because they where scanned and the chips where correctly registered. In those cases it worked as it should have. I would venture to say there is most likely many failures of returned pets even though the pet was chipped as in: chip not scanned even though the shelter had a scanner, chip migrated and the person scanning missed it, scanner not compatible with chip, failure of the chip because it’s defective, etc.etc. I am sure I read a couple stories of pets being adopted out and even euthanized because of these failures. I also came across articles raising the question as to what happens to a chip if the pet has to have a MRI , x-ray or a cat scan??? Has this ever been studied?......Are vets making sure they don’t administer any vaccines in the same area as the chip?? I’ve seen articles where this can cause an inflammatory process increasing the risks of tumors or possibly cancer forming. These sorts of things should be considered when opting to use chips.

All I’m saying is there are too many unknowns concerning this product. In the years to come I believe we will see more studies but until then *I* will wait….This is just one of those topics that is not answered with a simple*yes* or *no* answer. For each of us it will take a lot of thought and weighing of all the unknowns with the benefits in their use and then deciding if the reasons for its use is worth it for a our pets health and welfare…..

I feel better having Darwin & Mabel micro-chipped. It's like vaccines, some may have bad reactions to them, but most don't. I will take the chance and hope for the best. Knowing that they are micro-chipped, tattooed and collared makes me feel better. Mabel wants to buy a chopper now that she has a tattoo - she's such a rebel!!:D

Excellent post, I also have deep beliefs against micro-chipping. As you have posted, there are studies which contradict what many of these digital companies and their subsidiaries promote as "tested safe". As you have so eloquently stated, only time will predict the true safety of this RFID technology.