microchipping concerns....

[mhwc56]

This is an email a friend sent me not too long ago about the concern over microchipping...

Dear CASPIAN Members and Supporters,

I have big news! A lawsuit has been filed against pharmaceutical giant
Merck & Co. and implant maker Digital Angel over a cancerous tumor that
formed around a HomeAgain pet ID microchip. The victim was a cat named
Bulkin, who miraculously survived the ordeal after surgery,
chemotherapy, and radiation.

We are breaking the news today on our brand new www.ChipMeNot.com
website, featuring Bulkin's story, along with a copy of the lawsuit. Our
press release, which has already gone out to thousands of media outlets
and personal press contacts, is posted below, and at
http://www.chipmenot.org/mercksued.htm.

The Boston Globe has already picked up our story:
http://www.boston.com/community/pet...t_alleges_tracking_chip_caused_cancer_in_cat/

As has Bruce Sterling of Wired:
http://www.wired.com/beyond_the_beyond/2010/10/arphid-watch-rfid-implant-lawsuit-for-a-cat/

Steven Wise, the attorney who filed the suit, will be a guest on my
radio show tomorrow (Thursday 10/14) at 5:00 PM Eastern to discuss the
case. (See: www.KatherineAlbrecht.com for details on how to stream the
show live online, or catch the archives afterwards.)

Our new website, ChipMeNot.com, is an adverse reaction registry where
pet owners can report harm caused by implanted microchips. It features
Bulkin's story and the stories of other other cats, dogs, mice, rats,
and small animals that have been injured -- and even killed -- by
implanted chips.

Our inspiration for the website came from Seamus and Scotty, the two
brave dogs that died from microchip-induced tumors earlier this year,
Charlie Brown, the adorable chihuahua who bled to death in his owners'
arms last year, and Leon the bulldog whose owner first alerted us to the
cancer problem. We pay tribute to their memory through this new website,
and pray that by telling their stories we can help protect other pets
from their fate.

As you can imagine, it has taken months of hard work to put the website
together. I want to thank our unflappable graduate intern Lidiya
Prorochuk, tenacious pet owners Howard Gillis and Linda Hawkins, our
steadfast volunteer Brian Wiegand, our fountain of knowledge Jeanne, and
our cheerful webmaster Robin Abbate for a job extraordinarily well done.

I also want to thank each of you -- the CASPIAN members, supporters, and
radio show listeners who regularly send prayers, encouragement, and
financial support to keep us going. You guys are what makes it possible
for us to work on important issues like this.

In freedom,
Katherine Albrecht, Ed.D.


________________________________________________________________________

 

[welsummerchicks]

When you can show a researched, juried, replicated many times-mechanism by which that the chip actually caused the cancer, then I'll be interested in this. Otherwise it's just hystrionics.

There is a lawyer somewhere, who will take ANY case. That someone took the case, proves nothing.

 

[lasergrl]

Its well known that any type of injection can cause cancer in the rare cat that is genetically suceptable to these tumors. It isnt really what is in the injection its the act of introducing foreign anything and some even think its from the pushing of the outer layer of skin, inward. It has nothing to do with the chip itself. This type of tumor is so rare that it isnt even something people should worry about when the benefit outways the risk. of course if you have a cat that has had a sarcoma before, or a relative has then pass on vaccines and chips might make more sence.
Just for example, I work in a 5 doctor practice, and there has been one vaccine sarcoma in 3 years.

 

[patandchickens]

The lab studies, using special strains of mice that already have a very high tendency to develop tumors, are really not very well done (the ones I've seen) and because these type of lab mouse strains are so *notorious* for producing results that do not hold true in normal animals, I do not think their results have much if any relevance to pet/livestock situations.

(Although if you happen to have a pet mouse or rat rescued from a research lab that is bred from one of these abnormal high-cancer-formation lines, it probably *would* be better to forgo chipping it LOL)

In actual fact, AFAIK no study OF ACTUAL PETS has found that microchipping per se causes a higher rate of cancers. Injections and foreign bodies IN GENERAL do always carry this tiny-but-nonzero elevation in cancer risk, and since microchipping is in fact injection of a foreign body, there is that small increased number of cancers. But I have yet to see anything that suggests microchips are any worse than, like, casual injuries or surgical sites or vaccination sites. None of which do people get wigged out over.

For those who actually care to make an informed decision, an entry to the relevant literature can be found in the citations at http://www.avma.org/issues/microchipping/microchipping_bgnd.asp .

(Note that while their position is that microchips carry no extra cancer risk, the AVMA *does* recognize injection-site sarcomas in cats, primarily from certain versions of the FeLV and rabies vaccines, as being a real condition supported by the data. And some reasonable progress is being made towards identifying the cause and developing vaccines and vaccination protocols for cats that avoid this. (And thus injection-site sarcomas in cats are less common than they were, like ten or fifteen years ago). My point is, it isn't like the official vet party line is that nothing they do causes problems

)

Pat

 

[()relics]

all my shorthairs and weimaraner are chipped...Haven't seen any problems...Not to say that something may develop later...The vet said it was the right thing to do so I "figured" he knew what he was talking about.

 

[welsummerchicks]

The sarcoma and the injection issue, is not ALL cancers and actually it's not even close to 'cancer in general' as the essay suggested.

But by the way, the injection site sarcoma is associated with vaccines, not ID chips and sarcoma has NEVER been reported in association with ID tags. They have no science to back them up.

It appears only in 1-2 in every 10,000 cats, .02% but after VACCINE, not ID tag. And the sarcoma is very treatable, if it is gotten at when it is small. Lumps can also be fat tumors, insect bites or abcesses. Not every lump is a sarcoma.

 

[woodmort]

Having an Ed . D hardly makes one an expert on much of anything, including cancer causes. It is just a bunch of letters after ones name in an attempt to impress but means little. I've encountered enough of them in my checkered career to know. I'd take what she says with a very large grain of salt.

 

[NellaBean]

There is a much higher chance of your pet getting lost in their lifetime than of your pet developing any health problem relating to a microchip. Having worked at a shelter for years, a dog getting taken out of its area and into a shelter has a much higher risk of DEATH by not having a microchip........than a dog with a microchip. Guess what, no microchip and a few days later your dog might be dead. With a microchip, not only are you contacted but your dog is held longer. Even if there was a higher risk of cancer or whatever....which I don't believe....I would still do it.

 

[welsummerchicks]

Albrecht might or might not be knowledgeable about cancer and its causes, but I agree with the prev poster that an ED wouldn't be what makes her knowledgeable. I'd be more inclined to discuss it with an oncologist, veterinarian or researcher.

My guess, based on the lack of any juried research to back up her claims, is that she's on an empty crusade. So are many people, and the less science backs them up, the louder they talk. Their crusades cover many areas, and are usually grotesque distortions of the facts. Since people are gullible and easily frightened, they swallow it.

 

[woodmort]

Quote:
Agree!