(NAIS)=USDA Approves Chip Implants, that Cause Cancer Tumors

[TheOLDNewChick]

Quote:
Hey, guess what?



NO!

 

[yardbird tx]

Quote:
Hey, guess what?



NO!

Well Sorry but I have to agree with, NO.

I fell strongly about this old quote: If you give up liberty for security, you deserve neither.

 

[RoostersCrow]

I expect that there will not be too big a push for people to get these.

I just expect the government to slowly, surely, inextricably move towards mapping every persons DNA at birth.

"I love my country. It's the government I fear!"

"I pray I am dead before I surrender all my liberty to the FED"

 

[raindrop]

Quote:
Hey, guess what?



NO!

NO what? I don't get it New Chick.

 

[raindrop]

Yep, good quote.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

-Benjamin Franklin

 

[Cara]

Quote:
Microchipping can save an animal from being sold to a laboratory if stolen or lost. It is illegal for a laboratory to purchase or experiment on an animal with a tattoo or microchip without contacting the owner.

 

[cjeanean]

Microchipping an animal that you are afraid to lose is a non-issue. That's not what this discussion was about. So what if some people want to microchip their dogs or cats??? We rescued a pit bull that was microchipped, and due to all the issues with pit bulls I'd like to have our original dog microchipped in case he ever does get away. I don't want him put down, I would rather microchip him and get him back!!! BUT, he's an animal, he's my PROPERTY. I would never microchip a human, myself or my child, because I believe that to do that would take away my right to anonymity. I don't want the government to be able to track me, especially if the government does a total take over and I want to be hidden. Also, microchipping a pet is OPTIONAL. (Some areas require a pit bull to be chipped for the whole breed specific B.S., but other than PB'S) This whole NAIS thing is NOT optional, as a matter of fact we don't even get to vote on it!!! They're doing this behind our backs, and whether it causes problems or not we will never hear it. We will only hear the fabricated 'good' things about NAIS, or human microchips, whatever. They will lie and whatever they have to do to prove that NAIS and microchipping works so well, and convince humans to do it, which is what they're already doing. Then, just like NAIS, human chipping will be mandatory to wage the war on terror or whatever lame excuse they come up with. Call it conspiracy theory, I don't care. Based on everything that's been happening the past 20 years or so you can't tell me that it's not possible or believable.

 

[raindrop]

Just didn't want people to not microchip their pets if they were so inclined (I know its not for everyone) because they were worried about the microchips causing cancer.

 

[patandchickens]

THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT MICROCHIPS, AS SUCH, CAUSE CANCER.

(Yes, I am shouting, pardon me but I get tired of seeing this circulated around and around and around without correction, with the result that some people forego microchipping pets and end up losing them forever to euthanasia in some overcrowded pound).

Look: ANY foreign body, or even just wound, has a slightly elevated chance of giving rise to a tumor. THis is well documented in both humans and animals. The mechanism is not entirely understood but is likely to involve a) the fact that normal healing involves cell proliferation, and b) the likelihood that some cancers are caused by viruses, which could gain a foothold via a wound.

Microchipping involves creating a wound and inserting a foreign body. For this reason, yes, there is a slightly elevated incidence of tumors at microchip sites... but NOT because of anything inherent to the microchip.

The actual rate of microchip-site-associated tumors is incredibly incredibly low. I have to get breakfast into kids and don't hvae time right now to look it up but if you really want I'll dig it up for you later. It is on the order of what a previous poster on this thread has said. Your dog or whatever is much more likely to die by being struck by lightning on a Thursday just before a steak dinner.

Screaming hysterical anti-microchip websites and articles point to a study done with mice in which a much higher (although still quite low) rate of microchip-site-associated tumors developed. What the screaming hysterics do not mention is that this was done in a special strain of lab mice that is specially designed TO DEVELOP TUMORS. (There are many such mouse strains extant, some selected from naturally-occurring variants and some geneteically engineered to be tumor-prone). The rate of tumor formation in a mouse line that already has tumor-formation rates hundreds or thousands of times higher than , well, Actual Real Normal animals IS NOT RELEVANT to what's going to happen to Fido or Fluffy.

Sorry for the elevated level of aggravation and frustration here. Please, y'all, help out my blood pressure and the next time you hear someone passing this thing around, demand evidence and think critically about it (remember what I said about tumor-prone lab mouse strains).

Sitting down and shutting up now

,

Pat, who for the record is still very much against NAIS, but for much more reality-based reasons

 

[chicken_boy_Kurt]

Ron Paul is against NAIS (I think). If I'm not allowed to speak about politics forgive me, it fits into this.