Do you like this story?
Microchips for people raises tumor fears — for pets
By Gina Spadafori
September 9, 2007
The promising technology of microchips to help lost pets get home — long dampened by the market’s refusal to embrace universal chip-reading standards — may get even more problematic if this story from the Associated Press gains traction, with its documentation of the link between the chips and tumors in lab animals:
When the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved implanting microchips in humans, the manufacturer said it would save lives, letting doctors scan the tiny transponders to access patients’ medical records almost instantly. The FDA found “reasonable assurance” the device was safe, and a sub-agency even called it one of 2005′s top “innovative technologies.”
But neither the company nor the regulators publicly mentioned this: A series of veterinary and toxicology studies, dating to the mid-1990s, stated that chip implants had “induced” malignant tumors in some lab mice and rats.
“The transponders were the cause of the tumors,” said Keith Johnson, a retired toxicologic pathologist, explaining in a phone interview the findings of a 1996 study he led at the Dow Chemical Co. in Midland, Mich.
Here’s the rest. And for more on the industry’s refusal to adopt universal technology so all chips can be read with a single scanner, check out Dr. Khuly’s blog for a three-part series, here, here and here.
Share & Enjoy
|
Facebook
|
Twitter
|
Google Buzz
|
Digg
|
|
Technorati
|
StumbleUpon
|
Delicious
|
Email
|
Home
I’ll have to read the article later. But let me say this - we just did a set of shoulder x-rays on my 11-1/2 year old Papillon (he was limping - cause still unknown) and I chuckled when I saw - clearly outlined on the x-ray - his microchip - implanted when he was 15 months old.
No sign of a tumor in this boy!
Comment by The OTHER Pat — September 9, 2007 @ 7:15 am
I don’t believe in microchipping pets or humans.
I will not even go into my religious beliefs on the subject…but to introduce a foreign object into the body unncessarily, I think, is asking for trouble.
It may not affect all, but I am sure that there is a percentage who would (and are) affected, and may develop tumors. I have not had my pets microchipped, and I will not allow myself to be either.
Comment by Marcy — September 9, 2007 @ 12:40 pm
A little off topic, but my mom’s 7 year old male cat was recently disgnosed with vaccine caused fibrosarcoma. They removed a very large tumor from his side (it looks like where the distemper shot is given) but they have given a poor prognosis based generally on statistics. No treatment 6months-1 year, with treatment (radiation and chemo) 1-3 years. All of my research on the internet has shown that this is very hard to treat and prognosis is poor all around. Any suggestions as to alternative treatments or holistic treatments. I gave my mom the names of some holistic vets in the area (Tacoma, WA (30miles s of seattle)) but we have no way of knowing if they’re any good. Any thoughts, suggestions anything would be appreciated. Thanks
Comment by Chelsea — September 9, 2007 @ 10:44 pm
Chelsea,
This is a difficult situation and I would like to encourage you to reconsider your choice of holistic medicine. This cancer is too aggressive. There are no scientific studies that I could locate to confirm that holistic medicine will facilitate a cure or prolong life to the extent that conventional medical treatment will. You have no time to lose. I would strongly encourage you to take the cat to a veterinary teaching hospital such as Washington State University in Pullman. http://www.vetmed.wsu.edu/
http://findarticles.com/p/arti.....i_80532272
http://listserv.vt.edu/cgi-bin.....038;P=6847
http://www.consciouschoice.com.....s1803.html
I wish your cat all the best.
Comment by Lynn — September 10, 2007 @ 6:48 pm
While I always appreciate news, contrary or not, one needs to read it critically.
As I understand it, there has been only one possible case of cancer, not proven, that is POSSIBLY tied to the microchip in a dog. Just one out of several million pets that have been microchipped. While it’s true that there have been more reports of malignant sarcomas in lab mice and rats, you should know that these small lab animals frequently develop malignant tumors as a result of ANY kind of injection, microchip or not.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..97_pf.html
Of course it’s quite possible that in the absence of a core veterinary information network that collects private clinic reports of unusual findings in clinical practice, that sarcomas are indeed more commonplace in the dog or cat. [HINT: MUST GET A UNIVERSAL VETERINARY NETWORK ESTABLISHED!!! THE PET FOOD RECALL SHOULD HAVE INSPIRED THIS.] Time will tell [IF vets will report to a centralized agency].
I’ve had all my pets microchipped since the technology came out about 20 years ago. I don’t regret it at all. In fact, if it weren’t for that chip, it’s quite likely one of my beloved dogs would never have made his way back home to me after the house had been broken into and he slid out the door.
Until other findings surface that point toward contraindicating microchipping, I personally would continue to “chip” my pets.
So think of the odds: What are the odds your pet will get loose and end up at a shelter or in the hands of someone else? More than 1 in a few million?
I’d go with the microchip.
Comment by Lynn — September 10, 2007 @ 7:00 pm
Lynn … me, too.
I’ve re-homed too many animals who were obviously someone’s pet, except I couldn’t figure out where they belonged.
It’s all about balancing risks. My dogs, cat and parrot are chipped, and I don’t regret it at all.
Now … if the chip industry could just agree on a universal scanner …
Comment by Gina Spadafori — September 10, 2007 @ 7:24 pm
Gina:
You’re right - you have to figure out the lesser of all evils. And everyone needs to learn not to take everything at face value. It’s our responsibility as fur parents to investigate, investigate, investigate.
That the scanner isn’t universal has totally baffled me from day one. With all the “Einsteins” it took to develop the microchip, you would have thought they would have known better.
I just finished reading an excellent veterinary pathology case study about a French Bulldog who was diagnosed with a sarcoma next to [not encapsulating] his microchip. The microchip, incidentally, was of French origin [Indexel].
The University of Guelph [yes, the lab that did some of the early pet food recall testing] ran some fairly extensive tests once they removed the section and adjacent chip. They determined that the mass was very similar to vaccine-associated [or injection-related] fibrosarcoma in the cat. UC-Davis also got involved with some of the histological testing. No aluminum deposits were found in the sample; just vimentin. “Based on histologic and immunohistochemical results, a diagnosis of high-grade fibrosarcoma with typical features of postinjection sarcoma was made. The inflammatory cells exhibited histiocytic and T-cell phenotype, indicative of a type IV hypersensitivity reaction.”
http://www.vetpathology.org/cg.....l/43/4/545
Task forces were formed in 1996 to investigate and review literature as related to post-injection sarcomas [not limited to microchips].
They never did conclude that it was the microchip that caused Leon the French Bulldog the tumor, since he’d received several Rabies injections in the same general area in earlier years. But they did conclude that it would be wise to continue studying cases such as his.
In short, I think it’s safe to assume that it’s not necessarily a microchip that causes these sarcomas [and therefore shouldn’t be crucified inthe absence of credible data supporting that they do].
Again, which is the lesser of all evils?
Which brings us to the question: What have veterinarians done about developing a centralized massive early warning system and core data base? Isn’t this on the agenda for one of the big symposiums coming up soon?
Oh yes: while MOST sarcomas are cancerous, some are not.
Comment by Lynn — September 10, 2007 @ 8:21 pm
My chocolate lab just died yesterday from a brain tumor…she also had a tumor in her lungs. I’m not sure if there was or was not a connection with the microchip, but she was only 4.5 years old…I’ll definitely never use a microchip again.
I would recommend a transponder on the collar.
Comment by John — September 22, 2007 @ 1:40 am