Pet Forum / Miscellaneous / Animal Health / February 2008

My only post on this subject will be this one. I beg and plead that
everyone who wants to jump on the anti-chip bandwagon think about the
situation realistically.

The facts are:
1) In total, millions of microchips have been placed in dogs, cats and
humans.
2) The microchip opponent who produced antichip.com could only find two
cases in any species but mice and rats.
3) Most mice and rats produced for research are genetically modified and
many are designed to produce cancers at an increased rate compared to
the general population.
4) All of us in the field are very concerned about the very low chance
of fibrosarcoma being induced by an injection in predisposed
cats...that's a given. If microchips were causing cancers, wouldn't we
be seeing more and more cases in this population
(fibrosarcoma-predisposed cats)? In these cats, we know for a fact that
injections that incite inflammation may induce abnormal cell growth. Why
aren't we seeing it in our cats that have microchips?
5) *If* we assume the 2 reported cancers in dogs were induced by the
chip, the risk of cancer is minuscule compared to the number of chips
implanted. The benefits of microchip identification far outweigh this
astronomical risk. If I were told that there were a 1 in 500,000 chance
(my guesstimate...no real stats to back this up) my dog would get a
cancer if I implanted a microchip, but that there was a 95% chance he'd
be found if he got out of my back yard, I'd have the chip placed.
Wouldn't you?
6) Thousands of dogs and cats have been returned to their grateful
owners thanks to microchips.

OK, I'm off the soapbox. Flame away.

Dr. Sandy