Microchips

[raindove]

There was a recent thread talking about having ID on pets. People finding dogs sometimes remove a collar and will just keep a dog.
There's more out there than you think. I've seen it many, many times over the years, while doing rescue.

I've always used AVID microchips in all the rescues and my personal dogs. I paid to register the AVID chips in my name, and had no further fees after the initial registration.

I recently got a rescue, and he has two microchips. The breeder had a Home Again chip in him. Years later, he was in a shelter and they chipped him the second time with a 24 Pet Watch chip.

When I went to change ownership information --
Home Again charged me nothing to change the information.
They did suggest that I buy an $8 tag with his number on it because that did not come with him, but it was not required.

But the 24 Pet Watch that the shelter used -- charged me $18.95 for one year or $59.95 for a lifetime. I asked if they will contact me after one year, if I don't renew. I got a mealy mouthed response that they would try to contact me with the information they had. Did not leave me with a warm fuzzy feeling.

[Uppercrust]

Good ideas on this topic. I will definitely ask my vet about this.

[raindove]

dturm wrote:
Having multiple chips is not a problem as long as all are read. I had a client who was going to Greece and I had to place a second chip that was ISO compliant with the European Pet Passport.

My understanding is that they have re-engineered the chips to make migration less of a problem that the first generation chips. I have scanned them almost near the elbow :B, talk about migration.

I've always offered to scan dogs if someone found a dog or just wanted their own chip checked. Figured it could save the finder a trip to the SPCA. One dog I scanned one time, the chip was in his neck -- looked like it was pretty close to the jugular vein to me. I suggested they ask their vet about that one. If it was my dog, that would bother me.
That chip was in a dog that originated from a midwest puppy mill. So one doesn't know if the chip was haphazardly administered or if it migrated. Who's to say. But that's the only one I ever scanned that was that far from the recommended injection site.

[dturm]

GMandJM wrote:
But if you or your tech get a reading on a chip, do you generally stop there....or would you routinely check for another?

Our tech didn't do a secondary scan when we had our cat's chip read.

I agree you'd be more likely to stop, but standard procedure is to scan multiple time to confirm the number (at least twice). Hopefully both chips would be put in close proximity - they are supposed to all go in the same area.

[GMandJM]

But if you or your tech get a reading on a chip, do you generally stop there....or would you routinely check for another?

Our tech didn't do a secondary scan when we had our cat's chip read.

[dturm]

Having multiple chips is not a problem as long as all are read. I had a client who was going to Greece and I had to place a second chip that was ISO compliant with the European Pet Passport.

My understanding is that they have re-engineered the chips to make migration less of a problem that the first generation chips. I have scanned them almost near the elbow :B, talk about migration.

[GMandJM]

Wow - poor Muffin. People generously donated over $6,000 for his surgery to remove the chip in his spine. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like that resolved his left-side paralysis.

Bummer that the 24 Pet Watch people won't work with you, RainDove. If you don't renew, does your information just get dumped from their system?

You could register both chips, but as an animal rescuer, no doubt you could find a much better use for the $60 they want to charge you.

[CA_POPPY]

Maybe this link will work:
http://abc7.com/pets/partially-paralyzed-kitten-to-undergo-risky-surgery/367094/

[CA_POPPY]

This story was on our local news last year and is the only negative result I've heard of on the subject. Seems like application error, rather than product fault.

California people are largely VERY fond of animals and a fund was created to have a vet neurologist remove the chip. The last I heard, the little guy had been adopted as a special needs pet.

[raindove]

I had wondered about migration when chips first came out. A few years forward, I was told the chip companies addressed that issue and designed the chip with indentations on it... which in theory , I guess the fatty tissue would grow into the notches and therefore anchor the chip.

I have a scanner and I've checked chip locations on my dogs throughout the years, just to see if they had moved at all. I have not seen any that moved substantially.

As far as cancer at the implant site... I've had over 150 rescue dogs micro-chipped and all of my own dogs. Not one of those dogs developed any problems at the microchip site.

Everything in life has pros and cons.
Based on my experiences with microchips, I think the benefit of the chip outweighs the risks. So I chip my animals.

The beauty is that we live in a free country where we can make our minds up and have personal choice.

As far as the dog with 2 chips -- I had considered asking my vet if he could surgically remove the shelter chip when I take him in for a dental and some growth removals.

I appreciate Dr Doug's comments on this. I don't want to put the dog through any undue pain or risk.
What kind of worries me is that IF he were to ever get lost, if he is scanned - once a shelter picks up a chip number they are going to stop scanning. And I have no way of knowing which chip will read.

I've tried scanning him several times. With the scanner against the skin and moving very slowly, it appears that one chip is on his left side and the other on the right side.

But.... if I hold the scanner 2 inches above his body and scan -- it will pick up a chip number -- but it's not consistent - it reads either chip from that distance with no rhyme or reason to it.

I don't know why the shelter would have double chipped him. The microchip companies have provided free scanners to shelters and rescues in the past -- the shelter has to agree to scan every dog coming in, and again before they are adopted or euthanized. If he was scanned, why would they double chip? I'm thinking no one bothered to scan him.... but who knows.
And if this is the biggest problem I have, I am pretty well off. :B

[GMandJM]

Thanks for posting that. A surprising number of incidents of chip migration. I had no idea that ever happened.

The good news: August 15th is officially "National Check the Chip" day. Kinda cool!

(EDIT: Duplicate Link Deleted)

[dturm]

AVMA Microchip Literature and Summary

[dturm]

Q: What are some of the problems associated with microchips? How common are they?
A: The British Small Animal Veterinary Association (BSAVA) maintains a database of adverse reactions to microchips. Since the database was started in 1996, over 4 million animals have been microchipped and only 391 adverse reactions have been reported. Of these reactions, migration of the microchip from its original implantation site is the most common problem reported. Other problems, such as failure of the microchip, hair loss, infection, swelling, and tumor formation, were reported in much lower numbers. For a chart summarizing the BSAVA reports, read the AVMA's literature review on Microchipping of Animals.

Q: I've heard lately that microchips cause cancer. Do they?
A: There have been reports that mice and rats developed cancer associated with implanted microchips. However, the majority of these mice and rats were being used for cancer studies when the tumors were found, and the rat and mice strains used in the studies are known to be more likely to develop cancer. Tumors associated with microchips in two dogs and two cats have been reported, but in at least one dog and one cat the tumor could not be directly linked to the microchip itself (and may have been caused by something else). For more details on the studies, read the AVMA's literature review on Microchipping of Animals.

Q: I don't want my pet to get cancer. Should I have my pet's microchip removed?
A: We do not recommend that you have your pet's microchip removed, for two reasons. First, based on our review of the studies, the risk that your animal will develop cancer due to its microchip is very, very low, and is far outweighed by the improved likelihood that you will get your animal back if it becomes lost. Second, although implanting a microchip is a very simple and quick procedure, removing one is more involved and may require general anesthesia and surgery.

Current thinking now is that any insult to tissue (injection, bite, repeated trauma, etc.) causes the release of substances that in some individuals (very, very small percentage) may set up the circumstances where specific types of tumors could develop. There seems to be a familial (genetic) tendency. This is thought to be the mechanism where vaccine induced sarcomas develop in some cats.

There are ongoing investigations to try to pin down the exact mechanism, but the chances of developing cancer from an RFID chip are just about nil. Much greater chance of getting away, lost and no ID without the chip.

[GMandJM]

Relieved to hear that! Are there any CREDIBLE studies/journals/papers on line anywhere that you know of?

[dturm]

GMandJM wrote:
Actually there have been reports of injection-site carcinoma (Founded or not? Obviously you'd know more about that.) Just saying...that could be one reason someone would want to unchip a pet.

But generally I agree with you that removal has more potential for harm than good. Thanks for bringing that up.

Totally UNFOUNDED by multiple studies.