The Sham of Microchipping Pets

I continue to see postings and info-pieces put forth by supposed animal-loving groups & individuals on the benefits of microchipping one's pets.

Here is one I just reviewed
All Cats Need an Identity: Cats Without ID Can Become a Statistic

I quote :

The headline never fails to cause a twinge of empathy in a cat lover. Nothing can approximate the emotions playing hopscotch through the mind of someone who has lost a cat: fear that you'll never see her again; fear that you will see her again-- a broken corpse thrown to the side of a road; paranoia that someone has stolen her; anger at the cat for escaping; guilt and remorse for allowing her escape; hope that any minute now you'll hear that familiar "meow" and she'll be waiting patiently at the front door; and that heavy, dull, empty feeling of loss

Sounds like the only true compassion is keeping your cat or other pet microchipped and registered, right? Also, major heaps of F.U.D. (= Fear Uncertainty and Doubt) if you don't do this.

Here are some other less-alarming pro-microchipping pieces
- 'Microchipping Your Cat for Extra Safety', http://www.myhealthycat.com/microchipping.html
- 'All About Microchipping Identification for Dogs and Cats', http://petcaretips.net/microchipping-dog.html

Here is a pro-microchipping piece that hints at the current costs to animal shelters and potential pet owners for voluntary microchipping theirs pets. 'Microchip Your Cat', http://catszone.blogspot.com/2007/03/microchip-your-cat.htm

Microchipping is not an expensive procedure, in most areas the cost of this safety precaution is $50 USD. The owner must pay an additional fee to register the cat’s microchip ID information. This registration fee is used to make sure your cat’s information is entered into databases at shelters in your area. If you get your cat from an animal shelter, it may already be microchipped and you will only have to pay the small registration fee. Contact your local animal shelter to find out if they provide a free microchipping service.

Finally for now, there is also the "Uses and benefits" section of the Microchip implant (animal) Wikipedia,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microchip_implant_(animal)#Uses_and_benefits
As this piece summarizes,

Microchips have been particularly useful in the return of lost pets. They can also assist where the ownership of an animal is in dispute.

--

The striking aspect of all these site-pieces, without exception, is that these are all for the supposed benefit of the pet-owner and naturally, the owned pet.

Actually, there are some disturbing trends that indicate that any accrued benefit of microchipping may not be completely beneficial for the pet(!), and even more certainly, not for that pet-owner who voluntarily chose to microchip his/her pet or who voluntarily chose to adopt his/her pet in the first place.

Consider these findings.
1. The cons of microchipping pets as described at goemstic.com's Pros and Cons of Microchipping Pets
2. Within the last few years preceding this particular blog writeup, several news reports of studies suggesting that microchip implants may be linked to
tumors in pets.
- The washingtonpost.com's 'Chip Implants Linked to Animal Tumors
- LA radio station KNBC's Do Microchip Implants Pose Health Threat To Pets, Humans?
- A hard-hitting Anonyumous blogspot.com response to Arlington Pets blog: Microchip Concerns Premature

I'm extremely disappointed by your post. The title alone is misleading, if not wholly inaccurate. Ohio State University's veterinary oncology dept. has come forward requesting a full, 20-year retrospective study of chips and possible sarcoma links before any categorical ruling of 'safety'. The medical community has immediately stopped the implantation of chips in alzheimer's and dimentia patients, and most of the doctor's of the 200 or so already implanted are planning immediate removal.

One dog has already been confirmed to have contracted and died from chip-associated sarcoma. Perhaps it's best that you let ALL of the facts come out before commenting that concerns are 'premature'.

And citing the AVMA holds little to no validity in my book. It's an organization committed to its members and their business, not to animal welfare. Look at the AVMA's current VOCAL opposition to the Horse Slaughter Prevention Act.

Sorry - but you missed the boat on this one.10/18/2007 8:39 AM

Indeed, this may be the key reason that microchipping pets is a sham solely for our pets' healths alone.

IMNSHO, it seems to me that microchipping and the pet-databases associated with this practice are almost as concerned with licen$ing and product-marketing/spamming [to us pet owners] as they are with their primary purpose of recovering lost pets.


Are microchip manufacturers and veterinarians somehow burying the real statistical health-risks on the use of pet microchips from current and new pet-owners??

Who else could stand to benefit from the non-reversible use of pet microchips?
(Animal-rights lawyers and law enforcement personnel certainly!)

This may easily lead to a scenario in which animal registration and governmental surveillance possibly increases enactment and enforcement of animal-cruelty laws, making it increasingly criminal and punishable not to use pet microchip devices.
- What can effectively stop the eventual scenario of law enforcements' fining or arresting owners whose microchipped-ID'd pets accidentally and temporarily wander away from their owners, or fining or else arresting microchip ID'd owners when their pets miss a scheduled vaccination ??
- Will such owners of microchipped pets get fined or otherwise penalized when they do not pay initial and renewal fees for their pets' microchips?