# Micro-chip - should we remove?



## jhosk1981 (Feb 21, 2017)

When we bought our lovely little pup Reuben, he had been micro-chipped - (I was not very keen on this idea - seems wrong having a foreign object inside him). We were advised it was a legal requirement and the Breeder took him to have it done prior to us picking him up.

I have since been reading there are lots of health implications connected to micro-chips and evidence has even started to suggest there is a cancer link. I have also heard more and more case of dogs being lost and stolen and the micro-chip serving no purpose in their retrieval.

Any advise would be greatly received on whether they are actually a legal requirement, if you would have yours removed due to the health implications evidence is starting to point to and what purpose they actually serve - if they are not used when a dog is lost or stolen?

Thank you,
James


----------



## Nonnie (Apr 15, 2009)

Yes, they are a legal requirement.

Yes, they serve a purpose. Countless dogs are returned to their owners every single day because of them. 

There is a LOT of scaremongering in terms of the health problems caused by microchips. Problems caused by them are EXTREMELY rare. They are inert after all.


----------



## Darkangelwitch (Mar 16, 2016)

If you are in the U.K. then yes, it is a legal requirement to have your dog microchipped.

All mine have always been chipped and have never had any health problems from it, stop reading the scare mongers and listen to your vet, they know better.

If your dog is not microchipped you are at risk of either never getting it back if lost or having it removed from you as you will be breaking the law.


----------



## SixStar (Dec 8, 2009)

As already mentioned, in the UK it is a legal requirement to have your dog microchipped. Therefore, you will not find a vet willing to remove unless for already present (and unspeakably rare) medical reasons. And besides, you would put your dog through a general anaesthetic for no reason whatsoever?


----------



## MiffyMoo (Sep 15, 2015)

jhosk1981 said:


> When we bought our lovely little pup Reuben, he had been micro-chipped - (I was not very keen on this idea - seems wrong having a foreign object inside him). We were advised it was a legal requirement and the Breeder took him to have it done prior to us picking him up.
> 
> I have since been reading there are lots of health implications connected to micro-chips and evidence has even started to suggest there is a cancer link. I have also heard more and more case of dogs being lost and stolen and the micro-chip serving no purpose in their retrieval.
> 
> ...


Here you go

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.te...and-effective-dont-believe-the-scaremong/amp/

Micro chipping is a no brainer for me, as I prefer to know that if my dog escapes and either loses their collar or tag, there is always the chip as a back up


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

As every dog now has to be microchipped and every responsible owner has been microchipping for years then I would not worry about the very very odd reaction. Of course you want your dog to be chipped.


----------



## Freyja (Jun 28, 2008)

The only time a dog is allowed to leave their breeder without a microchip is if it is a tiny breed and has a letter from the vet stating the puppy was too small to be done.

A friends dog in fact one I bred was stolen and recovered 3 years after he went missing. He was only recovered because the person who stole him tried to sell him and the person who bought him took him to the vets due to a health issue and when he was scanned the chip was scanned as stolen. The vet informed my friend and the dog was returned to her.


----------



## Phoenix Rising (Jan 25, 2016)

Freyja said:


> The only time a dog is allowed to leave their breeder without a microchip is if it is a tiny breed and has a letter from the vet stating the puppy was too small to be done.
> 
> A friends dog in fact one I bred was stolen and recovered 3 years after he went missing. He was only recovered because the person who stole him tried to sell him and the person who bought him took him to the vets due to a health issue and when he was scanned the chip was scanned as stolen. The vet informed my friend and the dog was returned to her.


So why is it in some cases we see stories that the original owners were not allowed to know where there dog had ended up when it had been stolen/lost, picked up and adopted by someone else? Surely the dog warders/rescue would find the chip and return the dog to the original owner?

Should they give more than 7days? what if dog was stolen then driven miles from home? How would you know which direction to focus your search in to ring all dog wardens within 50 miles/100miles or more to find your dog before it's adopted out or PTS due to lack of spaces?


----------



## bogdog (Jan 1, 2014)

Dog warden scan dogs and attempt to contact owners, that is why it's important to notify the dog warden when a dog is found. However, many owners still don't change their details when they move. Or when a dog is rehomed the new owners don't register their details. If they did, dogs and owners could be reunited more quickly.


----------



## Freyja (Jun 28, 2008)

Phoenix Rising said:


> So why is it in some cases we see stories that the original owners were not allowed to know where there dog had ended up when it had been stolen/lost, picked up and adopted by someone else? Surely the dog warders/rescue would find the chip and return the dog to the original owner?
> 
> Should they give more than 7days? what if dog was stolen then driven miles from home? How would you know which direction to focus your search in to ring all dog wardens within 50 miles/100miles or more to find your dog before it's adopted out or PTS due to lack of spaces?


If the chip is flagged as stolen then the original owner should be informed if the dog wasn't chipped then how are they supposed to know who it belongs to. My friend searched for 3 years before Danny was found yet her lurcher who was stolen with him and also chipped has never been found. I am going back many years before it was the law that all dogs had to be chipped. Vets should scan he dog every time they go in for treatment although we all know that doens't happen. New clients at vets should be scanned when they go for their first appoinment. If a dog is found by someone and they do not hand it in and never take it to the vets then no one would know it is a stolen or lost dog.

I have seen dogs on facebook that have been found miles away but are chipped to other areas even abroad but the onwers details not registered. If the owners do not bother to register the chip then nothing can be done if the dog is found lost or stolen but being chipped gives it a much better chance of being returned to its rightful owner


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

jhosk1981 said:


> When we bought our lovely little pup Reuben, he had been micro-chipped - (I was not very keen on this idea - seems wrong having a foreign object inside him). We were advised it was a legal requirement and the Breeder took him to have it done prior to us picking him up.
> 
> I have since been reading there are lots of health implications connected to micro-chips and evidence has even started to suggest there is a cancer link. I have also heard more and more case of dogs being lost and stolen and the micro-chip serving no purpose in their retrieval.
> 
> ...


Whether you like it or not it is a legal requirement to have your dog micro chipped.

There are lots of people who will state that X is the source of numerous health problems; ask yourself "what is the source" "where is the scientific evidence"?

Animals have been microchipped for decades with no issues.

There is practically nothing on earth that is not linked to cancer.

Or you could risk a £500 fine!

http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/microchippingfactsheet


----------



## Meezey (Jan 29, 2013)

Phoenix Rising said:


> Should they give more than 7days? what if dog was stolen then driven miles from home? How would you know which direction to focus your search in to ring all dog wardens within 50 miles/100miles or more to find your dog before it's adopted out or PTS due to lack of spaces?


That is why there groups on the internet, and things like Doglost, and you include insurance, not to hard to get something circulated Globally now hence world wide web. I certainly would not be limiting myself to 100 miles.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

I think there is probably more risk in giving a puppy a general aesthetic, cutting him open, digging around to remove it and sewing him up again, all completely unnecessarily, versus the actual microchip itself. No vet would consent to this anyway as a) it's illegal for a dog not to be chipped and b) ethically you only put a dog through procedures when it's justifiable and for their benefit, which that would not be.


----------



## cbcdesign (Jul 3, 2014)

The one problem with the internet is that it is a haven for people posting rumours on all sorts of health related matters with little or no scientific grounding. Lots of people believing something causes health problems is not proof of anything just as lots of people believing the earth is flat doesn't prove anything other than the fact that there are some incredibly stupid people in the world! 

The chips are fine, leave well alone is the best advice.


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

I had my previous two dogs microchipped back in the late 1990's, long before the current legislation regarding microchipping dogs became a legal requirement.
Both dogs lived to a ripe old age and didn't have any cancers.
The trouble with the Internet is that there seem to be bored people who write rubbish with no scientific evidence to back up any claims that are made.

Not having your dog microchipped is illegal and you will be fined if caught.
It's highly unlikely that a vet will remove a chip whatever you say.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

I can't understand why you would want it removed, it's only the size of a small grain of rice and causes no problem to the dog.
As said.. in the UK you have to have dogs Micro chipped it's the law, anyway if your dog gets lost you have a good chance of getting it back, so I don't see your problem.


----------



## Sarah H (Jan 18, 2014)

jhosk1981 said:


> When we bought our lovely little pup Reuben, he had been micro-chipped - (I was not very keen on this idea - seems wrong having a foreign object inside him). We were advised it was a legal requirement and the Breeder took him to have it done prior to us picking him up.
> 
> I have since been reading there are lots of health implications connected to micro-chips and evidence has even started to suggest there is a cancer link. I have also heard more and more case of dogs being lost and stolen and the micro-chip serving no purpose in their retrieval.
> 
> ...


Eh? Are you for real? YES it's the law to have your dog microchipped, breeders must legally chip the puppies before they are sold so that there is always someone ultimately responsible for the dog.

I've never heard of ANY health implications of microchips, apart from the usual scaremongering you find on facebook and other sites.

I work with dog wardens and pretty much every dog picked up is reunited because of the microchip. We don't tend to see dogs with tags because they are contacted and therefore go home quickly because they have a legally required ID tag (unless contacts are out-of-date). Unfortunately even in this day and age dogs are still picked up with no collar AND no chip. Luckily our local dog wardens are great and try their hardest to find the dogs' owners, but they don't have to try so hard. If you can't be bothered to have any legally required ID tag or chip then then why should they spend their days tracking you down? It's £5 for a tag and £15 for a chip. It's £120 to get your dog back from the warden.


----------



## DaisyBluebell (Apr 14, 2017)

All mine have been microchipped over the years with no problems but I do know of one case where the chip moved, it was still readable by the vet but not in the spot where he expected to find it. I've had the word 'Microchipped' inscribed on Emma's collar under her name as well (belt & braces as husband says)


----------



## Tamberlane (Jul 8, 2014)

Microchips are great and are often literally life savers.
We routinely check for chips where I work and register chip numbers for all new animals entering our computer system...our nurses have also recently started checking the chip details against the databases once a week and encouraging people to update their details and addresses online as so many chips are not registered to the current owners/ have the wrong number/wrong address.

If the chip address is present and noones answering the phone the dog wardens go to the house to see if anyones home before bringing the dog to the pound as well.

We send dogs straight home when they are brought in as strays from the chip details all the time!As long as the details are up to date its a lifesaver...and fine saver! 
Have even identified a couple of stolen animals(buying off gumtree is a very bad idea!) and reunited them with their owners.

I have yet to see a health issue directly related to a microchip.
I dont know any vet who would willingly remove a chip.

The risk of surgery alone when its not causing any issues is much higher then any risk a chip might potentially cause...also I cant imagine it would be easy to surgically locate and dig out a grain of rice sized chip thats been implanted between the shoulder blades...

Id leave well enough alone and update your details on it so it can at least be useful.


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

I'm trying to update Ty's details on his chip and it's tricky to do! He's with Petlog and the website asked me for a transfer number. His ex-mom doesn't have one because she never bothered setting up a Petlog account on the internet 11 years ago when she got him from the rescue. So either I print out a form and post it to them and I should get a reply within 28 days giving me a transfer number to use on the website.... lordy me. The first problem with that is I don't have access to a printer. Or she can speak to her vet who can get me a transfer number for him. At least she thinks she can, she's going to check today. 

So I can understand why so many people don't bother updating their pet's details. It's such a faff!


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

DaisyBluebell said:


> All mine have been microchipped over the years with no problems but I do know of one case where the chip moved, it was still readable by the vet but not in the spot where he expected to find it. I've had the word 'Microchipped' inscribed on Emma's collar under her name as well (belt & braces as husband says)


I cannot see the point of having "microchipped" on the id tag when it is law that all dogs must be microchipped?

I could see the point before it was law.

I do have "tattood" on my dog's tag as of course this is not law.

My dogs are both microchipped AND tattood (belt and braces) and DNA profiled...................


----------



## Tamberlane (Jul 8, 2014)

My mobile on one side and Chipped and speyed is on my cat tag...In my mind its to let people know shes only got value as a pet and makes her less of a resale item and to encourage them to return her  

Shes currently an indoor only cat but its a precaution as shes a pedigreemix and both incredibly friendly and had pretty unusual markings.I want her home if she does wandering and not everyone is honest. 

Theres also a lot of people who just dont think to get the chip checked when they find an animal...partly due to fear of them ending up in the pound...partly as some would like to keep the new pet! 

Having as much id and identifying markers on your pets makes them more likely to be returned in the same way as lots of neighbour hood fliers etc helps.

People are much less likely to keep them if they might face consequences for stealing/face the fact that other people may realise the pet isnt theirs and that its stolen.

Its scarily common for people to just want to keep the stray they have found....


----------



## Katalyst (Aug 11, 2015)

Over the last decade or so, I have microchipped pedigree a rather large number of animals ranging from cats to rabbits to alpacas. I have seen/worked with quite literally thousands of microchipped animals. 

I have yet to see a single issue caused or directly hear of one.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Mirandashell said:


> I'm trying to update Ty's details on his chip and it's tricky to do! He's with Petlog and the website asked me for a transfer number. His ex-mom doesn't have one because she never bothered setting up a Petlog account on the internet 11 years ago when she got him from the rescue. So either I print out a form and post it to them and I should get a reply within 28 days giving me a transfer number to use on the website.... lordy me. The first problem with that is I don't have access to a printer. Or she can speak to her vet who can get me a transfer number for him. At least she thinks she can, she's going to check today.
> 
> So I can understand why so many people don't bother updating their pet's details. It's such a faff!


The petlog transfer number is a new thing. I believe from last year.

Most people may not have access to a printer, but know someone who does or use their local library.

After having to change details for most of my dogs, I believe petlog couldn't have made it simpler.

Personally I don't understand why people have not changed keeperrship, if they can afford x amount for special Snowflake dog then 10p for a print out at a library is nothing, plus price of a stamp and envelope.

However, what people begrudge paying is the change of keepership fees which are the pricely sum of £16..to them it's like chopping off their right arm.


----------



## Guest (May 30, 2017)

jhosk1981 said:


> When we bought our lovely little pup Reuben, he had been micro-chipped - (I was not very keen on this idea - seems wrong having a foreign object inside him). We were advised it was a legal requirement and the Breeder took him to have it done prior to us picking him up.
> 
> I have since been reading there are lots of health implications connected to micro-chips and evidence has even started to suggest there is a cancer link. I have also heard more and more case of dogs being lost and stolen and the micro-chip serving no purpose in their retrieval.
> 
> ...


Odds of your dogs getting lost and the microchip aiding in his recovery are much larger than the odds of the microchip causing any health issues. 
And yes, it's a legal requirement in the UK.


----------



## Sarah H (Jan 18, 2014)

lullabydream said:


> The petlog transfer number is a new thing. I believe from last year.
> 
> Most people may not have access to a printer, but know someone who does or use their local library.
> 
> ...


I agree that if it's change of keepership then an admin fee of £16 shouldn't be an issue. BUT if I want to change a detail on my chip database, I have to pay £16 too! That could be something like changing a dog from being 'entire' to 'neutered', which is ridiculous. I went on it recently just to check it (there were some issues with chip companies not changing details when rescues sent off new ownership details) and wanted to change my dog's colouring description, and put that she's spayed, purely because the chip details were done when she was 9 weeks old and at 4 years old she has changed slightly! But I'm not paying £16 to tick a box and change a couple of words in a description. If I had moved house then yes, I would pay to change all the details, but not for 2 tiny pieces of info, or one phone number, which is what people begrudge.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Sarah H said:


> I agree that if it's change of keepership then an admin fee of £16 shouldn't be an issue. BUT if I want to change a detail on my chip database, I have to pay £16 too! That could be something like changing a dog from being 'entire' to 'neutered', which is ridiculous. I went on it recently just to check it (there were some issues with chip companies not changing details when rescues sent off new ownership details) and wanted to change my dog's colouring description, and put that she's spayed, purely because the chip details were done when she was 9 weeks old and at 4 years old she has changed slightly! But I'm not paying £16 to tick a box and change a couple of words in a description. If I had moved house then yes, I would pay to change all the details, but not for 2 tiny pieces of info, or one phone number, which is what people begrudge.


When you change keepership, you're upgraded to premium membership so you don't have to pay for any future changes, such as what you are saying. People just see this as an additional charge once a dog is microchipped though, or they have rehomed a dog...and it's on a to do list that never gets done.


----------



## Sarah H (Jan 18, 2014)

lullabydream said:


> When you change keepership, you're upgraded to premium membership so you don't have to pay for any future changes, such as what you are saying. People just see this as an additional charge once a dog is microchipped though, or they have rehomed a dog...and it's on a to do list that never gets done.


I didn't know that about being upgraded - good to know 

What's unbelievable is the number of dogs we get that are chipped, but the chips aren't registered. Which basically means they've got the chip done but haven't gone onto the website to put in details, or sent off the paperwork. Not sure whether this is laziness or lack of communication between chipper and owner. Many also have out of date details, I think people just don't think their dog will ever go walkabout.


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

Yeah..... I'm not sure I really want to go to a public library and use a shared computer to log into a site to print off a form. Actually I am sure. I don't. 

What was I complaining of was having to print off a form in the first place. Seems an unnecessary faff for a company that does everything else online. I really don't see the need for it.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Mirandashell said:


> Yeah..... I'm not sure I really want to go to a public library and use a shared computer to log into a site to print off a form. Actually I am sure. I don't.
> 
> What was I complaining of was having to print off a form in the first place. Seems an unnecessary faff for a company that does everything else online. I really don't see the need for it.


The form holds no personal details. I don't see why logging on in a library would be a problem. It's a pretty basic form to fill in by of all things a pen. Anyone can access the form


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

Thank you for letting me know but I don't want to.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

Sarah H said:


> I agree that if it's change of keepership then an admin fee of £16 shouldn't be an issue. BUT if I want to change a detail on my chip database, I have to pay £16 too! That could be something like changing a dog from being 'entire' to 'neutered', which is ridiculous. I went on it recently just to check it (there were some issues with chip companies not changing details when rescues sent off new ownership details) and wanted to change my dog's colouring description, and put that she's spayed, purely because the chip details were done when she was 9 weeks old and at 4 years old she has changed slightly! But I'm not paying £16 to tick a box and change a couple of words in a description. If I had moved house then yes, I would pay to change all the details, but not for 2 tiny pieces of info, or one phone number, which is what people begrudge.


I just added my holiday home number over the phone, no problem at all and free. What annoyed me though is that I have to tell them each time I come here as they will only give out one number and they seemed to want a landline number. I really am not ever going to remember that so will have to rely on my mobile number.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Sarah H said:


> I didn't know that about being upgraded - good to know
> 
> What's unbelievable is the number of dogs we get that are chipped, but the chips aren't registered. Which basically means they've got the chip done but haven't gone onto the website to put in details, or sent off the paperwork. Not sure whether this is laziness or lack of communication between chipper and owner. Many also have out of date details, I think people just don't think their dog will ever go walkabout.


I know my local rescue states that new owner hasn't updated paperwork on microchip...and I do love reading when if left unclaimed the dog will return to the original owner. My local is what was the original pound, but does hold dogs longer than seven days, and will work with breed specific rescues occasionally.

When my dogs have all been microchipped the vets have sent off my details, as far as I know the same was happening with the free microchipping at by the dogs trust. My dogs that have come from rescues, again the rescues have sent off paperwork.

The only thing I can think is happening is those who advertise to microchip cheaper than than say the vets, are leaving the paperwork maybe in the hands of the owners or not completing the paperwork themselves. Surely this is few and far between.
Am sure ages ago, you could contact pet log as an owner and say you had parted company with your dog...as previously to say you were the new keeper you had to provide evidence too...such as vaccination card, KC papers whereas now it's basically the microchip number. So maybe that's what was preventing people updating so to speak with lack of vaccination cards, however previous owners were quick to say we definitely do not own this dog...and of course the £16 payment fee.


----------



## Sarah H (Jan 18, 2014)

Blitz said:


> I just added my holiday home number over the phone, no problem at all and free. What annoyed me though is that I have to tell them each time I come here as they will only give out one number and they seemed to want a landline number. I really am not ever going to remember that so will have to rely on my mobile number.


That's annoying about wanting a land line, lots of people don't have them anymore! But good to know you can add a number over the phone. I might see if I can get a minor amendment done by phone rather than paying for doing it online.


----------



## Sarah H (Jan 18, 2014)

lullabydream said:


> I know my local rescue states that new owner hasn't updated paperwork on microchip...and I do love reading when if left unclaimed the dog will return to the original owner. My local is what was the original pound, but does hold dogs longer than seven days, and will work with breed specific rescues occasionally.
> 
> When my dogs have all been microchipped the vets have sent off my details, as far as I know the same was happening with the free microchipping at by the dogs trust. My dogs that have come from rescues, again the rescues have sent off paperwork.
> 
> ...


The DWs contact the implanters to get owner info if it's not registered. As I say our wardens do go above and beyond and have won awards for their work. We had one where the chip was registered to a vet practice (they get sent batches for implantation), yet the vets totally denied they had chipped the dog or had any involvement and had no info on the owners! Can't remember which dog that was or what happened, either they found the owner or it went for rehoming. We're lucky that we have no pounds down here so dogs picked up are kept in kennels used by the council, and unless they have serious issues go into local or breed specific rescue.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Sarah H said:


> The DWs contact the implanters to get owner info if it's not registered. As I say our wardens do go above and beyond and have won awards for their work. We had one where the chip was registered to a vet practice (they get sent batches for implantation), yet the vets totally denied they had chipped the dog or had any involvement and had no info on the owners! Can't remember which dog that was or what happened, either they found the owner or it went for rehoming. We're lucky that we have no pounds down here so dogs picked up are kept in kennels used by the council, and unless they have serious issues go into local or breed specific rescue.


I did think it was whoever implanted the chip was responsible to pass info to pet log whoever, however when my friend got her dog she used a person she found on Facebook to microchip the dog, and was given all forms...which hopefully was a brain fart by the microchipper... Or as the person was ridiculously cheap... didn't want to do the paperwork. 
I only ever got a copy from my dogs being chipped, think it's the second form carbon copy.
Obviously the vets admin went haywire that time...so of course they denied responsibility!


----------



## Rott lover (Jan 2, 2015)

jhosk1981 said:


> When we bought our lovely little pup Reuben, he had been micro-chipped - (I was not very keen on this idea - seems wrong having a foreign object inside him). We were advised it was a legal requirement and the Breeder took him to have it done prior to us picking him up.
> 
> I have since been reading there are lots of health implications connected to micro-chips and evidence has even started to suggest there is a cancer link. I have also heard more and more case of dogs being lost and stolen and the micro-chip serving no purpose in their retrieval.
> 
> ...


There are 2 sides to every coin and you seem to be focusing on all the bad and heresay.Look at the other side of that coin.


----------



## FeelTheBern (Jan 13, 2016)

jhosk1981 said:


> When we bought our lovely little pup Reuben, he had been micro-chipped - (I was not very keen on this idea - seems wrong having a foreign object inside him). We were advised it was a legal requirement and the Breeder took him to have it done prior to us picking him up.
> 
> I have since been reading there are lots of health implications connected to micro-chips and evidence has even started to suggest there is a cancer link. I have also heard more and more case of dogs being lost and stolen and the micro-chip serving no purpose in their retrieval.
> 
> ...


Yes, it's a legal requirement. As of April 2016, all pet dogs in the UK must be microchipped. There are no ill health effects of microchips-the only people who tell you otherwise are scaremongering idiots on the internet. There is also no "cancer link". The microchip does not stop dog theft but it allows dogs to be returned to their owners. I can't imagine that any vet would remove a microchip, as this would be a needless and possibly dangerous procedure.


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

I haven't posted here for a very longtime, but this is a subject I feel strongly about. I am also anti chipping for the following reasons.

They do not prevent dogs being stolen or from going missing.

Chipping was only made mandatory to save local authorities money from kenneling strays and that is the reason the law only applies to dogs and not cats (which are free to roam).

They can and have caused cancerous tumours to form at the insertion point.

They can and have been gouged out.

They can stop working.

Not all scanners are equal and some will fail to detect chips.

It is not mandatory for vets to scan dogs during routine check ups or other types of appointments.

They can dislodge with potentially fatal consequences.

Not every person will register chips or keep details up to date.

Chips can be taken out of dogs and implanted into other dogs as a way of importing them illegally into other countries.

There was a case recently when my council picked up a chipped stray, but their scanner did not detect the dog's chip. Instead they transported the dog almost 30 miles to the Edinburgh Dog and Cat Home (which is the only place that takes in strays picked up by my council). This resulted in a completely unneccesary trip for the dog, council and the person who had the dog. There have been many other cases of scanners failing to detect chips resulting in dogs being classed as 'unchipped' and quite often being put to sleep.

What would actually make a huge difference to the number of dogs being stolen would be to make tying them up outside shops and other places illegal and to also make it against the law to leave dogs unsupervised in cars and other vehicles. And people should be strongly discouraged from leaving their dogs unsupervised in gardens because this also leads to dogs being stolen on a regular basis. There was an incident a couple of years ago in which a couple of Lurchers and puppies were taken from a garden in a nearby village. The adult dogs were released not far from where they were taken and both were killed on the road. The puppies were never found. Microchops would not have prevented that from happening. In fact the number of dogs being stolen has risen since chipping became law. So the new laws have not deterred thieves nor have they made people more responsible with their dogs.

Sadly, both my dogs were chipped before I could get them from their respective rescues. I have had one of them for more than 5 years and my other for almost 4 years. Not once during any of their trips to the vet were they scanned to make sure that their chips were still in place and working. I always have to ask to get them scanned. That should not be the case. Additionally, my dogs are never left tied up outside, are never left in the car, are never unsupervised out the back and the fencing is also secure so no chance of them jumping the fence, when off lead they are watched the whole time and are only let off in wide open spaces and they wouldn't be let off somewhere they could easily disappear. So the chances of them being stolen or going missing are very slim and I hate the fact that they have got those horrible foreign objects inside them.

http://www.fitzpatrickreferrals.co....al-of-a-microchip-from-a-puppys-spinal-canal/

http://www.dogsnaturallymagazine.com/implanted-microchips-cause-cancer/

http://www.antichips.com/press-releases/chipped-pets.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4236158/Thieves-GOUGE-dog-s-microchip-shave-fur.html

http://www.independent.ie/irish-new...by-legend-had-microchip-removed-35378244.html

http://metro.co.uk/2016/04/02/why-y...-your-dog-according-to-a-leading-vet-5791824/

http://www.chipmenot.org.uk/news.asp

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/vet-many-databases-mean-new-7680968

http://www.dogworld.co.uk/story.php/155043/2149/jury_s_still_out_on_microchipping

There are also many real stories on social media about dogs that have died or become seriously ill because of microchips. Those of you saying that there are no links to cancer, etc are completely out of touch with reality.

To those of you defending these wretched things. Woud you want chips inserted into yourselves and your human family members (including your kids) when those same risks were attached? Would you personally take the chance of cancer or a chip dislodging and dangerously migrating around the body for yourself and your relatives?


----------



## SixStar (Dec 8, 2009)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> I haven't posted here for a very longtime, but this is a subject I feel strongly about. I am also anti chipping for the following reasons.
> 
> They do not prevent dogs being stolen or from going missing.
> 
> ...


A handful of examples vs millions of dogs chipped without issue worldwide? Hmm. I'm almost certain I won't get in a tizz about these wretched forgein bodies in my dogs just yet.

As for microchipping humans? My kids would have been first in line


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

Yeah.. being harangued as a stupid person always make you want do as you're told......


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

SixStar said:


> A handful of examples vs millions of dogs chipped without issue worldwide? Hmm. I'm almost certain I won't get in a tizz about these wretched forgein bodies in my dogs just yet.
> 
> As for microchipping humans? My kids would have been first in line


You never know if your dog will be that one in whatever number that gets cancer, that has a potentially fatal chip migration (and chip migrations are common) or if your dog will be that one dog who is stolen and the chip removed. Or if your dog's chip will stop working or if your dog will be scanned properly. Those are completely unnecessary risks to take especially when there are simple measures to take that would ensure your dog is never stolen or goes missing.


----------



## Guest (May 31, 2017)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> They do not prevent dogs being stolen or from going missing.


Of course they don't. No one would claim that. 
Where microchips help is in the recovery of a lost or stolen dog.



LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> there are simple measures to take that would ensure your dog is never stolen or goes missing.


What would those measures be, that ensure your dog *never* goes missing?


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> You never know if your dog will be that one in whatever number that gets cancer, that has a potentially fatal chip migration (and chip migrations are common) or if your dog will be that one dog who is stolen and the chip removed. Or if your dog's chip will stop working or if your dog will be scanned properly. Those are completely unnecessary risks to take especially when there are simple measures to take that would ensure your dog is never stolen or goes missing.


So, we need to be concerned that our dog's chip will stop working or he won't be scanned properly?

I assume that is because he then wouldn't be reunited with his rightful owner?

How would that be different to if the dog weren't chipped at all?

That makes no sense whatsoever.


----------



## Nonnie (Apr 15, 2009)

Whether or not you agree with microchipping is irrelevant - its a legal requirement, thus, you have no choice but to have it done.


----------



## ForestWomble (May 2, 2013)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> You never know if your dog will be that one in whatever number that gets cancer, that has a potentially fatal chip migration (and chip migrations are common) or if your dog will be that one dog who is stolen and the chip removed. Or if your dog's chip will stop working or if your dog will be scanned properly. Those are completely unnecessary risks to take especially when there are simple measures to take that would ensure your dog is never stolen or goes missing.


However the dog could also be one that never gets cancer, never gets stolen, or if stolen that the chip will return him/her, chip always works and that they will be scanned correctly. 
If we lived with the constant 'what ifs' we'd never do anything.


----------



## SixStar (Dec 8, 2009)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> You never know if your dog will be that one in whatever number that gets cancer, that has a potentially fatal chip migration (and chip migrations are common) or if your dog will be that one dog who is stolen and the chip removed. Or if your dog's chip will stop working or if your dog will be scanned properly. Those are completely unnecessary risks to take especially when there are simple measures to take that would ensure your dog is never stolen or goes missing.


Assuming you do not walk your dogs?

The number of risks involved is mind boggling - leads snapping, dog attacks, bee stings, broken limbs, adder bites, sprains, torn claws. Not to mention the choking risk involved with giving them food or toys.

Of course my point is ridiculous.

Dogs need to be walked & fed - no two ways about it.

Dogs (in the uk) need to be chipped - no two ways about that either.


----------



## Guest (May 31, 2017)

SixStar said:


> Assuming you do not walk your dogs?
> 
> The number of risks involved is mind boggling - leads snapping, dog attacks, bee stings, broken limbs, adder bites, sprains, torn claws. Not to mention the choking risk involved with giving them food or toys.
> 
> ...


Thinking about it, I think the risks to microchipping are fewer than the risks to taking your dog for a walk!


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

ouesi said:


> Of course they don't. No one would claim that.
> Where microchips help is in the recovery of a lost or stolen dog.
> 
> What would those measures be, that ensure your dog *never* goes missing?


I covered those already. Taking measures to prevent your dog being stolen or going missing are much better than having a damned microchip implanted in them! The main reasons dogs go missing or are stolen is because they have been left unsupervised outside a shop or whatever, left alone in a vehicle or because they have been left unsupervised in the garden. Cracking down on those things would be far more beneficial than putting an unreliable and potentially dangerous foreign object in them!


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> I covered those already. Taking measures to prevent your dog being stolen or going missing are much better than having a damned microchip implanted in them! The main reasons dogs go missing or are stolen is because they have been left unsupervised outside a shop or whatever, left alone in a vehicle or because they have been left unsupervised in the garden. Cracking down on those things would be far more beneficial than putting an unreliable and potentially dangerous foreign object in them!


You seem a little hysterical.

I am certain any dog owner, however careful, however vigilant, is at more risk of losing their dog than the dog is of dying as a result of having a microchip inserted.

I have never had any dog suffer an adverse reaction from a chip.

Are your dogs microchipped?


----------



## Guest (May 31, 2017)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> I covered those already. Taking measures to prevent your dog being stolen or going missing are much better than having a damned microchip implanted in them! The main reasons dogs go missing or are stolen is because they have been left unsupervised outside a shop or whatever, left alone in a vehicle or because they have been left unsupervised in the garden. Cracking down on those things would be far more beneficial than putting an unreliable and potentially dangerous foreign object in them!


You said there are measures to ensure your dog NEVER goes missing - you used the word never. I was wondering how one does that. I, for one, would love for my dogs to never go missing. But even though I don't leave them outside of shops or outside unsupervised, I can't assert that they will never go missing, so I was wondering if you knew something I didn't.


----------



## rescuecollieChip (May 31, 2017)

If you're in the UK then as of April all dogs above the age of 8 weeks have to be micro chipped. If your dog is stolen I agree it's not much help, but if they slip their collar and do a runner (like mine does daily ) it is the best thing you could have done.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

ouesi said:


> You said there are measures to ensure your dog NEVER goes missing - you used the word never. I was wondering how one does that. I, for one, would love for my dogs to never go missing. But even though I don't leave them outside of shops or outside unsupervised, I can't assert that they will never go missing, so I was wondering if you knew something I didn't.


Absolutely this...

I have heard of the most well trained bomb proof dog getting spooked by something totally unexpected on a walk and ran for miles out of sheer fright...

Dogs have innate instincts after all...


----------



## Nonnie (Apr 15, 2009)

Tbh, a dog is far greater risk of being vaccinated, wormed, deflea'd etc than it is to have an EXTREMELY rare reaction to a microchip.

Do we stop doing anything and everything that poses a risk?


----------



## CuddleMonster (Mar 9, 2016)

I know a couple of people whose dogs went missing and ended up miles away - it was the chip that brought them back. So I always had my dogs chipped even before it was a legal requirement.

Yes, chips can stop working - Bonnie's failed just before the law came in, so I had to get her rechipped. So if she had been lost between the old chip failing & the new one going in, it wouldn't have helped. But it wouldn't have made her LESS likely to be found either.

As for the cancer scares, dogs died of cancer for years before chips were used. I think things like traffic pollution or eating grass that has been sprayed with pesticide is far more likely to cause a problem than a chip.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> I haven't posted here for a very longtime, but this is a subject I feel strongly about. I am also anti chipping for the following reasons.
> 
> They do not prevent dogs being stolen or from going missing.
> 
> ...


You are confusing possiblity with probability.

It is possible that I will win the lottery on Friday, but not probable.

Probability is what we work on in the field or risk assessment.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> I covered those already. Taking measures to prevent your dog being stolen or going missing are much better than having a damned microchip implanted in them! The main reasons dogs go missing or are stolen is because they have been left unsupervised outside a shop or whatever, left alone in a vehicle or because they have been left unsupervised in the garden. Cracking down on those things would be far more beneficial than putting an unreliable and potentially dangerous foreign object in them!


What a load of rubbish. Dogs are left outside shops hundreds of times a day and probably thousands of dogs left in a vehicle or in the garden - it is incredibly rare for a dog to be stolen


----------



## Sarah H (Jan 18, 2014)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> I covered those already. Taking measures to prevent your dog being stolen or going missing are much better than having a damned microchip implanted in them! The main reasons dogs go missing or are stolen is because they have been left unsupervised outside a shop or whatever, left alone in a vehicle or because they have been left unsupervised in the garden. Cracking down on those things would be far more beneficial than putting an unreliable and potentially dangerous foreign object in them!


I'd much rather a chip than no chip, I see dog reunited all the time thanks to chips, because inevitably the owners don't have a legally required ID tag. Most are just dogs that have gone wandering from home, or on a walk. Gates get blown or left open, dogs climb walls and fences, they follow a scent blissfully unaware of their owners screaming their name in the wilderness. Unless you have your dog tethered to you all the time there is going to be the odd occasion where they could get lost, and I for one would much rather a teeny tiny inert chip was there to help get them home than not.


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

Sweety said:


> So, we need to be concerned that our dog's chip will stop working or he won't be scanned properly?
> 
> I assume that is because he then wouldn't be reunited with his rightful owner?
> 
> ...


It makes perfect sense! And yes you do need to be concerned about a chip not working, etc. If that doesn't bother you then something is wrong!



Nonnie said:


> Whether or not you agree with microchipping is irrelevant - its a legal requirement, thus, you have no choice but to have it done.


Well, there are actually vets who advise against chipping and there are also medical exemptions that allow for dogs not to be chipped.



Animallover26 said:


> However the dog could also be one that never gets cancer, never gets stolen, or if stolen that the chip will return him/her, chip always works and that they will be scanned correctly.
> If we lived with the constant 'what ifs' we'd never do anything.


I would rather have minimized the risks to my dogs by not having them chipped. When getting your dog chipped you have no way of knowing if the chip will cause problems and if you are responsible enough with your dog then your dog doesn't need a chip!



SixStar said:


> Assuming you do not walk your dogs?
> 
> The number of risks involved is mind boggling - leads snapping, dog attacks, bee stings, broken limbs, adder bites, sprains, torn claws. Not to mention the choking risk involved with giving them food or toys.
> 
> ...


Feeding, walking and playing are essential things for a dog. Chipping them is not.



ouesi said:


> Thinking about it, I think the risks to microchipping are fewer than the risks to taking your dog for a walk!





Sweety said:


> You seem a little hysterical.
> 
> I am certain any dog owner, however careful, however vigilant, is at more risk of losing their dog than the dog is of dying as a result of having a microchip inserted.
> 
> ...


So being concerned about having potentially fatal foreign bodies implanted in dogs is being hysterical is it? Also, if you had read my posts properly you would have seen that my dogs were unfortunately chipped by their respective rescues before I could get them. And since you didn't read my posts properly you probably didn't bother to look at the links I provided. Chips have been responsible for dogs and cats dying and having to have risky surgery to remove them when they have dislodged and ended up in dangerous places like spinal cords! And just because you've never had a dog suffer an adverse reaction doesn't mean that plenty of other people haven't had to watch their dogs suffer horrendously from cancerous tumours and chip migrations.



rescuecollieChip said:


> If you're in the UK then as of April all dogs above the age of 8 weeks have to be micro chipped. If your dog is stolen I agree it's not much help, but if they slip their collar and do a runner (like mine does daily ) it is the best thing you could have done.


If your dog slips his/her collar on a daily basis then you should think about using a different type of collar. Perhaps a martingale. Changing collar would be the best thing you could do for your dog to prevent him/her doing a runner. A microchip won't ensure your dog's wellbeing. A collar your dog couldn't slip out of would. And like I have just said there are vets who won't chip dogs and in some cases an exemption can be made so that a dog doesn't have to be chipped.



lullabydream said:


> Absolutely this...
> 
> I have heard of the most well trained bomb proof dog getting spooked by something totally unexpected on a walk and ran for miles out of sheer fright...
> 
> Dogs have innate instincts after all...


A chip will NOT guarantee that dog gets home.



Nonnie said:


> Tbh, a dog is far greater risk of being vaccinated, wormed, deflea'd etc than it is to have an EXTREMELY rare reaction to a microchip.
> 
> Do we stop doing anything and everything that poses a risk?


Yes everything poses a risk, but those risks can be minimized. By using better quality worming and flea treatments instead of cheap and nasty ones like Bob Martin's products you can minimize the risks attached to treating your dogs for those things. By not chipping your dog you can ensure that they won't develop cancer or have a dangerous migration because of it.



Blitz said:


> What a load of rubbish. Dogs are left outside shops hundreds of times a day and probably thousands of dogs left in a vehicle or in the garden - it is incredibly rare for a dog to be stolen


You never fail to astound me. So you think it's okay for dogs to be left unsupervised in public places, in vehicles or in their gardens? Next you'll be advocating that people leave their handbags, smartphones and heck even their babies unattended outside shops, that they should leave their cars unlocked with the keys still in the ignition, that they should leave their TV's, computers and jewelry out in their gardens and just hope that those things aren't stolen. And I could also list more than a dozen dogs that have been stolen in my area over the past few years. The reasons they were stolen were because they'd been tied up outside shops and alone in their gardens. I already gave an example of one such theft in my area and here's a link to it. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-34290577 Dog thefts most certainly are not incredibly rare and the number of dogs being stolen has actually risen since chipping became law.


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

This was an interesting thread ....


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

ouesi said:


> You said there are measures to ensure your dog NEVER goes missing - you used the word never. I was wondering how one does that. I, for one, would love for my dogs to never go missing. But even though I don't leave them outside of shops or outside unsupervised, I can't assert that they will never go missing, so I was wondering if you knew something I didn't.


If you NEVER leave your dog tied up outside a shop or any other place, if you NEVER leave your dog unsupervised in a a vehicle and if you NEVER leave your dog alone in the garden then you can guarantee that your dog is NEVER stolen or escapes from the lead when left outside a shop or some other place. You can guarantee that your dog is NEVER stolen or goes missing from the garden. You can guarantee that your dog is NEVER stolen or goes missing after being left alone in a vehicle. If you regularly inspect leads, collars and harnesses for damage and replace them when need be and only use good quality equipment then you're not going to have any incidents in which one of those snaps. The appropriate equipment should also be used for your dogs and not like the other poster who claims that their dogs slips their collar every day and does a runner. A collar that was actually appropriate for that dog would prevent them slipping their collar and running off. Ensuring that your garden in well secured and regular inspections of fencing and walls for damage and carrying out necessary repairs will guarantee that your dog doesn't escape. If you do all those things then there is no need to get your dog chipped!


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

There's also a 'h' in 'greyhound'.


----------



## Guest (Jun 1, 2017)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> If you NEVER leave your dog tied up outside a shop or any other place, if you NEVER leave your dog unsupervised in a a vehicle and if you NEVER leave your dog alone in the garden then you can guarantee that your dog is NEVER stolen or escapes from the lead when left outside a shop or some other place. You can guarantee that your dog is NEVER stolen or goes missing from the garden. You can guarantee that your dog is NEVER stolen or goes missing after being left alone in a vehicle. If you regularly inspect leads, collars and harnesses for damage and replace them when need be and only use good quality equipment then you're not going to have any incidents in which one of those snaps. The appropriate equipment should also be used for your dogs and not like the other poster who claims that their dogs slips their collar every day and does a runner. A collar that was actually appropriate for that dog would prevent them slipping their collar and running off. Ensuring that your garden in well secured and regular inspections of fencing and walls for damage and carrying out necessary repairs will guarantee that your dog doesn't escape. If you do all those things then there is no need to get your dog chipped!


You yourself say you let your dog off lead. What if for some unknown reason he blows his recall and the field you thought was safe turns out not to be? 
Appropriate equipment that is regularly checked can also fail. Humans are humans, you could trip and drop a leash. 
Car accidents happen and dogs end up loose, spooked, and running.

There is no NEVER in life. Sorry.

A reasonable weighing of the risk vs. benefit of chipping, (never mind that fact that it is a legal requirement) is that the benefit of a microchip far outweigh the potential risks.

The AVMA recommends dogs be chipped.
https://www.avma.org/KB/Resources/Reference/Pages/Microchipping-of-Animals-Backgrounder.aspx


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

Mirandashell said:


> There's also a 'h' in 'greyhound'.


You can't actually refute what I have been saying so you resort to being petty? But to address what you said. I am well aware that there is an 'h' in Greyhound. However, it was late at night when I registered, I was tired and made a simple spelling mistake. When I realized I had made a mistake it was too late to change it. I did enquire about having it changed, but the admin who could change it never seems to be available so I have not been able to get it changed.


----------



## Guest (Jun 1, 2017)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> that they should leave their cars unlocked with the keys still in the ignition,


I actually do this fairly frequently. 
Small town living 'n all...


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

ouesi said:


> You yourself say you let your dog off lead. What if for some unknown reason he blows his recall and the field you thought was safe turns out not to be?
> Appropriate equipment that is regularly checked can also fail. Humans are humans, you could trip and drop a leash.
> Car accidents happen and dogs end up loose, spooked, and running.
> 
> ...


She's already stated that a chip won't guarantee my dog is returned on my post about a dog blowing a recall...

However am not quite sure with all this talk about martingale collars if people are aware they are the worse collars to slip off a dog when free running, and are really walking collars only, especially on sighthounds.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> makes perfect sense! And yes you do need to be concerned about a chip not working, etc. If that doesn't bother you then something is wrong!


Oh, I see.

There is "something wrong" with me because I don't worry about a chip potentially failing and yet you aren't worried about not chipping a dog at all?


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> You can't actually refute what I have been saying so you resort to being petty? But to address what you said. I am well aware that there is an 'h' in Greyhound. However, it was late at night when I registered, I was tired and made a simple spelling mistake. When I realized I had made a mistake it was too late to change it. I did enquire about having it changed, but the admin who could change it never seems to be available so I have not been able to get it changed.


It's actually got nothing to do with refuting what you are lecturing on. Lots of other people are doing that and making a good job of it. I was just pointing that you spelt 'greyhound' wrong in your name. And not for petty reasons, but because you seem so certain that you are right all the time that it struck me as funny/ironic that you would spell your own name wrong. But I appreciate that people who like to lecture others as if everyone else is stupid often lack a sense of humour. So no worries.

And this thread could do with some lightheartedness as it's just going around in circles.


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

ouesi said:


> You yourself say you let your dog off lead. What if for some unknown reason he blows his recall and the field you thought was safe turns out not to be?
> Appropriate equipment that is regularly checked can also fail. Humans are humans, you could trip and drop a leash.
> Car accidents happen and dogs end up loose, spooked, and running.
> 
> ...


I have actually tripped a couple of times and dropped my dogs leads. What did they do? They stayed right beside me and didn't move until I got up. There have been cases when something unexpected has happened when they have been off lead. But my dogs didn't react at all. There have also been times when they have picked up on scents and have started to chase after whatever left the scents, but they gave up after about a minute. If I thought for a second that they were the types of dogs who would run off and not come back then they wouldn't get off lead at all. I always take precautions before and during my dogs being off lead as well. They don't get off lead near roads, fast moving water, sheer drops, dangerous rubble, etc. I always keep an eye on them and if there are other people about then I am extra vigilant and make sure that my dogs are close by.

And there can actually be a 'never' in life. There's a whole host of things I'll never do and as such I can be guaranteed that nothing will ever happen to me when doing those things as I will never do them. For example. I would never jump out of a plane with a parachute. So I am guaranteed to never die because of a parachute failing. I will never climb a mountain either so am guaranteed of never becoming stranded on a mountain. I never leave my dogs outside shops or alone in vehicles or the garden, so I am guaranteed my dogs will never get stolen or escape from outside shops, vehicles or the garden. I take loads of precautions when my dogs are off lead and have never had an incident in which they have run off and not come back.

The AVMA has also admitted to the fact that there are risks attached to chipping.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

There is risk in most things we do in life...

Let's hope you never need any medical treatment, or need to take medication because even the simplest medications can cause death.


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

ouesi said:


> I actually do this fairly frequently.
> Small town living 'n all...


Don't ever think that just because you live in a small town that it's okay to do that. Here in the UK a large number of vehicles are stolen from small (especially more rural) communities and from farms. I have friends in the countryside and have heard about lots of thefts in the countryside. One of my friends used to have a caravan site on one of his fields and a couple of caravans were stolen a few years ago.


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

lullabydream said:


> There is risk in most things we do in life...
> 
> Let's hope you never need any medical treatment, or need to take medication because even the simplest medications can cause death.


And even a teeny tiny microchip can cause death!


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

Well, I think the majority of use seem to recognise that even the best trained dog can do something unpredictable, (apart from LurcherGreyoundGirl's dogs that is).

With that in mind, I am happy to have my dogs chipped, just in case.

I have never lost a dog in forty years but I don't take anything for granted.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

So what's the figure globally for dog s in the UK...about 10 million now and that's just the UK...and a handful of scaremongering articles on the internet. I will take my chances I think...

Maybe lurchergreyoundgirl should volunteer at a rescue and see how valuable microchips can be.


----------



## Dimwit (Nov 10, 2011)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> There are also many real stories on social media about dogs that have died or become seriously ill because of microchips. Those of you saying that there are no links to cancer, etc are completely out of touch with reality.


Well, if it says it on social media then it must be true


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

Dimwit said:


> Well, if it says it on social media then it must be true


It was in the Daily Mail as well, don't forget!


----------



## Dimwit (Nov 10, 2011)

Mirandashell said:


> It was in the Daily Mail as well, don't forget!


Wait! The Daily Mail claiming that something causes cancer - whatever next :Hilarious


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

It still doesn't get away from the fact that not to microchip a dog is illegal in this country.

I've owned dogs for most of my life (I'm 66) and none of them have got lost, but I'm not complacent and will never say that there might be an occasion when a dog I own goes missing. It could be anything, blows a recall, house broken into and the dog runs away in fear, car accident where the dog escapes and again runs away due to fear, you can never say never, these things could happen. Consequently my dogs wear a collar with an address tag AND are microchipped.

You seem to be very concerned about microchips causing cancer @LurcherGreyoundGirl, have you lobbied your MP about this, have you written endless letters to the government explaining why dogs should not be microchipped? Was there any replies?


----------



## Wilmer (Aug 31, 2012)

The cancers you refer to are injection site sarcomas (google scholar is your friend) and relate to the needle puncture, not the chip itself. These sarcomas are often associated with vaccination sites and IV medication, so it's a bit disingenuous to blame the chip. Unless you're anti-vacc and your dog has never been ill or injured, the chip injection will just be one of many. They're also pretty rare. As for "chip failure", well that does concern me, but more because I take Betty to France and don't want her to be denied re-entry. Personally, I've never stopped using a collar tag, so I have back up if she gets lost - both failing simultaneously after 4 years of faithful service would be a bit odd.


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

Having recently spent god knows what on a pet passport and a rabies jab so we could take the dog to Ireland with us, no one was in the least bit interested when we came back into the UK a couple of days ago. Along with all the other coming off the boat, we were all waved through by the border police,they weren't even bothered about seeing our passports let alone the dogs. Our friends had the same thing when they came home a week earlier then us not long after the Manchester bombing.


----------



## Guest (Jun 1, 2017)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> I would never jump out of a plane *with* a parachute. So I am guaranteed to never die because of a parachute failing.


Tee hee... :Hilarious



LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> I take loads of precautions when my dogs are off lead and have never had an incident in which they have run off and not come back.


Then count yourself lucky, not superior to other dog owners. Dogs are sentient creatures with minds of their own, and the fact that you think you will never have an accident, mistake, or failure just shows your lack of experience, not your superior dog training/managing skills.



LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> Don't ever think that just because you live in a small town that it's okay to do that. Here in the UK a large number of vehicles are stolen from small (especially more rural) communities and from farms. I have friends in the countryside and have heard about lots of thefts in the countryside. One of my friends used to have a caravan site on one of his fields and a couple of caravans were stolen a few years ago.


Don't lecture me on property thefts. It makes you look silly. 
I don't live in the UK. I live in the US on 20 acres surrounded by 500 acres of un-used, un-accessible land (no road access). GPS will bring you to our mailbox, half a mile up the dirt road, not our actual house. For 22 years I have left my keys in the ignition of all of our vehicles, and not one has been stolen. 
And frankly, if someone needs a car that badly, they're welcome to my 12 year old beat up minivan that smells like wet dog and sweaty teenagers.


----------



## Guest (Jun 1, 2017)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> The AVMA has also admitted to the fact that there are risks attached to chipping.


Yes, there are risks to micro chipping. They are minimal and far outweighed by the benefits of chipping.

There are risks to pretty much everything we do with our dogs. 
Just Monday, I took my dogs in for their 3 year rabies vaccine. Mine have never had an adverse reaction to a vaccine, but I personally know dogs who have had a very bad reaction to the rabies vaccine. I will still give it though. The risk of rabies out where we are is high, and there is no cure. I know every time I vaccinate them there is a risk, I mitigate that risk by not doubling up and going as long between boosters as the law allows, and in general keeping my dogs healthy and not stressed. But at the end of the day, the risk of rabies is greater than the risk of the vaccine, so I go with the vaccine.

The risk of your dog getting lost is far, far, greater than the risk of your dog having an adverse reaction to a chip. That chip may mean the difference between you getting your dog back or not. I know which risk I'm going to take....


----------



## bumbarrel (Feb 23, 2017)

Reading a few pages of the Doglost site will tell you how useful microchips are.

AND dogs don't only get lost/stolen from outside the house. Dogs get taken from inside houses. There have been many taken in house burglaries.

Had dogs over 60 years and microchipped since they became available.


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

lullabydream said:


> She's already stated that a chip won't guarantee my dog is returned on my post about a dog blowing a recall...
> 
> However am not quite sure with all this talk about martingale collars if people are aware they are the worse collars to slip off a dog when free running, and are really walking collars only, especially on sighthounds.


No a chip would definitely NOT guarantee your dog's return. And actually martingale collars are about the best collars for sighthounds to wear both on and off lead. Just about every sighthound rescue will recommend a martingale or a sighthound collar to be used for both on and off lead exercise. As for 'all this talk'. I only mentioned a martingale collar once (hot loads of times) as a solution to stop the other poster's dog slipping his/her collar and running off.



CuddleMonster said:


> I know a couple of people whose dogs went missing and ended up miles away - it was the chip that brought them back. So I always had my dogs chipped even before it was a legal requirement.
> 
> Yes, chips can stop working - Bonnie's failed just before the law came in, so I had to get her rechipped. So if she had been lost between the old chip failing & the new one going in, it wouldn't have helped. But it wouldn't have made her LESS likely to be found either.
> 
> As for the cancer scares, dogs died of cancer for years before chips were used. I think things like traffic pollution or eating grass that has been sprayed with pesticide is far more likely to cause a problem than a chip.


Can I ask what happened to the old chip? Did it have to be removed surgically or was the new chip put in along with the old one? If the former it means that your dog had to undergo an invasive surgical procedure to remove something that didn't need to be there in the first place. If the latter then it means that your dog's chances of having a dangerous migration has doubled.


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

ouesi said:


> Yes, there are risks to micro chipping. They are minimal and far outweighed by the benefits of chipping.
> 
> There are risks to pretty much everything we do with our dogs.
> Just Monday, I took my dogs in for their 3 year rabies vaccine. Mine have never had an adverse reaction to a vaccine, but I personally know dogs who have had a very bad reaction to the rabies vaccine. I will still give it though. The risk of rabies out where we are is high, and there is no cure. I know every time I vaccinate them there is a risk, I mitigate that risk by not doubling up and going as long between boosters as the law allows, and in general keeping my dogs healthy and not stressed. But at the end of the day, the risk of rabies is greater than the risk of the vaccine, so I go with the vaccine.
> ...


Vaccinating against diseases and viruses that can make a dog seriously ill or worse is essential. Chipping them when you are already responsible about not putting them into situations where they could easily get stolen or go missing is not essential!


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> If you NEVER leave your dog tied up outside a shop or any other place, if you NEVER leave your dog unsupervised in a a vehicle and if you NEVER leave your dog alone in the garden then you can guarantee that your dog is NEVER stolen or escapes from the lead when left outside a shop or some other place. You can guarantee that your dog is NEVER stolen or goes missing from the garden. You can guarantee that your dog is NEVER stolen or goes missing after being left alone in a vehicle. If you regularly inspect leads, collars and harnesses for damage and replace them when need be and only use good quality equipment then you're not going to have any incidents in which one of those snaps. The appropriate equipment should also be used for your dogs and not like the other poster who claims that their dogs slips their collar every day and does a runner. A collar that was actually appropriate for that dog would prevent them slipping their collar and running off. Ensuring that your garden in well secured and regular inspections of fencing and walls for damage and carrying out necessary repairs will guarantee that your dog doesn't escape. If you do all those things then there is no need to get your dog chipped!


If you NEVER take your dog for a walk you can guarantee it will not be run over by a vehicle; it will never be attacked by another dog; it will never catch something contagious; etc etc etc

The above are far more common than the miniscule alleged issues with microchips.

Look, if you do not want to do it and believe so strongly you can make your own choices and take the consequences and fined.

Who cares?

And in the meantime stop using nonsensical arguments to try and validate your position.

You merely undermine your credibility not only as a dog owner but as a sensible human being who has weighed up the pros and cons and found that the weight of scientific evidence not support your hysteria.

Just off to my underground bunker where I know I will NEVER be hit by a crashing plane................................


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

Dimwit said:


> Well, if it says it on social media then it must be true


So are you calling every single person who has said their dogs died, became ill, etc because of microchips on social media a liar?


----------



## Guest (Jun 1, 2017)

smokeybear said:


> Just off to my underground bunker where I know I will NEVER be hit by a crashing plane................................


Or meteor. Gotta take proper precautions for those meteors too ya know. I mean, just look at the dinosaurs!


----------



## Dimwit (Nov 10, 2011)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> So are you calling every single person who has said their dogs died, became ill, etc because of microchips on social media a liar?


No. I am saying that correlation does not equal causation (and that the plural of anecdote is not data). A quick search of peer-reviewed literature shows very few cases of complications that are actually linked to microchip implantation. The problem with social media is that incidents like this then get taken out of proportion and before you know it, mass hysteria ensues.

Of course, the point you haven't mentioned in your rant against microchips is, how many of these "loads of cases" are due to this chip itself, and how many are due to poor injection technique or improper placement???


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

smokeybear said:


> If you NEVER take your dog for a walk you can guarantee it will not be run over by a vehicle; it will never be attacked by another dog; it will never catch something contagious; etc etc etc
> 
> The above are far more common than the miniscule alleged issues with microchips.
> 
> ...


That counter argument is getting old now. Walking your dog is essential! Chipping them is NOT! And my Lurcher has actually been attacked three times now by Staffordshire Bull Terriers, so yes I do know the risks of walking dogs. However, my dogs need exercise to keep them happy and healthy. They do not need the foreign objects that are implanted in them!



Mirandashell said:


> It was in the Daily Mail as well, don't forget!


Well actually the DM article I linked to was in relation to a stolen dog who had her chip gouged out. But the dog was still found and returned to her family WITHOUT her chip. Fancy that, good old fashioned detective work was used to find and return the dog. No need for the chip! And as time goes on there will be more and more cases of chips being removed. Not only in dogs, but there have been a lots of cases of horses having their chips removed as well.


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

ouesi said:


> Tee hee... :Hilarious
> 
> Then count yourself lucky, not superior to other dog owners. Dogs are sentient creatures with minds of their own, and the fact that you think you will never have an accident, mistake, or failure just shows your lack of experience, not your superior dog training/managing skills.
> 
> ...


I don't think of myself as superior, but I am not a sheep and don't believe everything the Government says. The only reason they made the chipping of dogs mandatory was to save local authorities money by kenneling strays. If they actually cared about dog welfare and preventing them being stolen then they would make things like leaving dogs unattended in public illegal.

I have also read about studies which have found that you are safer living in the city than in the countryside in America.


----------



## ForestWomble (May 2, 2013)

The most important fact here is microchips are a legal requirement.


----------



## LinznMilly (Jun 24, 2011)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> Also, if you had read my posts properly you would have seen that my dogs were unfortunately chipped by their respective rescues before I could get them.


Do/does the rescue(s) know how adamantly you are against microchipping? Were you so against microchipping then, or has this objection suddenly come on in the face of social media hysteria? I'm guessing you didn't mention any objection to the dogs being microchipped before you brought them home, or were you such a catch that the rescue just disregarded any concern they might have had rehoming their dogs to a person so vehemently against chipping?


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

I find it quite amusing that someone won't trust research done by the Government but will trust anecdotes on social media and in the Daily Mail. Cos you know, believing proper scientific research makes you a sheep......


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

Animallover26 said:


> The most important fact here is microchips are a legal requirement.


Not for all dogs. Exemptions can be made if a dog is elderly, in poor health, a toy breed or has suffered an adverse reaction to previous chipping.


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

Mirandashell said:


> I find it quite amusing that someone won't trust research done by the Government but will trust anecdotes on social media and in the Daily Mail. Cos you know, believing proper scientific research makes you a sheep......


So do you think the Government is right about everything and agree with everything it says? Do you think everything in the Daily Mail is fake news? Do you think that everyone who says that their dogs became seriously ill or died because of chipping on social media is a liar? And social media has actually played an invaluable part in identifying dog thieves and other criminals.


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

# The wheels on the bus go round and round. Round and round. Round and round........ #


----------



## Nonnie (Apr 15, 2009)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> So do you think the Government is right about everything and agree with everything it says? Do you think everything in the Daily Mail is fake news? Do you think that everyone who says that their dogs became seriously ill or died because of chipping on social media is a liar? And social media has actually played an invaluable part in identifying dog thieves and other criminals.


I bet you're one of those people that think the lunar landings were faked and that 9/11 was an inside job.


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

D'you think she knows who the Lone Gunman was?


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

Nonnie said:


> I bet you're one of those people that think the lunar landings were faked and that 9/11 was an inside job.


And that Princess Diana was murdered by Prince Charles and The Queen.


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

LinznMilly said:


> Do/does the rescue(s) know how adamantly you are against microchipping? Were you so against microchipping then, or has this objection suddenly come on in the face of social media hysteria? I'm guessing you didn't mention any objection to the dogs being microchipped before you brought them home, or were you such a catch that the rescue just disregarded any concern they might have had rehoming their dogs to a person so vehemently against chipping?


What social media hysteria? There are loads of REAL stories on the likes of Facebook about dogs suffering because of chips. Or are they all lies? And I have never thought that chips were a good idea. I didn't need to read about them being gouged out to know that they could be gouged out. I had already guessed that could happen and I was right. I always thought they would not prevent thefts or deter thieves and I was right. I always thought that chipping could have horrible consequences and I was right. So I have never liked the things. Yes I did voice my concerns with the rescues, but they said I couldn't get my dogs unless they were chipped. So they knew I was anti chipping, but rehomed them with me regardless!


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

Mirandashell said:


> # The wheels on the bus go round and round. Round and round. Round and round........ #


No answers to my questions, but more pettiness!


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

Known to everyone else as a joke......

Honestly, conspiracy theorists, no sense of humour or self-knowledge. Bless em!


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> What social media hysteria? There are loads of REAL stories on the likes of Facebook about dogs suffering because of chips. Or are they all lies? And I have never thought that chips were a good idea. I didn't need to read about them being gouged out to know that they could be gouged out. I had already guessed that could happen and I was right. I always thought they would not prevent thefts or deter thieves and I was right. I always thought that chipping could have horrible consequences and I was right. So I have never liked the things. Yes I did voice my concerns with the rescues, but they said I couldn't get my dogs unless they were chipped. So they knew I was anti chipping, but rehomed them with me regardless!


Oh yeah.

I joined a few dog related Groups on Facebook and ended up having to 'unjoin' myself as I saw so much rubbish being talked it beggared belief.

One woman took her pup for it's first vaccination and, later in the day, the pup began to vomit. Of course, the Vet was to blame, he should never have vaccinated the pup, Vets are nothing but moneygrabbing scoundrels, vaccinations are dangerous, blah, blah, blah.

It later transpired that one of her children had given the pup a large onion, which the pup had crunched up and eaten.

Do you have a link to where you have read that many horses are having chips removed? That is news to me.


----------



## Dimwit (Nov 10, 2011)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> What social media hysteria? There are loads of REAL stories on the likes of Facebook about dogs suffering because of chips. Or are they all lies?


I am sure there are loads of stories on Facebook about dogs suffering, and that their owners believe the problems are caused by microchips but it doesn't mean they are right.
The point you are continually missing is that they do not KNOW for certain that the chip is causing the problem, they just believe it because it seems plausible and there are lots of other "reports" of the same thing.

Unfortunately the internet plus cognitive bias is a dangerous combination as it is very easy to find lots of "evidence" to support your claims...


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

Sweety said:


> Oh yeah.
> 
> I joined a few dog related Groups on Facebook and ended up having to 'unjoin' myself as I saw so much rubbish being talked it beggared belief.
> 
> ...


So they actually admitted that it wasn't the vaccination that made the puppy ill? Is that correct? But the stories about reactions I have read were confirmed to be because of the chips.


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

Mirandashell said:


> Known to everyone else as a joke......
> 
> Honestly, conspiracy theorists, no sense of humour or self-knowledge. Bless em!


I know there are members posting on this thread who are against the Government's banning of certain dog breeds. Does that make them conspiracy theorists as well? Will you answer that question or just ignore it like you have done with my other questions?

Edited to add that my view on certain breeds is the reason that certain members here are relishing in ganging up on me.


----------



## Laney_Lemons (Mar 23, 2016)

@LurcherGreyoundGirl What are the statistics with chips and reactions or death?


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

The DDA has nothing to do with micro-chipping or any conspiracy about it. You are doing what all one-issue posters do, moving the goalposts when you know you are losing the argument. And don't think I'm stupid enough to go around that circle either!


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

Mirandashell said:


> The DDA has nothing to do with micro-chipping or any conspiracy about it. You are doing what all one-issue posters do, moving the goalposts when you know you are losing the argument. And don't think I'm stupid enough to go around that circle either!


You are just avoiding answering my questions because you know it would mean admitting that I am right. You are saying that I am a conspiracy theorist because I disagree with the Government's microchipping law. Yet people who disagree with BSL are not conspiracy theorists because presumably you disagree with BSL as well so therefore neither you or them could possibly be conspiracy theorists. I will ask again. Do you think the Government is right about everything and agree with everything it says? Do you think everything in the Daily Mail is fake news? Do you think that everyone who says that their dogs became seriously ill or died because of chipping on social media is a liar?


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> I know there are members posting on this thread who are against the Government's banning of certain dog breeds. Does that make them conspiracy theorists as well? Will you answer that question or just ignore it like you have done with my other questions?
> 
> Edited to add that my view on certain breeds is the reason that certain members here are relishing in ganging up on me.


I am very much against BSL and banning of certain Breeds.

What has that to do with microchipping?


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> No a chip would definitely NOT guarantee your dog's return. And actually martingale collars are about the best collars for sighthounds to wear both on and off lead. Just about every sighthound rescue will recommend a martingale or a sighthound collar to be used for both on and off lead exercise. As for 'all this talk'. I only mentioned a martingale collar once (hot loads of times) as a solution to stop the other poster's dog slipping his/her collar and running off.
> 
> Can I ask what happened to the old chip? Did it have to be removed surgically or was the new chip put in along with the old one? If the former it means that your dog had to undergo an invasive surgical procedure to remove something that didn't need to be there in the first place. If the latter then it means that your dog's chances of having a dangerous migration has doubled.


A martingale collar by design and to work tightens if need be so your dog does not 'slip their collar' in a moment of madness. Due to the fact sighthounds necks are larger than their heads, this is why they are recommended. They also shouldn't tighten too tightly to cause discomfort is like a choke chain would.

So due to simple biology, most sight hound rescues will recommend these for walks only since they are a walking aid more than anything. Can freely fall off, as they should do fitted properly..

What most sight hound rescues recommend is house collars to be worn at all times, which is why many ex racers and many sight hounds usually wear 2 collars whilst walking. So the martingale can be removed for safety when off lead.


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> You are just avoiding answering my questions because you know it would mean admitting that I am right. You are saying that I am a conspiracy theorist because I disagree with the Government's microchipping law. Yet people who disagree with BSL are not conspiracy theorists because presumably you disagree with BSL as well so therefore neither you or them could possibly be conspiracy theorists. I will ask again. Do you think the Government is right about everything and agree with everything it says? Do you think everything in the Daily Mail is fake news? Do you think that everyone who says that their dogs became seriously ill or died because of chipping on social media is a liar?


 

You have no idea what I believe about anything because I haven't said anything about it. You are the one who brought up the DDA cos you can't stand to think that you are wrong. The DDA is irrelevant to your ranting. I can believe one thing the Government does is correct and another thing incorrect because I have critical thinking skills and don't just believe the things on Facebook that back up my own conspiracy theory. 
And now I am going to stop discussing this with you as you are a one-issue nutjob, like many others on the internet and expecting you to admit that someone might actually have a point is a complete waste of time.


----------



## MilleD (Feb 15, 2016)

Elaine2016 said:


> @LurcherGreyoundGirl What are the statistics with chips and reactions or death?


This is what I was going to ask


----------



## Nonnie (Apr 15, 2009)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> the stories about reactions I have read were confirmed to be because of the chips.


Reacting to what exactly? Microchips are inert after all.


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

Sweety said:


> I am very much against the DDA and banning of certain Breeds.
> 
> What has that to do with microchipping?


That wasn't aimed at you and it doesn't relate to microchipping. What it does relate to is the notion that anyone who disagrees with the Government is a conspiracy theorist.


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

I dont think much of the DDA and I'm definitely not a conspiracy theorist. 

On the other hand I do agree with microchipping not because the government said so, but because I believe that it is safe and a good way of returning lost dogs to there owners and have been microchipping my dogs years and years before it became mandatory.

Do you have statistics to show out of all the dogs that have been microchipped how many have died directly from having a microchip implanted, no maybes or could have beens, but those that have been proven beyond any doubt.
I would also like to see the percentage of dogs out of all those that have been chipped that have definitely died due to the chip (not the injection site, but the chip itself).
Do you have those to hand by any chance?


----------



## Babyshoes (Jul 1, 2016)

Do you wear a seatbelt? Those things can cause some nasty injuries in an accident, but we still all wear them because the benefits outweigh the risks.


----------



## Blackadder (Aug 25, 2014)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> What social media hysteria? There are loads of REAL stories on the likes of Facebook about dogs suffering because of chips. Or are they all lies?


The problem with all social media is that anyone can post anything without corroboration or supporting evidence & some will take it as gospel, before you can blink it's all over the web that x, y or z is dangerous/life threatening!

Someone asked about statistics, in 2 minutes I found this.



> 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


Ref: https://www.avma.org/KB/Resources/FAQs/Pages/Microchipping-of-animals-FAQ.aspx

From the WSAVA


> In the United Kingdom where over half of the dog population has a microchip, the British Small Animal Veterinary Association has established a formal system for the reporting of adverse events related to microchips, including tumors. In ten years of collecting data, only 2 tumors were reported to their adverse event registry.


Ref: http://www.wsava.org/sites/default/files/Microchip Safety and Efficacy.pdf

Everything in life carries a risk element, from having your pet vaccinated to walking to the local shop for some milk! It's up to each individual to weigh up benefit v risk & go from there. The risks from microchipping are so small that they are not even worth considering... 0.009775%, you're more likely to be struck by lightening!

Respected animal medical institutions or some unsubstantiated poster on social media?? I know who I'll believe 

Just to add: Since microchipping became compulsory the reporting of adverse effects also became compulsory.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> And I have never thought that chips were a good idea.


That's the nub of this whole thread isn't it. You don't think they're a good idea a bit like rogue drivers don't think compulsory third party insurance is a good idea and some parents don't think the no parking zones outside school gates should apply to them - because they are special and different.

Got news for you - you're not. None of us are.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

A number of years ago, two Jack Russells appeared on my drive one afternoon. I managed to get them into my garden, which I know is escape proof, and had no choice other than to ring the Dog Warden, as I didn't recognise the dogs.

When the Dog Warden arrived, he told me he had a scanner in his van and would check them for chips. Had they not been chipped, they would have been taken to the Council run Shelter where, if not claimed/rehomed, they would have been put to sleep after seven days. Thankfully, they were chipped and were returned to their frantic owner, who had been scouring the neighbourhood looking for them.

Both dogs were elderly and would have stood little or no chance of being adopted out of the Shelter, so the fact that they were chipped may well have saved their lives.

The Dog Warden told me that him being able to scan dogs had undoubtedly saved many from Death Row, as nearly half of all dogs he collected were chipped.

I have no doubt that there are posts on Facebook from those whose dog has collapsed/had a seizure/ suffered a complete personality change/contracted cancer and even died as a result of being chipped but then FB isn't always the most reliable source of information.

Why don't you balance against the lavish and hysterical claims of fearful events surrounding microchipping the indisputable fact that many lost dogs are returned safely to their owners because they were chipped?


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

I think chips are a magnificent idea. Especially with salt and vinegar.


----------



## Aahlly (Sep 12, 2014)

I resent this business of "if you take proper precautions you'll NEVER lose your dog". My OH took his eye off Roxy for two minutes to take a business call, the bin men opened the door and we briefly lost her. This was an accident, no-one's fault. It's not fair to pin blame on people and insinuate incompetence due to an accident. I'm fairly paranoid about my dog's safety and I try to do all the right things. They're never left tied up outside of shops, rarely left in the car for longer than it takes me to pump gas or run into the store for a bottle of water and they all have good recall and yet things go wrong. Lola got dirt kicked in her eye by Ghost that resulted in a corneal ulcer. Was that my fault? Sometimes incidents are beyond our control. 

What helps when things go wrong is stuff like microchips. I'm much more confident about my dogs being returned to me if I did happen to lose them because they're all microchipped (and I'm not sure about the exemptions for toy dogs? Lola weighed in at 1.8kg at the vet last week and she is microchipped). Risk is a part of life and this is one of those risks that's worth taking. Perhaps there are stories of them migrating or causing an issue, I don't doubt that. But what the articles don't tell you about is all the millions of other dogs that live their entire lives with no problems caused by microchips. If your vet doesn't routinely scan your dogs' microchips at their check ups why can't you just ask them to do it? I don't really understand why that issue was highlighted. 

This debate is bizarre and quite honestly pointless considering microchipping is now a legal requirement, not a choice.


----------



## Guest (Jun 1, 2017)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> So are you calling every single person who has said their dogs died, became ill, etc because of microchips on social media a liar?


I think it's important to distinguish between correlation and causation.
It is human nature to create causations from correlations, but that doesn't make it accurate.

Dogs get sick for all sorts of reasons that may or may not be related to the microchip. Dogs get cancer for all sorts of reasons that may or may not be related to the microchip. That's why we study data and form hypothesis and test those hypothesis to make sure we're drawing correct conclusions.



LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> I don't think of myself as superior, but I am not a sheep and don't believe everything the Government says. The only reason they made the chipping of dogs mandatory was to save local authorities money by kenneling strays. If they actually cared about dog welfare and preventing them being stolen then they would make things like leaving dogs unattended in public illegal.
> 
> I have also read about studies which have found that you are safer living in the city than in the countryside in America.


Nor do the people arguing with you on this thread all believe everything the government says. I for one believe scientific studies and experts in their field. Some happen to be employed in government jobs, others not. The government's stance on microchips is not necessarily relevant. Certainly not for me, as I live somewhere where microchipping is not a legal requirement. And, shocker here, neither of my dogs are chipped. And not for any of the reasons you have presented either 

As for your last line. Sorry, but you make me laugh. We were talking about my car being stolen. Not the dangers of living in rural areas in America. I'm sure there is some study out there about that, and it wouldn't surprise me either. Parts of America are still very wild and yup, if you don't know what you're doing you can go out in the wilderness and get yourself killed fairly easily. Has nothing to do with my car (or dogs) being stolen LOL.



LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> Edited to add that my view on certain breeds is the reason that certain members here are relishing in ganging up on me.


No one is "ganging up" on you. You are posting absolute statements and making judgmental assumptions about people based on their views on microchipping. If you had simply said you don't want to microchip your dog for your own reasons I doubt you would have had this reaction, but you don't just say that. Instead you insist on a "right" "wrong" argument where anyone who doesn't share your views is not only wrong, but doesn't care about dogs as much as you do. It's offensive and tiring.



LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> You are just avoiding answering my questions because you know it would mean admitting that I am right.


This is a perfect example of what I mean. 
You have no idea what that poster's reasons are for not answering your question. This is not a productive way to have a discussion. You're telling someone what they know and don't know, what they feel and don't feel, and guess what? You don't know.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> Edited to add that my view on certain breeds is the reason that certain members here are relishing in ganging up on me.


Oh, this old chestnut?

"I'm going to post baseless and outlandish opinions and, if you disagree with me, I'll accuse you of bullying/ganging up on me.

As you are free to post your opinions, so are we, and if they're different to yours, that's how it is.

I wonder, does it ever occur to you that, if virtually everyone disagrees with you, you just might be wrong?

Easier, I suppose, to accuse everyone else of ganging up on you.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> Edited to add that my view on certain breeds is the reason that certain members here are relishing in ganging up on me.


Oh, you mean your apparent hatred of Bull Breeds?

Yes, that may be something to do with why some members have no time for you.

However, on this particular thread, it's fairly apparent that members are disagreeing with your ridiculous and unfounded claims that dogs die when they're microchipped.


----------



## Laney_Lemons (Mar 23, 2016)

I'm still waiting on these statistics of how many dog die because of being microchipped?


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

Sweety said:


> Oh, you mean your apparent hatred of Bull Breeds?
> 
> Yes, that may be something to do with why some members have no time for you.
> 
> However, on this particular thread, it's fairly apparent that members are disagreeing with your ridiculous and unfounded claims that dogs die when they're microchipped.


Hatred of Bull breeds? I knew nothing about that.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

Mirandashell said:


> Hatred of Bull breeds? I knew nothing about that.


Look back through some old threads.

She has nothing good to say about Bull Breeds.


----------



## MaggiesMom (Oct 13, 2016)

No One is saying a chip will guarantee a lost dogs return, they're saying it's just much more likely!
There's no such thing as never in life and all this nonsense about 'well I'm never going to jump out of a plane' yada yada , jeeze are you ACTUALLY mental?!
For Christ's sake the chances of a chip harming your dog are far slimmer than most other risks involved with dog ownership! The law is trying to make life easier should the worst happen! Come and volunteer at my local rescue with me & watch how many (successfùl) chips we scan each week!


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

Elaine2016 said:


> I'm still waiting on these statistics of how many dog die because of being microchipped?


Me too


----------



## Sairy (Nov 22, 2016)

Wow just read through this thread after seeing how many comments were on it I figured it might make an interesting read.

I have both my cats chipped, as well as the dog, despite the fact that it is not a legal requirement for the cats to be done. If ever one of them went missing I would do everything in my power to ensure that they were returned to me, including having the foresight to have them chipped.

My brother in law had a staffy some years ago, before the chip law came into place. The dog actually previously belonged to another family member and was much-loved, but they could no longer look after him so passed him onto my brother in law. One day he didn't close the front door to his flat properly and fell asleep in his flat. When he woke up the dog had got out and was nowhere to be seen. To this day we do not know what happened to him and my brother in law has since passed away so it is highly unlikely we will ever know. At the time he phoned around all the rescue centres and put word out etc., but if he had been chipped then there would have been a better chance of him being brought home.

@ouesi I think I have house envy. I would love to have that much land. I don't even like leaving the keys in the ignition whilst I de-ice the car where I live!


----------



## CuddleMonster (Mar 9, 2016)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> No a chip would definitely NOT guarantee your dog's return. And actually martingale collars are about the best collars for sighthounds to wear both on and off lead. Just about every sighthound rescue will recommend a martingale or a sighthound collar to be used for both on and off lead exercise. As for 'all this talk'. I only mentioned a martingale collar once (hot loads of times) as a solution to stop the other poster's dog slipping his/her collar and running off.
> 
> Can I ask what happened to the old chip? Did it have to be removed surgically or was the new chip put in along with the old one? If the former it means that your dog had to undergo an invasive surgical procedure to remove something that didn't need to be there in the first place. If the latter then it means that your dog's chances of having a dangerous migration has doubled.


The old chip is still in her. Because it no longer scans, it wouldn't be possible to tell where it is, so obviously it can't be removed. And the chip did need to be there in the first place because it is a legal requirement.

My dog is a rescue and very easily startled. Once, she managed to slip both harness and collar when something panicked her. Another time, I was walking her when a sonic boom spooked her so much that she pulled me over and jerked the lead out of my hand. So it is possible to lose a dog, even if you are really careful. And while a chip doesn't guarantee the dog returns, it does increase the chance that it will. So I am glad she has one.

Regarding the cancer worry, dogs can die of cancer or other illnesses anyway. I try to keep my dog as safe as I can while giving her a good quality of life and making her as happy as I can (e.g. I could reduce the risk of her running away to minimum by never letting her off lead, but she loves to run so much, so I let her off in places I think are very safe because I think her happiness is worth the slightly increased risk.)


----------



## Guest (Jun 1, 2017)

Sairy said:


> @ouesi I think I have house envy. I would love to have that much land. I don't even like leaving the keys in the ignition whilst I de-ice the car where I live!


LOL I think it's easy to forget how incredibly vast the US is. When we lived out west you could really get a sense of the vastness of the land. I remember driving through Wyoming on the interstate highway and you would wave if you passed another vehicle  Size-wise Wyoming is actually bigger than all of the UK, but it's population is only 580 thousand to the UK's 65 Million. Those are numbers I have to take a minute to process 

But yeah, even here on the east coast in the rural parts, 20 acres of land is not that uncommon. We bought it for dirt cheap too. Apparently some person in Belgium owned it, had never even been out here, and defaulted on the taxes long enough that it came up for sale at the cost of the taxes and lawyer fees. And like much of the rural south, we are land rich but house poor. We have a very small, no-frills house - not much to be jealous of 

As for leaving keys in the car, that's a very done thing around here too. Was just at a friend's house dropping a kid off, went inside, left the keys in the car. It's not at all uncommon to be at a gathering and have someone need to move a vehicle and the car owner saying "keys are in it".


----------



## Laney_Lemons (Mar 23, 2016)

ouesi said:


> LOL I think it's easy to forget how incredibly vast the US is. When we lived out west you could really get a sense of the vastness of the land. I remember driving through Wyoming on the interstate highway and you would wave if you passed another vehicle  Size-wise Wyoming is actually bigger than all of the UK, but it's population is only 580 thousand to the UK's 65 Million. Those are numbers I have to take a minute to process
> 
> But yeah, even here on the east coast in the rural parts, 20 acres of land is not that uncommon. We bought it for dirt cheap too. Apparently some person in Belgium owned it, had never even been out here, and defaulted on the taxes long enough that it came up for sale at the cost of the taxes and lawyer fees. And like much of the rural south, we are land rich but house poor. We have a very small, no-frills house - not much to be jealous of
> 
> As for leaving keys in the car, that's a very done thing around here too. Was just at a friend's house dropping a kid off, went inside, left the keys in the car. It's not at all uncommon to be at a gathering and have someone need to move a vehicle and the car owner saying "keys are in it".


It's just like the movies  

Movies always show how people keep their keys in the sunvisor bit (independence day  etc) and I always think No one keeps their keys in the ignition or sun visor!! But I wrong  
I love it


----------



## FeelTheBern (Jan 13, 2016)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> What social media hysteria? There are loads of REAL stories on the likes of Facebook about dogs suffering because of chips. Or are they all lies? And I have never thought that chips were a good idea. I didn't need to read about them being gouged out to know that they could be gouged out. I had already guessed that could happen and I was right. I always thought they would not prevent thefts or deter thieves and I was right. I always thought that chipping could have horrible consequences and I was right. So I have never liked the things. Yes I did voice my concerns with the rescues, but they said I couldn't get my dogs unless they were chipped. So they knew I was anti chipping, but rehomed them with me regardless!


Of course the fact that a dog is microchipped isn't going to deter thieves. Unless the dog has a "microchipped" engraving on its tag; or the thief is carrying a chip scanner, there is no way for them to know whether the dog is chipped. That's pretty obvious, isn't it? I have never heard claims that micrpchipping reduces dog theft. Of course, if a dog is stolen and then runs off, if it is found it can be scanned and returned to its owner. But the fact that a dog is chipped wouldn't stop people from stealing it in the first place. You also claim that microchips have a negative impact upon dogs' health. Just because some microchipped dogs fell ill, this doesn't mean that the microchip was the cause of the illness. Do you know what external factors could have been affecting these dogs at the time of illness? I remember reading about claims that there was a relationship between power lines and cases of cancer in humans. But research showed that there wasn't a definite link between these two variables, and that the cancer was likely caused by things unrelated to the powerlines (such as pollution). What I'm trying to say is that there is no confirmed link between illnesses in dogs and microchips.


----------



## Guest (Jun 1, 2017)

Elaine2016 said:


> It's just like the movies
> 
> Movies always show how people keep their keys in the sunvisor bit (independence day  etc) and I always think No one keeps their keys in the ignition or sun visor!! But I wrong
> I love it


Yup, we do! But sun visor is so last century. I keep mine in the cup holder


----------



## Sairy (Nov 22, 2016)

ouesi said:


> LOL I think it's easy to forget how incredibly vast the US is. When we lived out west you could really get a sense of the vastness of the land. I remember driving through Wyoming on the interstate highway and you would wave if you passed another vehicle  Size-wise Wyoming is actually bigger than all of the UK, but it's population is only 580 thousand to the UK's 65 Million. Those are numbers I have to take a minute to process
> 
> But yeah, even here on the east coast in the rural parts, 20 acres of land is not that uncommon. We bought it for dirt cheap too. Apparently some person in Belgium owned it, had never even been out here, and defaulted on the taxes long enough that it came up for sale at the cost of the taxes and lawyer fees. And like much of the rural south, we are land rich but house poor. We have a very small, no-frills house - not much to be jealous of
> 
> As for leaving keys in the car, that's a very done thing around here too. Was just at a friend's house dropping a kid off, went inside, left the keys in the car. It's not at all uncommon to be at a gathering and have someone need to move a vehicle and the car owner saying "keys are in it".


Haha! I cannot imagine doing that over here. I would love to go to America - been wanting to go on holiday over there for a very long time, but it's just a case of getting the money together. So far I've never been outside of Europe. So many places I'd like to go to in America.


----------



## MilleD (Feb 15, 2016)

BlackadderUK said:


> The problem with all social media is that anyone can post anything without corroboration or supporting evidence & some will take it as gospel, before you can blink it's all over the web that x, y or z is dangerous/life threatening!
> 
> Someone asked about statistics, in 2 minutes I found this.
> 
> ...


So that's roughly 0.0097% having an issue - not dying - just an issue.

Sounds like a fairly low risk factor.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

Sairy said:


> Wow just read through this thread after seeing how many comments were on it I figured it might make an interesting read.
> @ouesi I think I have house envy. I would love to have that much land. I don't even like leaving the keys in the ignition whilst I de-ice the car where I live!


I live in the UK and my keys live in the car at home. The only reason I take them out in the village (but not lock the car) is because I am afraid it might lock itself and I would be stuck but I have a spare key at home if it happens. plenty of rural areas in the uk are safe to do that.
I have started locking the car in town recently but not sure it is really necessary. The police were having the odd dig about unlocked cars in car parks so, as I wanted to take the keys out anyway, I started locking it


----------



## Laney_Lemons (Mar 23, 2016)

I would never leave my keys in the car, its just too risky IMO

I live in Northern Ireland, in a small town and there are small villages around us and thefts are rife. They do always say most thefts are opportunists and keys in a car is just too risky for me. 

Plus your insurance company might walk away if you keys are in the car so i also couldn't afford not to get money from them if my car was stolen


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> I don't think of myself as superior, but I am not a sheep and don't believe everything the Government says. The only reason they made the chipping of dogs mandatory* was to save local authorities money by kenneling strays.* If they actually cared about dog welfare and preventing them being stolen then they would make things like leaving dogs unattended in public illegal.
> 
> I have also read about studies which have found that you are safer living in the city than in the countryside in America.


But local authorities charge for kennelling - here it's around £100 per day. The quicker dogs are returned to their owners, the less money they make.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

Elaine2016 said:


> I would never leave my keys in the car, its just too risky IMO
> 
> I live in Northern Ireland, in a small town and there are small villages around us and thefts are rife. They do always say most thefts are opportunists and keys in a car is just too risky for me.
> 
> Plus your insurance company might walk away if you keys are in the car so i also couldn't afford not to get money from them if my car was stolen


Risky where you live but not where I live or where Ouesi lives. Like she said if someone's car is in the way the keys are usually in it so you can move it.


----------



## Guest (Jun 2, 2017)

This happens here, small town, 2017, all the time. 
When I need my car serviced or tires changed, I call the shop we've been with for decades now. Say I need whatever service done, tell them my car is in the parking lot at work, keys in it. They come get it, work on it, and return it to the parking lot before the end of work. 
I drive by the shop on the way home and pay. 

There really are parts of the world still like this


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

Blitz said:


> Risky where you live but not where I live or where Ouesi lives. Like she said if someone's car is in the way the keys are usually in it so you can move it.





ouesi said:


> This happens here, small town, 2017, all the time.
> When I need my car serviced or tires changed, I call the shop we've been with for decades now. Say I need whatever service done, tell them my car is in the parking lot at work, keys in it. They come get it, work on it, and return it to the parking lot before the end of work.
> I drive by the shop on the way home and pay.
> 
> There really are parts of the world still like this


If you honestly believe nothing will happen just because you've been doing something for x number of years without incident then you are seriously deluded. You sound a bit like someone who says that they've been a careful driver for several decades and never had an accident and then they go out and cause a collision.


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

jhosk1981 said:


> seems wrong having a foreign object inside him


So we can confidently expect you to be refusing any future knee or hip replacements for yourself (or for your dog) on that basis, however painful normal life may become?


----------



## ForestWomble (May 2, 2013)

ouesi said:


> This happens here, small town, 2017, all the time.
> When I need my car serviced or tires changed, I call the shop we've been with for decades now. Say I need whatever service done, tell them my car is in the parking lot at work, keys in it. They come get it, work on it, and return it to the parking lot before the end of work.
> I drive by the shop on the way home and pay.
> 
> There really are parts of the world still like this


Wow. Where you live sounds more like a book I'd read set in the pre/post war period, not something you'd expect now a days.

Sounds lovely.


----------



## Magyarmum (Apr 27, 2015)

ouesi said:


> This happens here, small town, 2017, all the time.
> When I need my car serviced or tires changed, I call the shop we've been with for decades now. Say I need whatever service done, tell them my car is in the parking lot at work, keys in it. They come get it, work on it, and return it to the parking lot before the end of work.
> I drive by the shop on the way home and pay.
> 
> There really are parts of the world still like this


I live in Hungary which is 106 times smaller than the US and with only 10 million people compared to the US's 309 million,but even so there are large areas of uninhabited land where you can travel for miles without seeing any vehicles, buildings or people.

I don't usually leave my keys in the car but I regularly leave the car unlocked when I'm out shopping especially if the dogs are in it. Generally speaking, Hungarians are scared of dogs and two dogs on the back seat are enough to put them off trying to break into it.

Living in a tiny village I can safely leave my front door wide open when I take the dogs for a walk because I can't be bothered to carry the keys with me. On the rare occasions when one of the dogs wakes in the middle of the night I'll let them out then go back to bed leaving the door wide open. I very much doubt whether any burglar is going to risk an encounter with a Pei who's first priority is guarding her home and family! Now the weather's getting too hot for Georgina I'll be leaving her quite often to sleep under the hedge in the garden whilst Gwylim and I go for a walk.

As @ouesi has already said there are still parts of the world like this!


----------



## Guest (Jun 2, 2017)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> If you honestly believe nothing will happen just because you've been doing something for x number of years without incident then you are seriously deluded. You sound a bit like someone who says that they've been a careful driver for several decades and never had an accident and then they go out and cause a collision.


See? Here you go not having a productive discussion again. Making assumptions about what I believe, and then insulting me based on wrong assumptions.

I never said I believe nothing will happen. I simply shared an anecdote of life in a small town in the rural south of the US.
Could my car be stolen? Yup. That's a possibility.
Is it likely? Not really.

Again, possibility vs. probability.
For example. Is it possible that you will respond with a reasoned and well thought out reply? Yup. Is it probable based on past behavior? Nope.


----------



## Gemmaa (Jul 19, 2009)

Elaine2016 said:


> It's just like the movies
> 
> Movies always show how people keep their keys in the sunvisor bit (independence day  etc) and I always think No one keeps their keys in the ignition or sun visor!! But I wrong
> I love it


Hah! Me and my OH were shouting at a film for that reason the other day....feel a bit silly now :Hilarious


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

Aahlly said:


> I resent this business of "if you take proper precautions you'll NEVER lose your dog". My OH took his eye off Roxy for two minutes to take a business call, the bin men opened the door and we briefly lost her. This was an accident, no-one's fault. It's not fair to pin blame on people and insinuate incompetence due to an accident. I'm fairly paranoid about my dog's safety and I try to do all the right things. They're never left tied up outside of shops, rarely left in the car for longer than it takes me to pump gas or run into the store for a bottle of water and they all have good recall and yet things go wrong. Lola got dirt kicked in her eye by Ghost that resulted in a corneal ulcer. Was that my fault? Sometimes incidents are beyond our control.
> 
> What helps when things go wrong is stuff like microchips. I'm much more confident about my dogs being returned to me if I did happen to lose them because they're all microchipped (and I'm not sure about the exemptions for toy dogs? Lola weighed in at 1.8kg at the vet last week and she is microchipped). Risk is a part of life and this is one of those risks that's worth taking. Perhaps there are stories of them migrating or causing an issue, I don't doubt that. But what the articles don't tell you about is all the millions of other dogs that live their entire lives with no problems caused by microchips. If your vet doesn't routinely scan your dogs' microchips at their check ups why can't you just ask them to do it? I don't really understand why that issue was highlighted.
> 
> This debate is bizarre and quite honestly pointless considering microchipping is now a legal requirement, not a choice.


That issue was highlighted to show how ridiculously the new law is being policed. Any person could walk into my vet's surgery with a stolen chipped dog, claim it's theirs and the dog won't be scanned. Since chips have been known to stop working and to migrate there is no way of knowing those things unless the dog is scanned. And not everybody would think of asking to get their dogs scanned to make sure of those things.



ouesi said:


> I think it's important to distinguish between correlation and causation.
> It is human nature to create causations from correlations, but that doesn't make it accurate.
> 
> Dogs get sick for all sorts of reasons that may or may not be related to the microchip. Dogs get cancer for all sorts of reasons that may or may not be related to the microchip. That's why we study data and form hypothesis and test those hypothesis to make sure we're drawing correct conclusions.
> ...


Yet calling people nutjobs, conspiracy theorists, a joke, etc is a productive way of having a discussion? Why don't you say the same thing to her? Oh wait, you won't because you agree with her!

And universities have conducted studies and found that small town living isn't as safe as city living in the US.



Sweety said:


> Oh, you mean your apparent hatred of Bull Breeds?
> 
> Yes, that may be something to do with why some members have no time for you.
> 
> However, on this particular thread, it's fairly apparent that members are disagreeing with your ridiculous and unfounded claims that dogs die when they're microchipped.


I can actually see that there are such things as more dangerous breeds (do you want me to name the breeds that have been responsible for all 6 fatal attacks here since the beginning of last year?) so then bull breed advocates (who are renowned for being rude and abusive) resort to being bullies. And it's apparent that you have issues when you keep on insisting that dogs don't die because of being chipped when there is proof that they do in fact die because of them! So my claims are NOT ridiculous or unfounded!



Elaine2016 said:


> I'm still waiting on these statistics of how many dog die because of being microchipped?


Statistics on this keep on changing. Out of all the chipped dogs that are still missing after being stolen or becoming lost, only time will tell as to how many are reunited with their families because of their chips. And out of the millions of dogs who are chipped, again only time will as to how many will develop problems because of the chip.



MaggiesMom said:


> No One is saying a chip will guarantee a lost dogs return, they're saying it's just much more likely!
> There's no such thing as never in life and all this nonsense about 'well I'm never going to jump out of a plane' yada yada , jeeze are you ACTUALLY mental?!
> For Christ's sake the chances of a chip harming your dog are far slimmer than most other risks involved with dog ownership! The law is trying to make life easier should the worst happen! Come and volunteer at my local rescue with me & watch how many (successfùl) chips we scan each week!


Now you are splitting hairs. It was blatantly obvious I was using that as an example as to how there can actually be a 'never' in life.



CuddleMonster said:


> The old chip is still in her. Because it no longer scans, it wouldn't be possible to tell where it is, so obviously it can't be removed. And the chip did need to be there in the first place because it is a legal requirement.
> 
> My dog is a rescue and very easily startled. Once, she managed to slip both harness and collar when something panicked her. Another time, I was walking her when a sonic boom spooked her so much that she pulled me over and jerked the lead out of my hand. So it is possible to lose a dog, even if you are really careful. And while a chip doesn't guarantee the dog returns, it does increase the chance that it will. So I am glad she has one.
> 
> Regarding the cancer worry, dogs can die of cancer or other illnesses anyway. I try to keep my dog as safe as I can while giving her a good quality of life and making her as happy as I can (e.g. I could reduce the risk of her running away to minimum by never letting her off lead, but she loves to run so much, so I let her off in places I think are very safe because I think her happiness is worth the slightly increased risk.)


Just because dogs develop other types of cancer, it doesn't make it right to heighten their chances of developing cancerous tumours after implanting something in them that won't even guarantee their safe return if they are lost of stolen.


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

Burrowzig said:


> So we can confidently expect you to be refusing any future knee or hip replacements for yourself (or for your dog) on that basis, however painful normal life may become?


Knee and hip replacements are essential. Chips are not.


----------



## Gemmaa (Jul 19, 2009)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> I can actually see that there are such things as more dangerous breeds (do you want me to name the breeds that have been responsible for all 6 fatal attacks here since the beginning of last year?) *so then bull breed advocates (who are renowned for being rude and abusive)* *resort to being bullies.* And it's apparent that you have issues when you keep on insisting that dogs don't die because of being chipped when there is proof that they do in fact die because of them! So my claims are NOT ridiculous or unfounded!


...unlike your sweet self :Joyful


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> Knee and hip replacements are *essential*. Chips are not.


Really? For most of the world's population, they are an unimaginable luxury.
And chips are essential. The law says so.


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

Gemmaa said:


> ...unlike your sweet self :Joyful


At least I'm not acting in petulant manner. Nor have I resorted to name calling. After all I haven't called anyone a nutjob or anything like that! 


ouesi said:


> See? Here you go not having a productive discussion again. Making assumptions about what I believe, and then insulting me based on wrong assumptions.
> 
> I never said I believe nothing will happen. I simply shared an anecdote of life in a small town in the rural south of the US.
> Could my car be stolen? Yup. That's a possibility.
> ...


And is it possible for you to reply without being rude and sarcastic? Is it possible for you to aim criticism at others for doing the same things that you are accusing me of?


----------



## Gemmaa (Jul 19, 2009)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> At least I'm not acting in petulant manner. Nor have
> 
> And is it possible for you to reply without being rude and sarcastic? Is it possible for you to aim criticism at others for doing the same things that you are accusing me of?


Hmm, I think that's debatable.


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> If you honestly believe nothing will happen just because you've been doing something for x number of years without incident then you are seriously deluded. You sound a bit like someone who says that they've been a careful driver for several decades and never had an accident and then they go out and cause a collision.


And you sound a bit like someone who says their dogs will never get lost or stolen but then their dogs get lost or stolen.

Why do you always have to be so obstreporous?

Are you as abrasive in real life as you are behind the safety of a keyboard?


----------



## Guest (Jun 2, 2017)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> Yet calling people nutjobs, conspiracy theorists, a joke, etc is a productive way of having a discussion? Why don't you say the same thing to her? Oh wait, you won't because you agree with her!


One, thank you very much for illustrating my point about the possibility vs. probability of how you would respond 

Two, again, I'm going to have to remind you that you don't get to assume my reasons or intentions when I post. 
I don't know who "her" is. I honestly did not see the nutjob insult, most of the time I skim through threads when they get long, and some posters I skim more than others  
But that's beside the point. You complained about being ganged up on. I tried to explain to you that part of that is due to your posting style, and am giving you examples of your posting style that gets the reaction you're getting. If you don't like being ganged up on, that is one place you could make a change and you might see a different reaction.



LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> And universities have conducted studies and found that small town living isn't as safe as city living in the US.


Please do tell. I would love to know the criteria of safety being measured. 
I would also like to know your point about rural living not being safe, are you wanting me to move, or?? Not sure how this all fits to be honest!



LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> And is it possible for you to reply without being rude and sarcastic? Is it possible for you to aim criticism at others for doing the same things that you are accusing me of?


It's very possible for me to reply without being rude or sarcastic as that is what I have done throughout the thread.


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> At least I'm not acting in petulant manner.


Your posting history says otherwise, & I'm including the red blobs you doled out to quite a few of us on the old forum, just because we disagreed with you.


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

Nice one, Gemma! 

And the arguments start again. Still no real evidence, no statistics, just the same hysterical lecturing. One of these days, you might work out that talking to people like this doesn't work. People don't take you seriously. You aren't saving the lives of any dogs. And your rudeness gives people licence to make fun of you. That's all part of the social contract. So basically you are wasting your time and making yourself unpopular. And not helping any dogs.


----------



## Guest (Jun 2, 2017)

Burrowzig said:


> Really? For most of the world's population, they are an unimaginable luxury.
> And chips are essential. The law says so.


Absolutely!! Joint replacements are not essential at all! But so glad we have them, for both humans and our beloved animals!


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Animallover26 said:


> Wow. Where you live sounds more like a book I'd read set in the pre/post war period, not something you'd expect now a days.
> 
> Sounds lovely.


 In the sixties we used to leave our back door unlocked in the daytime.
Nowadays if you leave your keys in your car , there's a good chance it will be stolen . cars have been stolen from peoples drives and the ownners have been runover trying to st op them .


----------



## Guest (Jun 2, 2017)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> I can actually see that there are such things as more dangerous breeds (do you want me to name the breeds that have been responsible for all 6 fatal attacks here since the beginning of last year?) so then bull breed advocates (who are renowned for being rude and abusive) resort to being bullies. And it's apparent that you have issues when you keep on insisting that dogs don't die because of being chipped when there is proof that they do in fact die because of them! So my claims are NOT ridiculous or unfounded!


I find it sadly ironic that you're very concerned about supposed (and unproven) needless deaths due to microchips, but you're not at all concerned with actual needless deaths because of BSL....


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> I can actually see that there are such things as more dangerous breeds (do you want me to name the breeds that have been responsible for all 6 fatal attacks here since the beginning of last year?) so then bull breed advocates (who are renowned for being rude and abusive) resort to being bullies. And it's apparent that you have issues when you keep on insisting that dogs don't die because of being chipped when there is proof that they do in fact die because of them! So my claims are NOT ridiculous or unfounded!


And it is a fact that many, many dogs die in Council Pounds and Shelters every day because they aren't chipped and no owner can be traced.

I absolutely do not believe that there are more deaths attributed to the chipping of dogs.


----------



## Dimwit (Nov 10, 2011)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> If you honestly believe nothing will happen just because you've been doing something for x number of years without incident then you are seriously deluded.


Oh, the irony :Hilarious


----------



## ForestWomble (May 2, 2013)

kimthecat said:


> In the sixties we used to leave our back door unlocked in the daytime.
> Nowadays if you leave your keys in your car , there's a good chance it will be stolen . cars have been stolen from peoples drives and the ownners have been runover trying to st op them .


Yep, exactly.


----------



## Nonnie (Apr 15, 2009)

simplysardonic said:


> obstreporous


I feel educated today.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> Any person could walk into my vet's surgery with a stolen chipped dog, claim it's theirs and the dog won't be scanned.


That's an issue you need to take up with your vet. The vast majority now automatically check a dog's microchip.


----------



## SusieRainbow (Jan 21, 2013)

My vet checks chips at every visit. I'd be very surprised if a vet didn't check a dog's chip at it's first visit to the practise.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

havoc said:


> That's an issue you need to take up with your vet. The vast majority now automatically check a dog's microchip.


 is this because of the new law? Ive never known vets to bother.

ETA I go to vets and one a vet hospital and I have to ask them to check in case its migrated .


----------



## MilleD (Feb 15, 2016)

ouesi said:


> This happens here, small town, 2017, all the time.
> When I need my car serviced or tires changed, I call the shop we've been with for decades now. Say I need whatever service done, tell them my car is in the parking lot at work, keys in it. They come get it, work on it, and return it to the parking lot before the end of work.
> I drive by the shop on the way home and pay.
> 
> There really are parts of the world still like this


We do similar, but we are slightly more security conscious in that we leave the vehicle locked and the keys on the wheel. Much better :Smug


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)




----------



## MilleD (Feb 15, 2016)

Makes you wonder why the OP actually started this thread with a question when they were planning on arguing with every person that said no.

Weird.


----------



## Nonnie (Apr 15, 2009)

MilleD said:


> Makes you wonder why the OP actually started this thread with a question when they were planning on arguing with every person that said no.
> 
> Weird.


The op hasnt been back, have they?


----------



## MilleD (Feb 15, 2016)

Nonnie said:


> The op hasnt been back, have they?


Which goes to show I didn't read the thread properly


----------



## Magyarmum (Apr 27, 2015)

Nonnie said:


> The op hasnt been back, have they?


She was last on at 1.35 pm today. Perhaps recouping her energy for the next onslaught?


----------



## Nonnie (Apr 15, 2009)

Magyarmum said:


> She was last on at 1.35 pm today. Perhaps recouping her energy for the next onslaught?


Nope.

Op was last online monday.

Looks like they started this thread, and never came back.

Its been interesting though.


----------



## Magyarmum (Apr 27, 2015)

Nonnie said:


> Nope.
> 
> Op was last online monday.
> 
> ...


Sorry! I wasn't thinking about the original poster, but the one that's taken over the thread and seems to take delight in arguing!


----------



## Wilmer (Aug 31, 2012)

Considering someone posted clear, coherent, referenced facts about 2 pages ago - 391 issues in 4 million animals over ~20yrs - I find it odd that our passionate anti-chipper hasn't commented once on it? I wonder if there's a paper out there discussing the human preference for anecdote over fact, it seems quite common these days.


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

Nonnie said:


> I feel educated today.


It a word my nan used a lot, I hear it & I'm immediately back in her kitchen drinking overly milky tea & listening to Radio Norfolk......

Just realised I spelt it wrong though....


----------



## Shadowrat (Jan 30, 2011)

Out of interest, those who think their dog will 'never be stolen' purely because they don't leave it unattended......what about if someone snatches the lead off you on an afternoon walk, bundles your dog into a van, and drives off? It happened locally last year. Ok, it was a small dog that didn't have much chance of defending itself, and an elderly female owner who was much the same, but still, its not exclusive to where I live. It happens. Does it happen often? No. But probably more often than a dog getting sick from a microchip happens........

The point is, you can NOT say your dog will never be stolen, you're deluding yourself; there is always that risk, just like there is always a risk a child will be snatched, no matter how attentive you are. I never leave mine unsupervised outside, I never leave them in the car, if they're offlead they're in my sight, and I would never leave them outside a shop (I have an anxiety disorder, so trust me, Im very good at being totally over the top paranoid with my dogs)......I still don't go around thinking that means my dogs will never ever be at risk of theft. In fact, for a time, I walked with my pup clipped to my belt purely so if someone snatched the lead out of my hand, it'd be another barrier to them getting away with my dog, give me a few seconds more.

On microchips, I actually got my ferret back purely because of her chip. She broke out of her enclosure, and went for a late night wander around the houses and gardens, and we ONLY got her back because she was chipped, as obviously one doesn't leave visible ID on a ferret. She was found, scanned at Pets at Home, and returned to me. 

Are there any actual studies into how common these microchip injuries actually are? What are the numbers? And how do they stand up against the UK dog population as a whole? Thats what you need to look at. For example, 100 dogs being affected by something might sound like a lot, but when taken into context of a population of millions of dogs, its really a piffling number and barely relevant.......


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

Shadowrat said:


> Out of interest, those who think their dog will 'never be stolen' purely because they don't leave it unattended......what about if someone snatches the lead off you on an afternoon walk, bundles your dog into a van, and drives off? It happened locally last year. Ok, it was a small dog that didn't have much chance of defending itself, and an elderly female owner who was much the same, but still, its not exclusive to where I live. It happens. Does it happen often? No. But probably more often than a dog getting sick from a microchip happens........
> 
> The point is, you can NOT say your dog will never be stolen, you're deluding yourself; there is always that risk, just like there is always a risk a child will be snatched, no matter how attentive you are. I never leave mine unsupervised outside, I never leave them in the car, if they're offlead they're in my sight, and I would never leave them outside a shop (I have an anxiety disorder, so trust me, Im very good at being totally over the top paranoid with my dogs)......I still don't go around thinking that means my dogs will never ever be at risk of theft. In fact, for a time, I walked with my pup clipped to my belt purely so if someone snatched the lead out of my hand, it'd be another barrier to them getting away with my dog, give me a few seconds more.
> 
> ...


I know there wasn't much out there 5 years ago, because I was going to write my dissertation on the 'cons' of microchipping but there wasn't enough credible evidence to use.

Plenty of anecdotes, but those do not a dissertation make.


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

I'm slightly puzzled as to why vets are expected to scan the chip at every visit. I'm not sure I see the purpose of that.


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

Mirandashell said:


> I'm slightly puzzled as to why vets are expected to scan the chip at every visit. I'm not sure I see the purpose of that.


My vet scans the dog if asked, if you bring in a new dog or if a new client brings in a dog. The first thing he did when I took Isla in to register her as a puppy, was to scan her.

I ask him to scan Isla every now and again just to check it's still working or whether it's moved at all. So far it's working fine and hasn't moved.


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

I understand that. Makes perfect sense to scan a new dog or as a check. It's Mrs Always Right's insistence on a scan every visit that puzzles me.


----------



## SusieRainbow (Jan 21, 2013)

Well, mine does , not sure why but it takes her all of 5 seconds.It would seem sensible at a first visit though.


----------



## bogdog (Jan 1, 2014)

I used to ask my vet to scan the chip in the early years, now I don't bother, I doubt that they would move if they were in place for the first 3 or 4 years of the dogs lives.


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

As I'm having a problem changing the chip details on Ty, I have an engraved disc with his address on and a Bow Wow Meow QR tab with his profile on it as backups. 

Obviously they are useless if he gets out without his harness on but they are the best I can do for now.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

I think it's a great idea now, especially with it being law for dogs to be microchipped that at least on a visit, say once a year the chip is checked that it's still working. As occasionally they do fail.

@Mirandashell might be worth doing in Ty's case, just in case the chip has failed and you payout £16 to change details, to find he needs re chipping anyway. The chances that it's failed is few and far between, but you never know.

If you are really struggling with the microchip details am more than happy to post you the form for you to fill in, I have envelopes, stamps and a printer...as long as you have the microchip number it's plain sailing. Maisie's took about 2 weeks to come, and arrived today. Everything is now online and pretty straightforward, once you get the details sent off.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

lullabydream said:


> I think it's a great idea now, especially with it being law for dogs to be microchipped that at least on a visit, say once a year the chip is checked that it's still working. As occasionally they do fail.


Only reason I know vets do is because of a thread a while back in cat chat. It was the vet on there who gave a link to the RCVS advice to vets. It was a surprise to me at the time that they are advised to scan and I subsequently saw the notice in the waiting room at my vets saying animals will be checked. I'd have been surprised at that had I not seen it here first


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

havoc said:


> Only reason I know vets do is because of a thread a while back in cat chat. It was the vet on there who gave a link to the RCVS advice to vets. It was a surprise to me at the time that they are advised to scan and I subsequently saw the notice in the waiting room at my vets saying animals will be checked. I'd have been surprised at that had I not seen it here first


Years ago I think a celebrity...am thinking Lionel Blair was petitioning for this to become law after his dog got stolen in front of his eyes... bundled in a van or something and drove off swiftly. So it's great that it's recommended now.
Might not have been Lionel, but someone of that ilk.. it was specifically aimed at new dogs attending vets I think. So that lost or stolen dogs could be reunited and I think if I remember rightly dogs lost was in the campaign too.

Have heard so many people discovering their rehomed pet isn't officially theirs when people have had to microchipped them with the new law, and owning them for x amount of years, if this had been common practice earlier a lot of heartache may never have occured.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

lullabydream said:


> Have heard so many people discovering their rehomed pet isn't officially theirs when people have had to microchipped them with the new law, and owning them for x amount of years, if this had been common practice earlier a lot of heartache may never have occured.


The subject came up over a Bengal cat which was returned to the original owners after it was missing for five years. It had strayed and the 'new' owners had to try and get the microchip changed over to their name because the vet had scanned and questioned ownership. What happens in a case like this is that the original owners are contacted by Petlog (or whoever) and if no reply then the details are amended. In this case the original owners wanted the cat back even though they hadn't seen it for so long. I'd have had more sympathy with them if the original price they paid for it wasn't the main piece of information they gave to every journalist who would listen.

Still, they got their cat back so everything was just hunky dory. Don't know if they ever offered to reimburse the other family for all the vet bills they'd paid out getting a stray cat back to full health.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

havoc said:


> The subject came up over a Bengal cat which was returned to the original owners after it was missing for five years. It had strayed and the 'new' owners had to try and get the microchip changed over to their name because the vet had scanned and questioned ownership. What happens in a case like this is that the original owners are contacted by Petlog (or whoever) and if no reply then the details are amended. In this case the original owners wanted the cat back even though they hadn't seen it for so long. I'd have had more sympathy with them if the original price they paid for it wasn't the main piece of information they gave to every journalist who would listen.
> 
> Still, they got their cat back so everything was just hunky dory. Don't know if they ever offered to reimburse the other family for all the vet bills they'd paid out getting a stray cat back to full health.


There was a post here where a dog had been missing for 7 years...the new owner had the dog for 2 spent a fortune on vet care...rescued him from some druggie, and fixed the dog. Orthopedic surgery no less. Originally the owners wanted the dog back, however I think the vet explained about the care the dog had received and the original owner met new owner and said she could keep the dog, just needed to know, that he's got a good home which he had. Obviously he would have been off the radar in the home with the druggie because it sounded like he was badly neglected. However if the new owner had the dog scanned on first vet appointment, who knows what may have happened. However, sounds like a vet trip was first on the agenda...I would do the same so if it had happened no great attachment would have occured.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

lullabydream said:


> I would do the same so if it had happened no great attachment would have occured


Makes perfect sense therefore for vets to scan as a matter of course and in time it could prevent a lot of heartache hence the current guidelines. In the case of the cat it had been with the new family for a couple of years, more time than with the original owners before it went missing. The vet had not scanned in those two years but did after lengthy and expensive courses of treatment.


----------



## CuddleMonster (Mar 9, 2016)

kimthecat said:


> is this because of the new law? Ive never known vets to bother.
> 
> ETA I go to vets and one a vet hospital and I have to ask them to check in case its migrated .


My old vet always used to check, even before it became a legal requirement to chip. This one only checks if you ask them to.


----------



## CuddleMonster (Mar 9, 2016)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> Just because dogs develop other types of cancer, it doesn't make it right to heighten their chances of developing cancerous tumours after implanting something in them that won't even guarantee their safe return if they are lost of stolen.


So what are you suggesting? That I refuse to comply with the law? It's all very well arguing against chips, but they are a LEGAL requirement in this country.


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

lullabydream said:


> If you are really struggling with the microchip details am more than happy to post you the form for you to fill in, I have envelopes, stamps and a printer...as long as you have the microchip number it's plain sailing. Maisie's took about 2 weeks to come, and arrived today. Everything is now online and pretty straightforward, once you get the details sent off.


That's really sweet of you but therein lies the rub. I don't have any of the numbers needed. Ty's ex-mom is going to contact the vet who put the chip in him so I'm waiting on her. But thank you for the offer.


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

Actually, I've been a bit of an idiot. He had his follow-up appointment today so I could have asked the vet to scan it. Never thought of it, TBH. D'oh!


----------



## Aahlly (Sep 12, 2014)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> That issue was highlighted to show how ridiculously the new law is being policed. Any person could walk into my vet's surgery with a stolen chipped dog, claim it's theirs and the dog won't be scanned. Since chips have been known to stop working and to migrate there is no way of knowing those things unless the dog is scanned. And not everybody would think of asking to get their dogs scanned to make sure of those things.


What this has got to do with the redundant (considering it is a legal requirement) argument about microchips I don't know. Yes, what you state is quite possible but not the most important scenario the chip was designed to aid in. If a dog is found wandering then having a microchip will enable it to be immediately returned to the owner, bypassing an unpleasant stay at a shelter while an owner is located, perhaps with difficulty.

However, on registering at a new vet the dog would be scanned and found to be stolen anyway. Surely all vets scan animals when they are registered for their records. Perhaps your own dogs were not as microchipping was not a legal requirement when they were first registered with your vet?

I don't know why this is even being debated. The good that microchips can and have done far, _far_ outweigh the teeny tiny risks involved. Surely the fact that literally no-one on this forum (which is full of experienced and knowledgeable people who care passionately about animals and their welfare) agrees with you is fairly sound evidence that what you are arguing is neither fact nor the commonly held belief. I sometimes wonder when threads like this go on and on what the contrary party is hoping to achieve. You've been provided scientific and anecdotal evidence that people who run into problems caused by microchips are few and far between.Where you hoping that everyone would run immediately to their vet and request their dogs' chips are removed? Or what? I don't get it.  Especially considering that that would in fact be illegal? I think few people would be willing to break the law based on such scant evidence for microchips being the work of the devil.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Mirandashell said:


> Actually, I've been a bit of an idiot. He had his follow-up appointment today so I could have asked the vet to scan it. Never thought of it, TBH. D'oh!


Give me a shout if you need me to print out the form for you. It's no bother, at all and Tescos is across the road with a post box. Always have stamps, and envelopes, ink in the printer and paper for it. We would be lost without it! 
Hope you get it sorted soon...am surprised the vets haven't got a record of it, or its written printed on vaccination card


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

I've had a look at the paperwork she did give me and can't find it. I'm seeing her tomorrow so will check if she called the original vet.


----------



## PoppyPaws (Apr 19, 2017)

Shadowrat said:


> Out of interest, those who think their dog will 'never be stolen' purely because they don't leave it unattended......what about if someone snatches the lead off you on an afternoon walk, bundles your dog into a van, and drives off? It happened locally last year. Ok, it was a small dog that didn't have much chance of defending itself, and an elderly female owner who was much the same, but still, its not exclusive to where I live. It happens. Does it happen often? No. But probably more often than a dog getting sick from a microchip happens........
> 
> The point is, you can NOT say your dog will never be stolen, you're deluding yourself; there is always that risk, just like there is always a risk a child will be snatched, no matter how attentive you are. I never leave mine unsupervised outside, I never leave them in the car, if they're offlead they're in my sight, and I would never leave them outside a shop (I have an anxiety disorder, so trust me, Im very good at being totally over the top paranoid with my dogs)......I still don't go around thinking that means my dogs will never ever be at risk of theft. In fact, for a time, I walked with my pup clipped to my belt purely so if someone snatched the lead out of my hand, it'd be another barrier to them getting away with my dog, give me a few seconds more.
> 
> ...


Over Christmas just near here, a dog was stolen overnight when a house was broken in to and the burglars took The puppy along with everything else they took. Fortunately it was returned a few days later (handed in to the police station), in part because the owners publicised far and wide that the dog was chipped.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

SusieRainbow said:


> My vet checks chips at every visit. I'd be very surprised if a vet didn't check a dog's chip at it's first visit to the practise.


Interestingly I registered with a vet near my holiday cottage and had to take Candy there last week. She was not scanned. My vet only scans if asked to.


----------



## Sarah H (Jan 18, 2014)

Argh I came back to more ranting!
Fact: Microchips help reunite lost pets with owners daily.
Fiction: Microchips mean your dog is a cyborg and microchipping pets is a cyber plan to take over the world using our beloved pets when the robot uprising begins.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

lullabydream said:


> Years ago I think a celebrity...am thinking Lionel Blair was petitioning for this to become law after his dog got stolen in front of his eyes... bundled in a van or something and drove off swiftly. So it's great that it's recommended now.
> Might not have been Lionel, but someone of that ilk.. it was specifically aimed at new dogs attending vets I think. So that lost or stolen dogs could be reunited and I think if I remember rightly dogs lost was in the campaign too.
> 
> Have heard so many people discovering their rehomed pet isn't officially theirs when people have had to microchipped them with the new law, and owning them for x amount of years, if this had been common practice earlier a lot of heartache may never have occured.


Bruce Forsyth and it was after his daughter's dogs were stolen from her car

https://vetsgetscanning.co.uk/

https://vetsgetscanning.co.uk/a-message-from-bruce/


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

smokeybear said:


> Bruce Forsyth and it was after his daughter's dogs were stolen from her car
> 
> https://vetsgetscanning.co.uk/
> 
> https://vetsgetscanning.co.uk/a-message-from-bruce/


I obviously got that story mixed up with this
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...of-stolen-dog-gives-hope-to-Lionel-Blair.html

However it's relevant to this post because am sure he was reunited after quite a while apart, due to the microchip!


----------



## MiffyMoo (Sep 15, 2015)

A couple of months ago I had a dog food delivery. Once I had taken the boxes, I immediately took them inside to unpack into the freezer, so didn't see the delivery guy leave. It was only a couple of hours later that I went outside and discovered that he had left the gate open. I'm still in shock that the dogs didn't take to their heels. 

In such a situation, it wouldn't matter how careful I am never to tie them up outside shops etc, they still could have disappeared, and even if I had run out straight after them, Huskies can run at 25mph; I'm getting on a bit and rarely manage to get above jogging speed


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

MiffyMoo said:


> A couple of months ago I had a dog food delivery. Once I had taken the boxes, I immediately took them inside to unpack into the freezer, so didn't see the delivery guy leave. It was only a couple of hours later that I went outside and discovered that he had left the gate open. I'm still in shock that the dogs didn't take to their heels.
> 
> In such a situation, it wouldn't matter how careful I am never to tie them up outside shops etc, they still could have disappeared, and even if I had run out straight after them, Huskies can run at 25mph; I'm getting on a bit and rarely manage to get above jogging speed


So many people have please close the gate the signs, simply because visitors through the gate, such as delivery people do not. Just a gentle reminder to jog people's memory. Many will have them them for the whole purpose of keeping dogs safe.

Yes it's not foolproof, but I bet it helps to some degree.

Human error happens sometimes...we cannot always be perfect. Sometimes we get distracted by something else, such as the phone ringing at the most opportune moment, and we go on autopilot..dogs out for their toilet after eating for example.


----------



## Magyarmum (Apr 27, 2015)

MiffyMoo said:


> A couple of months ago I had a dog food delivery. Once I had taken the boxes, I immediately took them inside to unpack into the freezer, so didn't see the delivery guy leave. It was only a couple of hours later that I went outside and discovered that he had left the gate open. I'm still in shock that the dogs didn't take to their heels.
> 
> In such a situation, it wouldn't matter how careful I am never to tie them up outside shops etc, they still could have disappeared, and even if I had run out straight after them, Huskies can run at 25mph; I'm getting on a bit and rarely manage to get above jogging speed


Sometimes things happen which are totally beyond your control.

Over the past year my two have twice gone walkabouts without me, (fortunately only down the road). The first time was when we had a terrific thunderstorm during the night and the force of the wind snapped the chain on the back gate, which then blew open. Because the gate's at the top of the garden I didn't notice when I let the dogs out first thing in the morning and of course they couldn't resist the temptation!

The second time was when some animal, possibly a fox or a neighbour's dog burrowed it's way under the chain link fencing ... again at the top of the garden. The hole was just big enough for Gwylim but not Georgina, to squeeze through He actually didn't go anywhere, and started to bark when he found he couldn't wriggle his way back into the garden!

And what do you mean @MiffyMoo that you're getting on a bit? You're a spring chicken compared to me!


----------



## MiffyMoo (Sep 15, 2015)

Magyarmum said:


> Sometimes things happen which are totally beyond your control.
> 
> Over the past year my two have twice gone walkabouts without me, (fortunately only down the road). The first time was when we had a terrific thunderstorm during the night and the force of the wind snapped the chain on the back gate, which then blew open. Because the gate's at the top of the garden I didn't notice when I let the dogs out first thing in the morning and of course they couldn't resist the temptation!
> 
> ...


Haha, you try telling that to this abused body!


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

MiffyMoo said:


> A couple of months ago I had a dog food delivery. Once I had taken the boxes, I immediately took them inside to unpack into the freezer, so didn't see the delivery guy leave. It was only a couple of hours later that I went outside and discovered that he had left the gate open. I'm still in shock that the dogs didn't take to their heels.
> 
> In such a situation, it wouldn't matter how careful I am never to tie them up outside shops etc, they still could have disappeared, and even if I had run out straight after them, Huskies can run at 25mph; I'm getting on a bit and rarely manage to get above jogging speed


I have to say I never trust anyone to shut the gate. The dogs are in the house till I have checked it. Even (or should I say especially) with my brother staying recently I checked the gate every time he had been in and out. Don't know what the matter is with them. I have even found the gate at home wide open after my husband has been through it.


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

lullabydream said:


> So many people have please close the gate the signs, simply because visitors through the gate, such as delivery people do not. Just a gentle reminder to jog people's memory. Many will have them them for the whole purpose of keeping dogs safe.
> 
> Yes it's not foolproof, but I bet it helps to some degree.
> 
> Human error happens sometimes...we cannot always be perfect. Sometimes we get distracted by something else, such as the phone ringing at the most opportune moment, and we go on autopilot..dogs out for their toilet after eating for example.


Or those spring or weight gizmos that close the gate automatically


----------



## BeauBeau (Jun 3, 2017)

jhosk1981 said:


> When we bought our lovely little pup Reuben, he had been micro-chipped - (I was not very keen on this idea - seems wrong having a foreign object inside him). We were advised it was a legal requirement and the Breeder took him to have it done prior to us picking him up.
> 
> I have since been reading there are lots of health implications connected to micro-chips and evidence has even started to suggest there is a cancer link. I have also heard more and more case of dogs being lost and stolen and the micro-chip serving no purpose in their retrieval.
> 
> ...


I live in Germany and to travel outside Germany (even within the EU) with my soon to be puppy/dog, I need to microchip him. Otherwise he would not be allowed to travel. I understand the chip itself causes no harm to dogs.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

I have a padlock on my gate so that nobody can open it.

I trained Rosie long ago never to go through an open gate without being told she can, but Rudi is still a work in progress.

It doesn't matter how many notices you post or even if the Delivery Person/Postman knows the dogs are out, some fool will always leave the gate open.


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

Microchip in puppy's brain.

https://www.vettimes.co.uk/app/uploads/2016/08/VT46.32-P1-News-Chihuahua-Intracranial-Microchip.jpg

Cat after botched microchipping.

http://www.lifewithcats.tv/2014/10/...botched-microchip-insertion-will-get-surgery/

Cancerous tumour in a cat caused by chip insertion.

http://noble-leon.com/images/mch-QA6b.jpg

Yorkshire Terrier that had a chip removed after it dislodged and migrated to the spinal cord.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20422127

Dog bleeds to death following microchipping.

http://www.katherinealbrecht.com/bl...th-after-routine-microchip-implant-procedure/

Noel Fitzpatrick's practice removes microchip from dog's spinal cord.

http://www.fitzpatrickreferrals.co....al-of-a-microchip-from-a-puppys-spinal-canal/

Scan of chip.

https://ibb.co/dGf5YF

Photo of chip removal surgery.

https://ibb.co/eG55YF

These aren't small risks. They are damned big ones to take just so something (that will NOT guarantee a lost/stolen dog or cat is reunited with their families) can be implanted. I don't care if the chances of these things happening are lower. There is still a chance that something with potentially fatal consequences will happen.

To those of you saying that rescues would disagree with me. Well, here's a rescue who have been honest about chipping.

https://www.7thheaven.org.uk/microchipping


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

For gawd sake...every time a person has a tiny cut, pin prick to their finger this could cause sepsis. Sepsis is one of the biggest causes of death in humans...but you still wouldn't be prescribed antibiotics for every minor scratch. As it's not a high enough risk.

You are taking everything out of context, and showing a handful of incidents compared to amount of dogs microchipped, which make these incidents extremely rare events.

Showing statistics, with none specific variants, which do not truly show a full picture.

One rescue in many is not backing microchipping, I wonder why? As they believe the same scaremongering views as yourself.

Am all for looking at two sides to every story, and getting a more balanced view, but reading unbalanced view from a rescue place would put me off the rescue if I was honest.


----------



## Mirandashell (Jan 10, 2017)

Oh jeez again? Might be an idea to close this thread as it's now on its third circuit.


----------



## Guest (Jun 4, 2017)

Rooster crows every morning. 
Every morning the sun comes up. 

Doesn't mean the rooster crowing caused the sun to come up.


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

lullabydream said:


> For gawd sake...every time a person has a tiny cut, pin prick to their finger this could cause sepsis. Sepsis is one of the biggest causes of death in humans...but you still wouldn't be prescribed antibiotics for every minor scratch. As it's not a high enough risk.
> 
> You are taking everything out of context, and showing a handful of incidents compared to amount of dogs microchipped, which make these incidents extremely rare events.
> 
> ...


What scaremongering? Those are just a few of the many instances of microchips causing serious illness and death. That 'unbalanced' view came after they actually did their research, sent FOI requests and did other things that the average person getting their pet chip wouldn't do. And just because that rescue charity is anti chipping you would be put off it? Really?

At least that rescue didn't blindly believe microchip manufacturers and the Government when they say how safe they are and that they are greatest thing in the world when it comes to reuniting lost/stolen dogs with their families. They also looked at statistics from before and after chipping laws came into effect in Ireland (and chipping has been mandatory there for longer than it has been here) and have hardly seen any difference in the amount of dogs who are returned to their families.


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

ouesi said:


> Rooster crows every morning.
> Every morning the sun comes up.
> 
> Doesn't mean the rooster crowing caused the sun to come up.


To quote yourself:

"This is not a productive way to have a discussion."


----------



## cbcdesign (Jul 3, 2014)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> What scaremongering? Those are just a few of the many instances of microchips causing serious illness and death.


Many? Tens of millions of dogs are chipped without issues, these instances are few and far between and frankly dogs are far more likely to develop something nasty from a simple cut out on a walk and even that is a very small risk overall. Life comes with risk that sometimes leads to injury and death. Perspective is required is you are going to own a living being as a pet! Bob Marley got cancer from a foot injury he suffered playing football. That doesn't mean football causes cancer!


----------



## Guest (Jun 4, 2017)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> To quote yourself:
> 
> "This is not a productive way to have a discussion."


Okay, let me clarify. 
Microchips being inserted incorrectly don't speak to the overall safety or not of microchips. It would be like calling seatbelts dangerous because some person decided to wrap a seatbelt around their neck instead of over their shoulder and lap.

Sarcomas at insertion sites also don't necessarily speak to microchip safety. That's the rooster crowing analogy. Two correlated events aren't necessarily causative. They might be, they might not be. 
Every night I brush my teeth and shortly thereafter I'm usually asleep. This is not because brushing my teeth causes me to fall asleep. 
So back to sarcomas. Dogs who are not chipped also get sarcomas. Often in the same site a chip is inserted. Vaccines might be a reason. Maybe even needle insertion. We don't know and it needs to be studied further before we insist that the microchips caused the problem.

And even IF it is the microchips causing the problem, does the risk outweigh the benefit? To many (most?) of us, the benefit far outweighs the very minimal and slight risk. 
Just as most of us will get out of bed in the morning, go outside, and risk being hit by a meteorite.


----------



## Sairy (Nov 22, 2016)

@LurcherGreyoundGirl what would you propose as a safer option of being able to identify lost dogs?


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> What scaremongering? Those are just a few of the many instances of microchips causing serious illness and death. That 'unbalanced' view came after they actually did their research, sent FOI requests and did other things that the average person getting their pet chip wouldn't do. And just because that rescue charity is anti chipping you would be put off it? Really?
> 
> At least that rescue didn't blindly believe microchip manufacturers and the Government when they say how safe they are and that they are greatest thing in the world when it comes to reuniting lost/stolen dogs with their families. They also looked at statistics from before and after chipping laws came into effect in Ireland (and chipping has been mandatory there for longer than it has been here) and have hardly seen any difference in the amount of dogs who are returned to their families.


Statistics are only as good as the people analysing them...law or not there will be people not microchipping whose dogs are picked up, there are always going to be owners who couldn't care about their dogs and will willingly never update data...
Variables in statistics are fluid, and to be honest there is nothing to substantiate the statistics on the website...and this is where people will say nearly all statistics are made up on the spot, as if you throw statistics into the mix people believe the unbelievable.

You have been given validated statistical data on this thread...and still ignore the information, instead googling for scaremongering information. Yes factually Fitzpatrick's referrals operated on a problem but it's there in black and white, to show what an outstanding surgeon they are there, nothing to do with microchips be the evil of everything. You have misconstrued why it's there, because of operating on the spinal cord comes with risk. The same reason it was shown in the episode of Bondi Vet...because it's a rare interesting case and shows skill of the surgeon, and their ability to work on the rare cases.

Yes if I read that on a rescue site, it would put me off a rescue. As I also would worry about other myths they believe too.


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

lullabydream said:


> Statistics are only as good as the people analysing them...law or not there will be people not microchipping whose dogs are picked up, there are always going to be owners who couldn't care about their dogs and will willingly never update data...
> Variables in statistics are fluid, and to be honest there is nothing to substantiate the statistics on the website...and this is where people will say nearly all statistics are made up on the spot, as if you throw statistics into the mix people believe the unbelievable.
> 
> You have been given validated statistical data on this thread...and still ignore the information, instead googling for scaremongering information. Yes factually Fitzpatrick's referrals operated on a problem but it's there in black and white, to show what an outstanding surgeon they are there, nothing to do with microchips be the evil of everything. You have misconstrued why it's there, because of operating on the spinal cord comes with risk. The same reason it was shown in the episode of Bondi Vet...because it's a rare interesting case and shows skill of the surgeon, and their ability to work on the rare cases.
> ...


Dangers surrounding chipping are not myths! They are facts And what other 'myths' do you think they would believe? Also, the fact that chip removals, etc have been publicised by surgeons doesn't mean the surgeons are showing off by saying they have performed those surgeries!


----------



## Guest (Jun 4, 2017)

@LurcherGreyoundGirl do you understand what people are saying about probability vs. possibility and potential risk vs. potential benefit?
Nothing is risk free, no one is claiming microchips are risk free. Just that the benefit of having a dog chipped far outweighs the potential risk.


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

......... And while this thread continues in circles one of the other undeniable facts is that _microchipping is the law_......


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

Sairy said:


> @LurcherGreyoundGirl what would you propose as a safer option of being able to identify lost dogs?


A DNA database to be backed up with photos.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> Dangers surrounding chipping are not myths! They are facts And what other 'myths' do you think they would believe? Also, the fact that chip removals, etc have been publicised by surgeons doesn't mean the surgeons are showing off by saying they have performed those surgeries!


Highlighting an expertise around the ability of a surgeon to operate around the spinal cord is not showing off.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> A DNA database to be backed up with photos.


Mmm... can't get people to pay a measly £16 to update microchip paperwork...

DNA.... doesn't come cheap...and photos could be useless. DNA results take time...never believe CSI! Whose going to pay for the swabs? Blood withdrawal...the costs that incurr with this...oh man heard it all now


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

lullabydream said:


> Mmm... can't get people to pay a measly £16 to update microchip paperwork...
> 
> DNA.... doesn't come cheap...and photos could be useless. DNA results take time...never believe CSI! Whose going to pay for the swabs? Blood withdrawal...the costs that incurr with this...oh man heard it all now


Except there are more and more councils both in the UK and abroad that are using DNA databases to catch people who don't pick up after their dogs. If databases can be set up to do that then they can be set up to identify lost/stolen pets as well!


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> Except there are more and more councils both in the UK and abroad that are using DNA databases to catch people who don't pick up after their dogs. If databases can be set up to do that then they can be set up to identify lost/stolen pets as well!


I call BS right there!

Yes there was media coverage saying that some councils MAY start DNA profiling but thats the thing...May turned out to be Not really feasible 
Unless you can prove otherwise that is


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

StormyThai said:


> I call BS right there!
> 
> Yes there was media coverage saying that some councils MAY start DNA profiling but thats the thing...May turned out to be Not really feasible
> Unless you can prove otherwise that is


Oh now, steady on.

She isn't into facts, research, etc., lavish and outlandish declarations are her go to thing.

Microchipping equals dead dog.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Sweety said:


> Oh now, steady on.
> 
> She isn't into facts, research, etc., lavish and outlandish declarations are her go to thing.
> 
> Microchipping equals dead dog.


Of course her two microchipped dogs haven't dropped dead yet from their microchip...

I was going to say I would understand if her dogs had, had a problem but no I can't...I had sepsis from a cannula... and have had numerous cannula's since out of necessity. If there had been a problem with a microchip a vet would tell her, this is an extremely rare situation.


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

StormyThai said:


> I call BS right there!
> 
> Yes there was media coverage saying that some councils MAY start DNA profiling but thats the thing...May turned out to be Not really feasible
> Unless you can prove otherwise that is


And what would identify a dog who wasn't chipped, who did have a chip but was gouged out, one whose chip had stopped working, one who was found dead and decomposing with the chip nowhere to be found or one was dead with predation removing the chip? Oh that's right, DNA!


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

Sweety said:


> Oh now, steady on.
> 
> She isn't into facts, research, etc., lavish and outlandish declarations are her go to thing.
> 
> *Microchipping equals dead dog.*


Mine must all be anomalies then.

As must all the cats I've ever had or have, & both of my rabbits, who are 8 & 6.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> And what would identify a dog who wasn't chipped, who did have a chip but was gouged out, one whose chip had stopped working, one who was found dead and decomposing with the chip nowhere to be found or one was dead with predation removing the chip? Oh that's right, DNA!


Could you post a link to the research done on all of these dogs who have had microchips gouged out.

Ta.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

simplysardonic said:


> Mine must all be anomalies then.
> 
> As must all the cats I've ever had or have, & both of my rabbits, who are 8 & 6.


Yes.

I have had dogs chipped and they have lived to old age.

Something isn't right.

Maybe they had their chips gouged out whilst I wasn't looking?


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

I also find it unbelievable that you lot are shunning a completely risk free way of obtaining pet information for possible future identification yet are in favour of something that has caused dangerous and fatal migrations, cancer and fatal bleed outs! And don't think that just because nothing has happened to your pets post chipping that nothing will happen in the future!


----------



## shadowmare (Jul 7, 2013)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> Except there are more and *more councils both in the UK and abroad *that are using DNA databases to catch people who don't pick up after their dogs. If databases can be set up to do that then they can be set up to identify lost/stolen pets as well!


Name a few, please.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> I also find it unbelievable that you lot are shunning a completely risk free way of obtaining pet information for possible future identification yet are in favour of something that has caused dangerous and fatal migrations, cancer and fatal bleed outs! And don't think that just because nothing has happened to your pets post chipping that nothing will happen in the future!


Are you talking about DNA testing?

So, if my dog goes missing and is picked up by the Dog Warden, rather than him being able to quickly scan her and return her to me, she will have to go into Kennels, have bloods taken and then languish there until the results come back from the laboratory?

Most Council Pounds have a seven day policy you know.

And, she is a Jack Russell. How would her DNA be any different from another Jack Russell?


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Sweety said:


> Are you talking about DNA testing?
> 
> So, if my dog goes missing and is picked up by the Dog Warden, rather than him being able to quickly scan her and return her to me, she will have to go into Kennels, have bloods taken and then languish there until the results come back from the laboratory?
> 
> ...


She read it in the media so it must be true..DNA testing...of course should be profiling...and don't forget the mugshots too...photographs to tell all dogs individuality.


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

Sweety said:


> Are you talking about DNA testing?
> 
> So, if my dog goes missing and is picked up by the Dog Warden, rather than him being able to quickly scan her and return her to me, she will have to go into Kennels, have bloods taken and then languish there until the results come back from the laboratory?
> 
> ...


In that specific area LGG is, for once, right.

Each individual dog will have their own unique genetic markers, Animal Health Trust offer DNA profiling for £30.

But as you have said, it's currently not widely used & is time consuming to implement.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

simplysardonic said:


> In that specific area LGG is, for once, right.
> 
> Each individual dog will have their own unique genetic markers, Animal Health Trust offer DNA profiling for £30.
> 
> But as you have said, it's currently not widely used & is time consuming to implement.


You can test for breed...as in those kits...and profile for specifics


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> And what would identify a dog who wasn't chipped, who did have a chip but was gouged out, one whose chip had stopped working, one who was found dead and decomposing with the chip nowhere to be found or one was dead with predation removing the chip? Oh that's right, DNA!


You failed to answer the question...I'll remind you.
Please provide proof that "more and more" councils are using DNA profiling to catch people who don't pick up after their dog.

Yes I have heard about the *one* dog being found with a gouge taken out but that does not back up your statement, it just makes you look like you are avoiding the question with "but, but, there was this one time at band camp"


----------



## FeelTheBern (Jan 13, 2016)

Sweety said:


> And, she is a Jack Russell. How would her DNA be any different from another Jack Russell?


All dogs have different DNA, just like how all humans do, with the exception of identical twins. But this wouldn't be an efficient alternative to the chip, as it would be time consuming.


----------



## Sarah H (Jan 18, 2014)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> A DNA database to be backed up with photos.


Fab, great idea. Now are you going to set that up and pay for every single 8 week old puppy in the UK to have their DNA profiled? And considering it's probably a 2 week turnaround (at quickest), are you going to make me, a taxpayer, pay for another week of kennelling for a stray dog? (In the UK stray dogs stay in kennels for a week before they are killed or rehomed,so there is time to find the owner). And what about all the other dogs picked up in that time, as pounds are struggling with the stray population at them moment, we're going to need a lot more pounds to cope with strays if they're staying for at least two weeks each.

Good idea, but it needs a lot of work (and money). I'll stick to my very low risk microchip for now thanks.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

lullabydream said:


> You can test for breed...as in those kits...and profile for specifics


The breed dna testing is really just a bit of fun. If every dog was DNA profiled and kept on a database then in theory every dog could be matched up. Obviously in practice it is a dumb idea compared with microchipping as it would be prohibitively expensive and time consuming. There are far more side effects to taking blood than microchipping so LGG would not really approve of it.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Blitz said:


> The breed dna testing is really just a bit of fun. If every dog was DNA profiled and kept on a database then in theory every dog could be matched up. Obviously in practice it is a dumb idea compared with microchipping as it would be prohibitively expensive and time consuming. There are far more side effects to taking blood than microchipping so LGG would not really approve of it.


Have already said how ridiculous an idea it is when it was suggested...I even commented about the length of time it would take not being like CSI...and the expense when people begrudge paying to change microchip details for £16...

Keep up Blitz you're slipping woman not reading all posts!


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

lullabydream said:


> Have already said how ridiculous an idea it is when it was suggested...I even commented about the length of time it would take not being like CSI...and the expense when people begrudge paying to change microchip details for £16...
> 
> Keep up Blitz you're slipping woman not reading all posts!


whoops. Actually I suppose you dont have to take blood, a hair would work wouldn't it so that would not have any adverse effects.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

Can you imagine the effect if every dog in this Country picked up as a stray was DNA tested?

No lab would be able to cope. Dogs could be in kennels for weeks and we all know, the Council Shelters do not keep them for weeks.

Who is going to pay for the whole thing?


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Sweety said:


> Can you imagine the effect if every dog in this Country picked up as a stray was DNA tested?
> 
> No lab would be able to cope. Dogs could be in kennels for weeks and we all know, the Council Shelters do not keep them for weeks.
> 
> Who is going to pay for the whole thing?


Exactly...still have to have a database with people's details. You know what...that still fails doesn't it...


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Blitz said:


> whoops. Actually I suppose you dont have to take blood, a hair would work wouldn't it so that would not have any adverse effects.


Saliva..so then there is the impact on the environment...shall we go on! Instead of a few minutes no invasive..you have to get up close and personal to a dog that may be stressed and scared...

Really really impractical in so many ways...


----------



## CuddleMonster (Mar 9, 2016)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> I also find it unbelievable that you lot are shunning a completely risk free way of obtaining pet information for possible future identification yet are in favour of something that has caused dangerous and fatal migrations, cancer and fatal bleed outs! And don't think that just because nothing has happened to your pets post chipping that nothing will happen in the future!


As I and several other posters have pointed out, microchipping is a LEGAL REQUIREMENT in Britain. So unless you are suggesting we break the law (which I am pretty sure is against forum rules!) there is not much point in criticising us for owning dogs that have microchips!


----------



## Nettles (Mar 24, 2011)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> To those of you saying that rescues would disagree with me. Well, here's a rescue who have been honest about chipping.
> 
> https://www.7thheaven.org.uk/microchipping


Oh please! 7th heaven is a one man "rescue" Not only is he against microchipping but he's also against vaccinating and feeding your dog fish  I'll take my chances with my microchipped, vaccinated, fish eating dog thanks.


----------



## CuddleMonster (Mar 9, 2016)

Nettles said:


> Oh please! 7th heaven is a one man "rescue" Not only is he against microchipping but he's also against vaccinating and feeding your dog fish  I'll take my chances with my microchipped, vaccinated, fish eating dog thanks.


Your dog eats fish?  Don't you realise she's not a enguin? And vaccinations and microchipping on top? To misquote Private Frazer, "she's doomed, doomed"


----------



## Guest (Jun 4, 2017)

Nettles said:


> Oh please! 7th heaven is a one man "rescue" Not only is he against microchipping but he's also against vaccinating and feeding your dog fish  I'll take my chances with my microchipped, vaccinated, fish eating dog thanks.


Thank you for that. Just had a very entertaining peruse of that "rescue" LOL


----------



## Guest (Jun 5, 2017)

With so many members and lurkers, there must be SOMEONE here who's had a dog get cancer from their chip or had it gouged out. Someone? Anyone? Hands up?


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Nettles said:


> Oh please! 7th heaven is a one man "rescue" Not only is he against microchipping but he's also against vaccinating and feeding your dog fish  I'll take my chances with my microchipped, vaccinated, fish eating dog thanks.


Thank you...my point exactly...I said the views on microchipping would put me off because I would be dubious off what other myths they believed him...
Well they can carrying on not vaccinating...and I will still give my dogs fish too! They adore their fish skins, twisted fish skins, mackerel in tomato sauce is food from god's here!


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

McKenzie said:


> With so many members and lurkers, there must be SOMEONE here who's had a dog get cancer from their chip or had it gouged out. Someone? Anyone? Hands up?


Wasn't the dog who had the chip gouged out...so it was reunited with the owner? Doesn't that sort of defeat her...microchips will never work to reunite?...just my opinion!


----------



## MilleD (Feb 15, 2016)

Sweety said:


> Are you talking about DNA testing?
> 
> So, if my dog goes missing and is picked up by the Dog Warden, rather than him being able to quickly scan her and return her to me, she will have to go into Kennels, *have bloods taken* and then languish there until the results come back from the laboratory?


Which carries the same puncture site risk as putting a chip in


----------



## JoanneF (Feb 1, 2016)

FeelTheBern said:


> dogs have different DNA, just like how all humans do, with the exception of identical twins.


Will all the puppies from the same litter have the same DNA?


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

McKenzie said:


> With so many members and lurkers, there must be SOMEONE here who's had a dog get cancer from their chip or had it gouged out. Someone? Anyone? Hands up?


When I worked in studs that bred tb's for the track I saw hundreds of foals chipped (usually done within the first week after birth) and in the 12 years there was one chip that moved, no links to cancer, no issues of people gouging out flesh to remove the chip, no issues at all....on the other hand there are many stories of dogs tattoos being removed (cut off) when ex racers are dumped, maybe they are just confused lol


----------



## Ceiling Kitty (Mar 7, 2010)

Anecdotal evidence and case reports are the weakest evidence.

That said, I'm going to bring in my own anecdotal evidence now... in fifteen years I've seen thousands and thousands of microchipped dogs. A few bleed transiently at insertion. A few chips have moved or failed.

I've never seen a death, tumour or fatal migration associated with a microchip.

I've seen dozens of dogs reunited through microchips.

Reports such as that of the chip in the spinal cord are outliers that make the news - including the veterinary press - because they are so unusual and shocking. Veterinary staff themselves look at those stories on the front of the Veterinary Times and think 'oh my god'.

Trust me, veterinary practices across the country are not seeing dozens of microchip injuries each year. They are seeing none, for the most part - with the occasional exception. 

Chocolate poisoning, RTAs, intestinal foreign bodies, dog bite injuries, heat stroke and other such mishaps? Daily basis.

Get some perspective.


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

MilleD said:


> Which carries the same puncture site risk as putting a chip in


Here is the difference in needle size. Besides, a DNA swab would only be done by swabbing the inside of the mouth.

https://www.holidayhousepetresort.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Needles-Copy.jpg

As you can see the needles used for vaccinations and taking blood are much smaller so therefore far less invasive!


----------



## Guest (Jun 5, 2017)

@LurcherGreyoundGirl what are you looking for from fellow members? 
Do you want us to agree with you that microchips are unsafe? I don't think anyone disagrees that there are risks to microchips, just that the risks don't outweigh the benefits. And in fact, the risks are negligible. 
Did you see the post above yours? @Ceiling Kitty is a vet. Is her opinion not valid to you?


----------



## MilleD (Feb 15, 2016)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> Here is the difference in needle size. Besides, a DNA swab would only be done by swabbing the inside of the mouth.
> 
> https://www.holidayhousepetresort.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Needles-Copy.jpg
> 
> As you can see the needles used for vaccinations and taking blood are much smaller so therefore far less invasive!


You do know that germs are really small though right?


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

Ceiling Kitty said:


> Anecdotal evidence and case reports are the weakest evidence.
> 
> That said, I'm going to bring in my own anecdotal evidence now... in fifteen years I've seen thousands and thousands of microchipped dogs. A few bleed transiently at insertion. A few chips have moved or failed.
> 
> ...


And how many practices are surveyed when compiling reports on the safety of chipping? How many people will report problems directly to authorities? When chipping is done are people informed that there is an online Government form that can be filled out in case there is a problem? Or are people just told that everything will be fine and that the microchip will (without shadow of doubt) be instrumental in reuniting their pet with them?

Also, as has been said already there are practices that don't even scan dogs to ensure they are still in place and still working. So how are they going to know if there's a problem if they don't even do that? So even if there are problems and chips have either stopped working or have migrated then those problems will go unreported as a result of those practices not scanning patients or not being surveyed.

Another thing. Will vets think of scanning if (for example) a dog suddenly starts limping or showing other signs of pain for unknown reasons? After all, that limp and pain could be associated with chip migration.


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

ouesi said:


> @LurcherGreyoundGirl what are you looking for from fellow members?
> Do you want us to agree with you that microchips are unsafe? I don't think anyone disagrees that there are risks to microchips, just that the risks don't outweigh the benefits. And in fact, the risks are negligible.
> Did you see the post above yours? @Ceiling Kitty is a vet. Is her opinion not valid to you?


And are the opinions of vets who are anti chipping not valid to you?


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

MilleD said:


> You do know that germs are really small though right?


Yes, but I can also see that you are splitting hairs!


----------



## Guest (Jun 5, 2017)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> And are the opinions of vets who are anti chipping not valid to you?


Actually, I value the opinions of all experts, so yes, I do value the input from vets who show the potential risks fo microchipping. 
I have actually not come across any vet who outright says *do not* microchip your pet because the risks are too great. No vet has said that, not even the ones in the links you provided.


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> Microchip in puppy's brain.
> 
> https://www.vettimes.co.uk/app/uploads/2016/08/VT46.32-P1-News-Chihuahua-Intracranial-Microchip.jpg
> 
> ...


You've come up with 6 examples of things going wrong, against millions that haven't (not counting the 'botched' one). Those risks seem pretty damn small to me.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> And are the opinions of vets who are anti chipping not valid to you?


They would be valid to me, if I actually knew a Vet who is anti chipping.

I don't.

I do appreciate this has already been said about forty times, but everything you're saying is just so much hot air, as chipping is mandatory. It is illegal to own an unchipped dog.

It doesn't matter what your opinion on chipping is, or what the opinion of your Vet is, dogs have to be chipped.


----------



## FeelTheBern (Jan 13, 2016)

JoanneF said:


> Will all the puppies from the same litter have the same DNA?


No, only if two puppies are identical twins will they have the same DNA. I think.


----------



## Burrowzig (Feb 18, 2009)

JoanneF said:


> Will all the puppies from the same litter have the same DNA?


No, just as human siblings don't have the same DNA. Except identical twins do in humans.


----------



## JoanneF (Feb 1, 2016)

Thanks !


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

Totally besides the point, but interesting nonetheless, identical twins do not have the same fingerprints.


----------



## Ceiling Kitty (Mar 7, 2010)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> And how many practices are surveyed when compiling reports on the safety of chipping? How many people will report problems directly to authorities? When chipping is done are people informed that there is an online Government form that can be filled out in case there is a problem? Or are people just told that everything will be fine and that the microchip will (without shadow of doubt) be instrumental in reuniting their pet with them?
> 
> I'm not aware of any surveys. If someone wants to send one to all practices, I'd happily fill one in with my experiences as above.
> 
> ...


Replied in red.


----------



## sskmick (Feb 4, 2008)

I had my dog micro chipped in 2005, he was four months old. The Dogs Trust was micro chipping free one afternoon at Pets at Home. Although he bled a lot he has white fur so may not have been as bad as it looked. He is 12 years old now and doing well.

For me any risk of health problems from the micro chip (albeit I haven't heard of any) is outweighed by the benefit of having my dog returned should he get lost.

I would only have it removed if it caused a severe reaction or serious health issue.


----------



## Sarah H (Jan 18, 2014)

I remember vividly my girl's chipping as a puppy. It was a bad experience. The large needle that inserts the chip was misaligned, meaning that the chipping gun was inserted and pressed, but the chip wasn't deployed. My poor squealing puppy had to then have another chip inserted, because the previous one went in the bin along with the needle. It wasn't pleasant, but it doesn't mean I'm against chipping. I see dogs reunited weekly because of chips, so I am very much in favour of microchipping as people seem to be unable to put a legally required ID tag on their dog or even keep a close eye on their dog (yes accidents happen)! Chips are definitely needed so that dogs get reunited quickly, and therefore cost us (and their owners) less money!


----------



## shadowmare (Jul 7, 2013)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> Yes, but I can also see that you are splitting hairs!


Still waiting on the names of at least few of those numerous councils and countries that test dog crap for DNA to track down poo- offenders. I'll be kind and let you name 2 councils in U.K. and another European country from this extensive list you've got. 
Eagerly waiting. May not be able to fall asleep tonight so I beg you, don't keep me up all night.


----------



## CuddleMonster (Mar 9, 2016)

Regarding vets not telling people to report adverse affects of microchipping - surely as a responsible dog owner, you would take your dog to the vet if it appeared unwell - if that illness is then found to be related to the chip, the vet can then make the report, so there is no need for a vet to explain all this when the chip is inserted.

It's like vaccinations. I've taken dogs for dozens of vaccinations over the years and no vet has ever said 'oh, if there's an adverse reaction, let us know and we will report it.' But when my current dog DID have a bad reaction to Lepto 4, I contacted the vet, and the vet recorded the reaction. If the reaction is so trivial that it's not worth bothering the vet with, then it's too trivial to be worth reporting. If it's serious enough to report to the vet then the vet is going to know about it anyway because as a worried dog owner, you are going to be calling them about your poorly pet.


----------



## lorilu (Sep 6, 2009)

Ugh. I just read 15 pages and they all basically were exactly the same. What insomnia can lead to, oh my! So before this thread gets closed I wanted to have my say. 

After the first few repeats, I started wondering........where are the goats?


----------



## Lexiedhb (Jun 9, 2011)

lorilu said:


> Ugh. I just read 15 pages and they all basically were exactly the same. What insomnia can lead to, oh my! So before this thread gets closed I wanted to have my say.
> 
> After the first few repeats, I started wondering........where are the goats?


I was going to do that, then saw who'd popped up and couldn't bring myself to go past page 3......  but here ya go.....


----------



## shadowmare (Jul 7, 2013)

Stayed up all night waiting for the names of rich countries that splash out their money for DNA testing poo.... I may fall asleep at the office because of this now. Very disappointed.


----------



## shadowmare (Jul 7, 2013)

@LurcherGreyoundGirl


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

shadowmare said:


> Stayed up all night waiting for the names of rich countries that splash out their money for DNA testing poo.... I may fall asleep at the office because of this now. Very disappointed.


I've been doing a bit of digging because I was bored and I really wanted to know what councils are wasting money on DNA profiling dogs...not one can be found 

For me, unless someone can back up claims then they lose credibility...


----------



## Siskin (Nov 13, 2012)

There's a piece on the Yorkshire Vets program tonight about a Patterdale Terrier that was found wandering on the A19, was scanned and the microchip found and she was reunited with the owner. The dog had been missing for six years and it's thought had been used by puppy farmers before being dumped.


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

shadowmare said:


> Still waiting on the names of at least few of those numerous councils and countries that test dog crap for DNA to track down poo- offenders. I'll be kind and let you name 2 councils in U.K. and another European country from this extensive list you've got.
> Eagerly waiting. May not be able to fall asleep tonight so I beg you, don't keep me up all night.





Lexiedhb said:


> I was going to do that, then saw who'd popped up and couldn't bring myself to go past page 3......  but here ya go.....
> 
> View attachment 313456





shadowmare said:


> Stayed up all night waiting for the names of rich countries that splash out their money for DNA testing poo.... I may fall asleep at the office because of this now. Very disappointed.





shadowmare said:


> @LurcherGreyoundGirl
> View attachment 313477


Resorting to the lowest form of wit as a way of trying to make yourselves look smart and to gain a few more 'likes' I see. And even getting a 'like' from a so called moderator. I thought moderators should remain impartial and not encourage such behaviour.

Here are some more links regarding DNA testing.

http://time.com/4552903/mislata-spain-dog-feces/

http://www.streetkleen.co.uk/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-isle-of-man-38905810

http://deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuws.english/News/1.2955671

Here is a discussion regarding chipping Greyhounds.

http://www.greyhound-data.com/knowledge.php?b=3&note=961992&order=&x=0

Two more stolen dogs found with their chips gouged out.

http://greyhoundcompassion.org/member-news/greyhound-compassion-volunteer-help-scooby/

As I have already said microchips can be faked and as such hundreds (possibly thousands) of puppies are being smuggled into the UK with fake chips. Another example of this is that Greyhound trainers tamper with chips as well.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...vers-believing-buying-vaccinated-animals.html

http://greyhoundcompassion.org/memb...tions-2010-is-necessary-support-the-campaign/


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

Siskin said:


> There's a piece on the Yorkshire Vets program tonight about a Patterdale Terrier that was found wandering on the A19, was scanned and the microchip found and she was reunited with the owner. The dog had been missing for six years and it's thought had been used by puppy farmers before being dumped.


And what led to the dog going missing in the first place? Did the chip prevent the dog going missing for all that time? Would DNA have also returned the dog to her family?


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

Ceiling Kitty said:


> Replied in red.


So by your own admission you don't inform people of the possible side effects. Surely if a drug carried the risk (however big or small that may be) of cancer or some other potentially life threatening condition then would inform them of that? It is my understanding the manufacturers of drugs for humans are duty bound to include every reported side effect in their information leaflets. It doesn't matter if only a few patients reported those side effects, manufacturers still have to be honest. Yet it's okay for vets to perform a procedure on much loved pets that could lead to serious problems and they don't have to make that information known?

You also said that you have detected many a failed chip. So going by your own experience would you say that chip failures are fairly common? If so then would you not want a more reliable system of identification?


----------



## Lexiedhb (Jun 9, 2011)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> Resorting to the lowest form of wit as a way of trying to make yourselves look smart and to gain a few more 'likes' I see. And even getting a 'like' from a so called moderator. I thought moderators should remain impartial and not encourage such behaviour.
> 
> Here are some more links regarding DNA testing.
> 
> ...


No not at all. I literally have never been able to get involved in any thread you are on, here, or h&h, because you are one of those people who forms an opinion and then closes their mind, even if presented with facts ...... And that's fine if it works for you, I just don't have to entertain it, so I didn't. 
Why are you offended by a goat meme which was for another poster?


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> Resorting to the lowest form of wit as a way of trying to make yourselves look smart and to gain a few more 'likes' I see. And even getting a 'like' from a so called moderator. I thought moderators should remain impartial and not encourage such behaviour.
> 
> Here are some more links regarding DNA testing.
> 
> ...


So basically... anything mentioning microchips now in a negative way is bad...

Spain is notorious for the treatment of their 'spanish greyhounds' on not one single comment was let's ban microchip. The bigger picture is these dogs are abused and dumped and some rescues work damned hard to get them in loving homes, in fact one lives her as in adopted by a member on the forum.

The arguing on the greyhound forum pretty much as here...although as Stormy Thai pointed out in a earlier post...greyhound welfare people have short memories, the amount of greyhounds who had ears cut off so tattoos could not be identified was huge...and ears bleed immensely.

Microchips to be honest are neither here nor there when it comes to dog smuggling in to the country...rabies is far more a serious concern. Although I thought the fact chips being sellotaped into collars would suit you.

The word 'may' came up with the DNA again...and I hope you noted the price...in a country as ours with a struggling NHS...I know where I would prefer my hard earned tax to go...and not everyone is a dog, or animal lover

However again..no one said things like this do not happen it's rare...you just don't listen or believe evidence right in front of you.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> Here are some more links regarding DNA testing.
> 
> http://time.com/4552903/mislata-spain-dog-feces/
> 
> ...


One council is doing a 3 month pilot scheme and another is a politician talking about in a bill (the others aren't in the UK so not relevant)...One council conducting a pilot scheme does not add up to "many"

Do you even read the links you post?


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

StormyThai said:


> One council is doing a 3 month pilot scheme and another is a politician talking about in a bill (the others aren't in the UK so not relevant)...One council conducting a pilot scheme does not add up to "many"
> 
> Do you even read the links you post?


Obviously not when she's more concerned about dogs being smuggled in the country with dodgy microchips...than the actual threat of rabies which the article was highlighting...
If there was more checks including checks on dogs having microchips actually implanted then rabies wouldn't be a worry...

Now I know I would rather risk microchipping than having rabies coming into our rabies free country.


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

Lexiedhb said:


> No not at all. I literally have never been able to get involved in any thread you are on, here, or h&h, because you are one of those people who forms an opinion and then closes their mind, even if presented with facts ...... And that's fine if it works for you, I just don't have to entertain it, so I didn't.
> Why are you offended by a goat meme which was for another poster?


I have formed my opinion based on facts and those facts are that chipping does carry serious risk, that chipping does not guarantee a pet's safe return to their family, that chips can and do fail on a regular basis and that they can and have been removed. Chipping should not be done when there is a much safer and far more reliable way of identifying lost/stolen pets.

I haven't posted on Horse and Hound for a long time because I got fed up of the pro hunting and pro racing attitudes and also because of the advocation of cruel training methods over there. I stopped posting on here because I became sick of the bullying behaviour of certain members (which I know is the reason why some other members left) and the fact that moderators allow it.



lullabydream said:


> Obviously not when she's more concerned about dogs being smuggled in the country with dodgy microchips...than the actual threat of rabies which the article was highlighting...
> If there was more checks including checks on dogs having microchips actually implanted then rabies wouldn't be a worry...
> 
> Now I know I would rather risk microchipping than having rabies coming into our rabies free country.


The dogs being smuggled in do have microchips implanted in them. Only they were chips that were taken out of other dogs. That was covered in an episode of Fake Britain and it showed footage of puppies actually having fake chips implanted in them. The episode can be viewed here: 




And where on earth did you get the idea that I'm not that concerned about rabies getting into the UK? The very fact that implanted chips (not ones attached to collars) are being faked means that even chipped dogs can bring rabies in!


----------



## LurcherGreyoundGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

lullabydream said:


> So basically... anything mentioning microchips now in a negative way is bad...
> 
> Spain is notorious for the treatment of their 'spanish greyhounds' on not one single comment was let's ban microchip. The bigger picture is these dogs are abused and dumped and some rescues work damned hard to get them in loving homes, in fact one lives her as in adopted by a member on the forum.
> 
> ...


I am well aware of how badly racing Greyhounds and hunting dogs are treated and I am vehemently against those things. The very fact that countless dogs have been found with their ears hacked off or burned with acid to remove their identifying tattoos means that the racing industry will also move onto ensuring that even chipped dogs can't be identified. If they can think nothing of hacking a dog's ears off then they will also think nothing of gouging out a chip!

As for the cost of DNA testing. Like everything else, once it becomes more popular and more mainstream then costs will become lower. And no, not everyone loves dogs, but just about everyone would like to be able to walk along paths and on grass and not have to worry about stepping in dog poo. Since starting their DNA scheme, Barking and Dagenham council saw a 60% drop in dog fouling and that can only be a good thing.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

LurcherGreyoundGirl said:


> I have formed my opinion based on facts and those facts are that chipping does carry serious risk, that chipping does not guarantee a pet's safe return to their family, that chips can and do fail on a regular basis and that they can and have been removed. Chipping should not be done when there is a much safer and far more reliable way of identifying lost/stolen pets.
> 
> I haven't posted on Horse and Hound for a long time because I got fed up of the pro hunting and pro racing attitudes and also because of the advocation of cruel training methods over there. I stopped posting on here because I became sick of the bullying behaviour of certain members (which I know is the reason why some other members left) and the fact that moderators allow it.
> 
> ...


Absolutely.

Anyone who disagrees with you is a bully.

Are you a bully for disagreeing with us?

Or is it, maybe, that the weight of opinion on this thread is against you, so you cry "Bully"?


----------



## Gwendolyn Edwards (Jun 6, 2017)

In a case like this it is best to keep the micro chip for safety reasons..especially in this day and age..thank you. I have over ten years experience taking care of animals, especially dogs and cats and they can get lost or even taken without your permission.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

I love the fact that the bully card has come out 

Oh noes no one agrees with me here and they keep poo pooing my links that don't actually back up what I'm saying...instead of taking a step back to maybe readdress the way I am looking at this I will just call them bullies...how dare they try to inject some form of common sense into this thread, how very dare they 


Annnd back in the real world...It is ILLEGAL to not chip your dog, regardless of your thoughts on the subject...yes there are circumstances where a dog can be exempt but they are so few and far between they don't really need taking into consideration.

Rant on like a ranty ranter, but that doesn't change the fact that if you fail to microchip your dog then you are breaking the law!


----------



## SusieRainbow (Jan 21, 2013)

As we have all said -* the law dictates that all dogs must be microchipped!* It seems pontless to argue about it and then accuse people who point this out of bullying. Closing now.:Locktopic


----------

