Does anyone here not believe in Microchipping?

 Not me personally, but I had a big debate with my homeland security professor over microchipping his dog.  He's suspicious of "The Man" and his ability to track people and possessions and also firmly believes his dog will never get lost.  I tried to give him the Hurricane Katrina argument and he was unconvinced.

I balance the risk of complications with the increased chances that my dog and I will be reunited if it gets lost.  There are just too many things that could go wrong, they could escape from vets, day care, my kids, myself, etc.  I want as many things in their favor as possible!

I'm slightly bothered by the competition among brands and that there are some that aren't picked up by certain scanners, but what can you do? 

Nope, both my girls are microchipped, and I wouldn't have it any other way. I personally am not concerned about the *cancer* risk, as the research done on mice is, well, questionable...lol, on many levels. And for religion, well, doesn't apply to me that way either. :-)

I like microchipping much better than tattooing, and more permanent than collar tags. I go over their chips once a year with mom's scanner and they haven't moved a speck since they've been put in.

I microchip my animals.  Actually, most of them come that way since the rescues and shelters are doing it.  I don't personally know anyone whose animal has had any complications from it.  I am FAR more concerned with vaccination protocols, actually. 

For me, the benefits of chipping greatly outweigh the risks. I would much rather have my pets back with me. The risk of cancer...well - it was proven in mice, which are not dogs or cats. All my pets are chipped. We've been chipping at the shelter for many years now, and have not gotten any complaints about it.

I live in Florida, and the chances of a hurricane hitting are great. There's always a chance the collar could slip off, or something unforeseen could happen. I want my pets back, no matter what the cost.

slightly off topic...but did you know that Banfield has their own chips? Which, by the way, do not register with most scanners....I would not get a Banfield chip. JMO

Liesje

I am FAR more concerned with vaccination protocols, actually.

Amen to that. Gaci hasn't had vaccines since her one year booster, and Shimmer only had her puppy series. I'd be far more concerned about vaccines than microchips. Being involved in the dog world, I see a lot of dogs, and I have never personally seen or heard of anybody with an issue as of yet.

The breeder from whom I got Zack from encouraged me to not microchip due to the cancer risk.  So right now he is not microchipped and I haven't decided if I am going to do it or not and just get him tattooed instead. I have heard that tattooing, while possibly safer, can be painful.  I am interested in hearing more information about the subject though.

 Well there wasn't much for me to think about in way of chipping since my breeder had Kirby chipped when he was fixed shortly before I went up to get him.  All I had to do was register it with all the proper information.

 Even so, I would have gotten him chipped.  Like a lot of members are mentioning the benefits far out weigh the possible risks in my mind. 

 I am a bit curious however, to know what your religious beliefs are that have stopped you from chipping your dog, if you don't mind sharing?  I've never heard someone use that a reason before and it has sparked my curiosity.
 

Having experienced both, they are both painful, no doubt, but I have found that dogs tend to find the tattooing much more painful than the microchip. One the chip is in, most dogs I have known and cared for undergo very little discomfort afterwards, whereas tattoos tend to be bloodier, and can remain quite painful for a few days, also depending on what part of the body is tattooed. But both actual procedures are uncomfortable, no doubt about it. The size of the needle for a microchip is enough to give me the willies!

I think the cancer risk is highly over-rated, to be honest. It's been blown way out of proportion, and the correlations are actually quite poor from a scientific standpoint. But I respect everyone's decision to weigh the risks and make their own decisions. That is why there are choices, after all!

jenn52

I personally am uncomfortable with them for reasons relating to religion ...

Can you explain the religion part, I am just curious.  Thanks.

jenns

The breeder from whom I got Zack from encouraged me to not microchip due to the cancer risk.  So right now he is not microchipped and I haven't decided if I am going to do it or not and just get him tattooed instead. I have heard that tattooing, while possibly safer, can be painful.  I am interested in hearing more information about the subject though.

I have never heard of a dog or cat getting cancer from a microchip.

As for tattooing, the problem is that it doesn't really help if the dog ends up at a shelter.  It helps YOU identify YOUR dog, but it doesn't help you get him back.  There are no central databases for tattoos.  Maybe that will change.  I've thought about getting Kenya tattooed b/c she will either have to be tat'd or I need a microchip scanner if we ever do SchH, but for now I've decided against it.  If I need to prove she's mine, I can describe the scar on her nose, the black spot on her tongue, and the white star on her chest. 

Liesje

As for tattooing, the problem is that it doesn't really help if the dog ends up at a shelter.  It helps YOU identify YOUR dog, but it doesn't help you get him back.  There are no central databases for tattoos.  Maybe that will change.  

This is a good point.  Max is chipped and I don't worry much about the cancer risk as I feel any benefits far outweigh any risks ... and there are too many things I enjoy myself that supposedly cause all sorts of dire things. I do have to wonder though - wouldn't tattooing take a lot more time and  be considerably more painful for the dog than chipping?

Joyce

Just out of interest, in my state at least, it's illegal to give away or sell a dog or cat without having it microchipped. I believe it's the same for every other state in Australia, but I'm not 100% sure on that. I assume it is. Vets will do it for as little as $20, so there are no excuses. I don't know anyone who has a dog or cat that isn't microchipped and I don't know anyone who has ever had problems with microchips. The vets check it periodically to make sure it's in the right place.

If I had a dog or cat that got lost and it wasn't microchipped, not only would I have a much slimmer chance of getting it back, but I'd be fined for not having it microchipped.

Considering I came home on Monday to discover Penny had slipped her collar, and considering she was tied up in the first place because we had a large delivery coming and we were worried about her leaving the yard while the delivery folks were getting stuff from the truck to the yard, I'm mightily glad that a) her collar was loose enough to slip in the first place because she had miraculously got herself tangled in the garden I didn't think she could even get to and b) she's microchipped so if she had got out and been picked up, I would have known about it as soon as she arrived at the pound/shelter.

I also found a foxhound once that had got away from his people when the man walking him put his foot in a hole and rolled his ankle. The dog lost his collar in the scrub chasing kangaroos. As it happened, I bumped into someone looking for him quite by accident, but if I hadn't, it's good to know his human parents would have got him back eventually even though he had no visible ID. You can't slip a microchip.

You can't slip a tattoo, either, but I guess over here tattoos aren't universal. I wouldn't know what to make of any of the tattoos I've seen.