By Jane Williams GFN contributing writer--- (For
Publication in the January 2007 “American Family Voice”)
At the National ID Expo in Kansas City, Arkansas
Animal Producer’s Association President Michael
Steenbergen asked, “What safety studies have been
conducted on the chips that are inserted into
animals?” His question was met with total silence.
Did these manufacturers not know, or were they
unwilling to admit that research has confirmed that
implanted microchips cause cancer?
Melvin T. Massey, DVM (Doctor of Veterinary
Medicine) from Brownsboro, Texas, brought this to
the attention of the American Horse Council when he
wrote, “I am a retired Equine Veterinarian and still
breed a few horses. Because of
migration-infections-increased risk of sarcoids I
will not want to have microchips in my horses.”
The Institute of Experimental Pathology at Hannover
Medical School in Germany reported , “An experiment
using 4279 CBA/J mice of two generations was carried
out to investigate the influence of parental
preconceptual exposure to X-ray radiation or to
chemical carcinogens. Microchips were implanted
subcutaneously in the dorsolateral back for unique
identification of each animal. The animals were kept
for lifespan under standard laboratory conditions.
In 36 mice a circumscribed neoplasm occurred in the
area of the implanted microchip. Macroscopically,
firm, pale white nodules up to 25 mm in diameter
with the microchip in its center were found.
Macroscopically, soft tissue tumors such as
fibrosarcoma and malignant fibrous histiocytoma were
detected.”
Ecole Nationale Veterinaire of Unite d’Anatomie
Pathologique in Nantes, France, reported, “Fifty-two
subcutaneous tumors associated with microchip were
collected from three carcinigenicity B6C3F1 mice
studies. Two of these 52 tumors were adenocarcinoma
of the mammary gland located on the dorsal region
forming around the chip. All the other 50 were
mesenchymal in origin and were difficult to classify
on morphological grounds with haematoxylin-eosin.”
Marta Vascellari of Instituto Zooprofilattico
Sperimentale delle Venezie at Viale dell’Universita
in Legnaro, Italy reported examining a 9-year-old
male French Bulldog for a subcutaneous mass located
at the site of a microchip implant. “The mass was
confirmed as a high-grade infiltrative fibrosarcoma,
with multifocal necrosis and peripheral lymphoid
aggregates.”
The Toxicology Department of Bayer Corporation in
Stillwell, Kansas reported, "Tumors surrounding
implanted microchip animal identification devices
were noted in two separate chronic
toxicity/oncogenicity studies using F344 rats. The
tumors occurred at a low incidence rate
(approximately 1%), but did result in the early
sacrifice of most affected animals, due to tumor
size and occasional metastases. No sex-related
trends were noted.
All tumors occurred during the second year of the
studies, were located in the subcutaneous dorsal
thoracic area (the site of microchip implantation)
and contained embedded microchip devices. All were
mesenchymal in origin and consisted of the following
types, listed on order of frequency: malignant
schwannoma, fibrosarcoma, anaplastic sarcoma, and
histiocytic sarcoma.
The following
diagnostic techniques were employed: light
microscopy, scanning electron microscopy, and
immunohistochemistry. The mechanism of
carcinogenicity appeared to be that of foreign body
induced tumorigenesis.”
Additional studies related to cancer tumors at the
site of microchip implants have been conduced in
China; however, at this time these studies are not
available in English. At this time, no long term
studies are available covering more than two years.
It only seems logical to conclude that if
carcinogenic tumors occur within one percent of
animals implanted within two years of the implant
that the percentage would increase with the passage
of time. Additional studies need to be conducted,
but don’t hold your breath for the manufacturers of
microchips to conduct such research and be leery of
any such “research” they may conduct. Even the
limited research available clearly indicates that
implantation of microchips within an animal is
gambling with the animal’s well being.
For additional Information: www.vetpathology.org/cgi/content/abstract/43/4/545,
National Library of Medicine and National Institutes
of Health, www.pubmed.gov,
google for “sarcomas associated with implanted
microchips”.
