American Blue Lacy Dog Blog

American Blue Lacy Dog Blog

Bringing owners, breeders and enthusiasts together to just talk dogs.

American Blue Lacy Dog Blog RSS Feed
 
 

Behavior Problems, Tumors and Cancer From Microchipping

CHIPPED PETS DEVELOP FAST-GROWING, LETHAL TUMORS
Owners, Medical Reports Point to Link Between RFID Chips and Cancers in Canines

Highly aggressive tumors developed around the microchip implants of two American dogs, killing one of the pets and leaving the other terminally ill. Their owners — and pathology and autopsy reports — have suggested a link between the chips and the formation of the fast-growing cancers.

In the town of Paeonian Springs, Va., a five-year-old male Bullmastiff named Seamus died in February, nine months after developing a “hemangio-sarcoma” — a rare, malignant form of cancer that strikes connective tissues and can kill even humans in three to six months. The tumor appeared last May between the dog’s shoulder blades where a microchip had been implanted; by September, a “large mass” had grown with the potential to spread to the lungs, liver and spleen, according a pathology report from the Blue Ridge Veterinary Clinic in Purcellville, Va.

Originally scheduled to receive just a biopsy, Seamus underwent emergency surgery. A foot-long incision was opened to extract the 4-pound-3-ounce tumor, and four drains were needed to remove fluid where the tumor had developed.

In Memphis, a five-year-old Yorkshire Terrier named Scotty was diagnosed with cancer at the Cloverleaf Animal Clinic in December. A tumor between the dog’s shoulder blades — precisely where a microchip had been embedded — was described as malignant lymphoma. A tumor the size of a small balloon was removed; encased in it was a microchip.

Scotty was given no more than a year to live.

But the dog’s owner, Linda Hawkins, wasn’t satisfied with just a prognosis: She wanted to know whether the presence of the microchip had anything to do with Scotty’s illness. Initially, her veterinarian was skeptical that a chip implant could trigger cancer; research has shown that vaccine injections in dogs and cats can lead to tumors.

In a December pathology report on Scotty, Evan D. McGee wrote: “I was previously suspicious of a prior unrelated injection site reaction” beneath the tumor. “However, it is possible that this inflammation is associated with other foreign debris, possibly from the microchip.”

Observing the glass-encapsulated tag under a microscope, he noted it was partially coated with a translucent material, normally used to keep embedded microchips from moving around the body. “This coating could be the
material inciting the inflammatory response,” McGee wrote.

Hawkins sent the pathology report to HomeAgain, the national pet recovery and identification network that endorses microchipping of pets. After having a vet review the document, the company said the chip did not cause Scotty’s tumor — then in January sent Hawkins a $300 check to cover her clinical expenses, no questions asked.

“I find it hard to believe that a company will just give away $300 to somebody who calls in, unless there is something bad going on,” Hawkins says.

Having spent $4,000 on medical treatment for Scotty since December, Hawkins accepted the money. But she says it hardly covers her $900 monthly outlays for chemotherapy and does little to ease her pet’s suffering. *AntiChips.com

A series of research articles spanning more than a decade found that mice and rats injected with glass-encapsulated RFID transponders developed malignant, fast-growing, lethal cancers in up to 1% to 10% of cases.

The tumors originated in the tissue surrounding the microchips and often grew to completely surround the devices, the researchers said.

Albrecht first became aware of the microchip-cancer link when she and her “Spychips” co-author, Liz McIntyre, were contacted by a pet owner whose dog had died from a chip-induced tumor. Albrecht then found medical studies showing a causal link between microchip implants and cancer in other animals. Before she brought the research to the AP’s attention, the studies had somehow escaped public notice.

A four-month AP investigation turned up additional documents, several of which had been published before VeriChip’s parent company, Applied Digital Solutions, sought FDA approval to market the implant for humans. The VeriChip received FDA approval in 2004 under the watch of then
Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson who later joined the
company’s board.

Under FDA policy, it would have been VeriChip’s responsibility to bring the adverse studies to the FDA’s attention, but VeriChip CEO Scott Silverman claims the company was unaware of the research.

Albrecht expressed skepticism that a company like VeriChip, whose primary business is microchip implants, would be unaware of relevant studies in the published literature.

“For Mr. Silverman not to know about this research would be negligent. If he did know about these studies, he certainly had an incentive to keep them quiet,” said Albrecht. “Had the FDA known about the cancer link, they might never have approved his company’s product.”

 

Behavior Problems

Could something as simple as a microchip really cause behavior problems? Yes. A microchip may be small, but it’s hardly simple. Each chip is encased in a glass bead about the size of a grain of rice. It contains a radio transmitter, an antenna and a computer chip (or integrated circuit) with a ten digit code. It also has a coil inductor with a magnetic core and a capacitor, which stores energy in the form of an electrostatic field. The coil inductor is capable of receiving power when the chip is scanned. The coil and capacitor together form an LC circuit, storing electrical energy – tuned to the frequency of the scanner’s magnetic field – to produce power for the chip. When scanned, the radio transmitter sends the chip’s data to the external scanner. So here’s the problem. Every cell in the body has its own electromagnetic frequency, a specific vibratory rate essential for optimal health and cell division, etc. Neurons and other brain cells are very easily affected by EMFs, which travel at the speed of light.

THE RESEARCH In 1960, neurobiologist Allan Frey was part of Cornell University’s General Electric Advanced Electronics Center. He became curious about the impact on the nervous system of electromagnetic fields, and found that EMFs had significant biological effects, one being that they seem to “dissolve” the blood-brain barrier. For instance, if you inject a rat with a fluorescent dye, its entire body and all of the organs fluoresce, except for the brain. That’s because the brain protects itself from possible contaminants in the bloodstream via this important barrier. But Dr Frey found that when you injected the dye, then exposed the rats to very weak pulsed microwaves, within a few minutes brains also began to fluoresce. Two other labs followed suit, using other techniques, and showed similar effects of EMFs violating the blood-brain barrier.

In the 1970s, Frey did research to determine if EMFs have an effect on specific parts of the brain involved in learning, memory, mood and behavior. He and other researchers found that EMFs had significant effects on the parts of the brain involved in producing and regulating opiates, dopamine, serotonin, gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA), melatonin, and their substrates, all of which either regulate or are involved in learning, mood, behavior and memory. They also found that EMFs could clearly be traced back as a root cause of aggression and anxiety in animals. More recent research shows that rats who’ve been conditioned to respond to certain cues fail to do so a significant percentage of the time after being subjected to low-level electromagnetic frequencies. Researchers in Switzerland found that cows pastured near a radio tower began showing strange behaviors, but when they were re-pastured several miles away, they began behaving normally again. There were also reports of sleep disturbances in humans living nearby, but when the tower was turned off for three days, their sleep patterns returned to normal, which confirms Frey’s research on the effects that EMFs have on melatonin.

PUPPY ADHD A 2006 study done in Denmark, involving nearly 13,000 children, showed that kids who were exposed to EMFs as infants were 80 percent more likely to develop symptoms of ADHD by age seven. (A 2010 study done at UCLA confirmed those findings.) This is telling because many trainers I know of have started complaining about a new puppy behavioral anomaly they refer to as Puppy ADHD. There’s a problem with these data, though, because while they’re telling us something important about the link between EMFs and behavior problems, science currently has no way of explaining how EMFs cause these disturbances. However, in his book What Is Life? Dr Lebrecht von Klitzing, who spent years studying these phenomena, says that while EMF “intensities are too low for an explanation by the known physical laws […] the number of disturbances seen in correlation with an exposure to these fields over a long period of time is increasing dramatically.” One of the qualities of water is that it absorbs electromagnetic waves. Dr von Klitzing says one explanation might be that EMFs interfere with normal bio-electric information processes in the brain – which is roughly 73 percent water. A 2014 article on Dogs Naturally’s website, Can EMFs Shorten Your Dog’s Life? explains that “Iron, necessary for healthy blood and stored in the brain, is highly affected by EMFs.” So if EMFs adversely affect clusters of water and iron molecules in living cells, particularly brain and nerve cells, it might explain some of the strange new behavioral problems I’ve been seeing in very young dogs.*Dogs Naturally Magazine

Related posts:

Categories

Photo Gallery Slideshow

Contact

Lacys

Sign Up

Login