Vet warns against microchipping

RE: Vet warns against microchipping

Miriam Lodewyks — Wed, 27 Apr 2016 23:40:52 GMT

These particular chips have a plastic "bung" the same size as the actual chip, inside the shaft of the needle. The needle is connected to an insertion device. The plunger must have been too long and pushed both chip and "bung" under the skin...

RE: Vet warns against microchipping

Anthony Dennison — Tue, 26 Apr 2016 16:49:17 GMT

[quote user="GrooveJet"]Unbeknown to my colleague, the white plastic plunger inside the microchip was inserted along with the actual chip.[/quote]

How?!

RE: Vet warns against microchipping

Miriam Lodewyks — Tue, 26 Apr 2016 16:19:45 GMT

FYI: couple weeks ago I saw a young cat that had been microchipped a week previously whilst anaesthetised for a routine spay. Unbeknown to my colleague, the white plastic plunger inside the microchip was inserted along with the actual chip. The size and scale of the abscess this piece of plastic caused quite beggars belief.

So Chippers BEWARE!!!

RE: Vet warns against microchipping

Elliot Kneba — Tue, 26 Apr 2016 14:29:39 GMT

[quote user="Malcolm Ness"]

Were the needles in these cases directed cranially?

[/quote]

I have no idea, but I imagine you would have a heck of a time entering the thoracic spine when you are injecting parallel to it.

Thanks for the warm welcome all 8)

RE: Vet warns against microchipping

Julie Turner — Fri, 22 Apr 2016 17:00:20 GMT

I favour side-to-side for safety reasons and it also seems easier to place the chip correctly.

The number of reunites of animals who are chipped has enabled in my direct experience far outweighs any tiny risk of trauma or cancer in the hands of a good vet or vet nurse chipper.

RE: Vet warns against microchipping

Malcolm Ness — Fri, 22 Apr 2016 16:25:05 GMT

[quote user="Neil Wheadon"]

Why Malcolm?

I switched from injecting from the back to the front a month or so ago, following Martin Atkinson's post.

It's been a revelation and I feel it's safer as the needles in my opinion are overly long and akin to a javelin. If the animal throws it's head back then there is a danger. If you go caudally and keep your hand down the needle isn't going to hit the spinal cord.

We do lots of things that make far less sense than this

Neil

[/quote]

That all seems plausible and sensible though I could make up an equally plausible tale about injecting from back towards the head so that if the cat springs forwards then it is jumping out of danger.

My point is that we don't actually know and expressing opinion as it it is fact is potentially dangerous. I tend to inject from side to side as keeping the needle point away from being directed at the spine seems sensible, though I can't say with any certainty that it is the best, or even a better way of doing things.

RE: Vet warns against microchipping

Neil Wheadon — Fri, 22 Apr 2016 14:46:49 GMT

[quote user="Malcolm Ness"]

[quote user="Elliot Kneba"]If someone is worried about going into the spinal cord (presumably in the cervical region?) then they could just point the needle caudally instead of cranially. Problem solved.[/quote]

Were the needles in these cases directed cranially?

Do we have evidence that a caudally directed needle is safe or even safer?

This kind of over-confident pronouncement is unhelpful.

[/quote]

Why Malcolm?

I switched from injecting from the back to the front a month or so ago, following Martin Atkinson's post.

We do lots of things that make far less sense than this

Neil

PS Welcome Elliot as well

RE: Vet warns against microchipping

Niall Taylor — Fri, 22 Apr 2016 13:07:41 GMT

[quote user="Elliot Kneba"]

[quote user="Malcolm Ness"]re 'chipping the spinal cord - I know of two well documented case (I dealt with one on referral). Both were in well-grown cats and both were in the hands of experienced chippers[/quote]

If someone is worried about going into the spinal cord (presumably in the cervical region?) then they could just point the needle caudally instead of cranially. Problem solved.[/quote]

Welcome to the forum, Elliot

Niall

RE: Vet warns against microchipping

Malcolm Ness — Fri, 22 Apr 2016 12:18:03 GMT

Were the needles in these cases directed cranially?

Do we have evidence that a caudally directed needle is safe or even safer?

This kind of over-confident pronouncement is unhelpful.

RE: Vet warns against microchipping

Elliot Kneba — Fri, 22 Apr 2016 12:12:39 GMT

If someone is worried about going into the spinal cord (presumably in the cervical region?) then they could just point the needle caudally instead of cranially. Problem solved.

RE: Vet warns against microchipping

Francisco Gomez — Tue, 05 Apr 2016 22:36:54 GMT

[quote user="Gerry Henry"]

Had a cat last year with a nasty injection (?) site sarcoma, and right in the middle was the chip I'd implanted seven years previously. We never inject into the scruff ... apart from chips.

[/quote]

Horrible anecdote... but even if you could prove cause-effect, would it be representative enough to lobby against chipping cats? My anecdote is that I've treated succesfully chipped cats because there was an owner that could face the bill, same cat in different circumstances has been euthanased.We would try to rehome even badly hurt cats without an owner but the business I work for must abide by a financial limit, many times a lower limit than that of a client.

RE: Vet warns against microchipping

Gerry Henry — Tue, 05 Apr 2016 16:01:06 GMT

Had a cat last year with a nasty injection (?) site sarcoma, and right in the middle was the chip I'd implanted seven years previously. We never inject into the scruff ... apart from chips.

RE: Vet warns against microchipping

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Mon, 04 Apr 2016 23:44:57 GMT

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]

[quote user="Bob Russell"]What makes you a top/senior vet? Age and homeopathic tendencies?[/quote]In this case a big mouth, thick skin and a propensity to spout bovine faecal matter.

[/quote]

There's a couple or two of top vets on this forum, then.

RE: Vet warns against microchipping

Clive Ansell — Mon, 04 Apr 2016 17:45:35 GMT

What's all of the fuss about? we all give vaccines, s/c injections, s/c fluids and place iv cannulas in very small patients most of the time. How is placing a microchip any more challenging?

RE: Vet warns against microchipping

Clive Ansell — Mon, 04 Apr 2016 17:42:40 GMT

[quote user="Michael Woodhouse"]When does this fall into the category of bringing the profession into disrepute?[/quote]

A very good question for this year's 8 7 6 0 RCVS election candidates maybe?

RE: Vet warns against microchipping

Martin Atkinson — Mon, 04 Apr 2016 16:28:19 GMT

[quote user="Bob Russell"]What makes you a top/senior vet? Age and homeopathic tendencies?[/quote]In this case a big mouth, thick skin and a propensity to spout bovine faecal matter.

RE: Vet warns against microchipping

Anthony Todd — Mon, 04 Apr 2016 15:15:26 GMT

[quote user="Bob Russell"]What makes you a top/senior vet? [/quote]

But [sigh], better than being "retired vet" or "geriatric vet", [sigh].

RE: Vet warns against microchipping

Bob Russell — Mon, 04 Apr 2016 14:52:06 GMT

Being totally slagged off by the responses on Facebook!

The articles generally end up pretty well balanced but it always makes me laugh to see someone described as 'top vet' or 'senior vet'.

What makes you a top/senior vet? Age and homeopathic tendencies?

RE: Vet warns against microchipping

George Cooper — Mon, 04 Apr 2016 14:36:23 GMT

Perhaps the solution might be "Homeopathic Microchipping", a distant relation to veterinary money-spinner "homeopathic castration"!

RE: Vet warns against microchipping

Nhombokisheni — Mon, 04 Apr 2016 14:10:48 GMT

It appeared in other papers too...really loved the comments under the article in the independent and on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/TELEGRAPH.CO.UK/posts/10154164093284749)....the real issue is what Michael raised......the profession is being tainted by people like him who are allowed to purvey hogwash in the name of the profession. If they start getting away with this....what next!!!!!!!A petition online to RCVS????????????

RE: Vet warns against microchipping

Julian Earl — Mon, 04 Apr 2016 12:48:46 GMT

I was appalled to see someone expressing this opinion the Telegraph. I think the report suggested smaller dogs might die due to the chip!I cannot recall ever seeing a single adverse reaction of any deacription in a patient never mind death! Has anyone seen a death as a result? \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\re VMD involved although it is not a medication? Should a vet really go around alledgedly advocating that owners break the law? A bit reckless I think. Hopefully the paper has misquoted Mr Allport so they should be the ones reprimanded. for advocating irresponsibility.

RE: Vet warns against microchipping

Malcolm Ness — Mon, 04 Apr 2016 11:31:17 GMT

From a journalistic point of view, the article seems fairly balanced to me. Allport claims that chipping is dangerous but provides neither data nor references then Wedderburn claims that benefits outweigh the risks but again presents neither references nor data. I prefer Weddeburn's view because it chimes with my experience but I would be very interested to see any good data from either side.

re 'chipping the spinal cord - I know of two well documented case (I dealt with one on referral). Both were in well-grown cats and both were in the hands of experienced chippers, one of whom was a veterinary surgeon. However, these cases, interesting as they are, are beside the point in a debate about 'chipping dogs.

RE: Vet warns against microchipping

Francisco Gomez — Mon, 04 Apr 2016 11:20:31 GMT

[quote user="J G Wray"]

.Fortunately, once Allportian/Woodhouseian bombast is stripped away, there's sufficient flexibility for professionals to work.

[/quote]

Ok, I see your point. Maybe I could try wording Michael's sentiments in a different way so we can all agree on something?

Would you be happier if I say:

Richard Allport I have read an article from your claim here: http://metro.co.uk/2016/04/02/why-you-shouldnt-microchip-your-dog-according-to-a-leading-vet-5791824/ I don't know if the article fully represents your view or it is somehow twisted to attract attention, like many things are in the media nowadays. Would you please enlighten us if that is the case?

If, on the other hand, you are defending calls against microchipping for those who worried about potential reactions... Given this premise: Amount of known reactions Vs the amount of chips implanted, and not taking into account the reactions that might not even be due to chipping, but due to improper techinque or underlying disease. Should any client of yours take anything you advise? ever?

Our job is making that decision, that what we do carries a risk and, if we do it, it must offset the benefits of what is likely to happen if we do not. Not having a microchip, not only causes loss of ownership, but in many cases, loss of medical History. Ever ex-lap a female to know if spayed or not? repeated potential risky tests in a patient that probably had this test already done?

RE: Vet warns against microchipping

Martin Atkinson — Mon, 04 Apr 2016 10:35:11 GMT

[quote user="Evelyn Barbour-Hill"]Actually some of what Mr. Allport writes seems quite sensible[/quote]Well that will be a first then! It is amazingly ironic that a vet who advocates 'alternative medicine' can make such a statement. I guess homeopathy has no side effects though, other than the denial of 'proper' treatment, because it has no active ingredient in the first place.

RE: Vet warns against microchipping

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Sun, 03 Apr 2016 18:26:33 GMT

[quote user="Dalriata"] I don't think this kind of reporting is very helpful though..... but not a surprise from the Telegraph! [/quote]

Or the Grauniad, or Times, or Mail, or Sun, or Mirror, or the Bangor Chronicle, or the Basingstoke Weekly Advertiser, or Vet Times for that matter. Journalists are paid to fill the columns of their papers with whatever eye-catching stuff they can find.

Actually some of what Mr. Allport writes seems quite sensible. "If the police or council jobsworths come knocking....."