A Massachusetts woman has filed a lawsuit against Merck and another company, Digital Angel, which make implantable radio tracking chips for pets, and claims her cat developed cancer after an implant was inserted,
The Boston Globe writes.
In a lawsuit filed in Cambridge District Court, Andrea Rutherford claims the companies violated an implied warranty that Merck's HomeAgain chip was safe, and seeks “reasonable compensatory damages and interest.’’ The devices contain chips that transmit an ID code and can be scanned so lost pets are returned to their owners (read more here). Merck acquired the Home Again product line when it bought Schering-Plough and its Intervet animal health business.
Animal rights lawyer Steven Wise, who is Rutherford’s attorney, tells the Globe that she filed suit to explore whether tracking chips are a major cause of health problems in pets. “We’re about to find out whether this is a big problem or a small problem,’’ he says. Rutherford had a HomeAgain chip implanted in her pet cat, called Bulkin, in February 2005, but in October 2007, a vet removed a malignant tumor from the cat - and the chip was found in the middle of the tumor, according to the lawsuit. Bulkin later was given chemo and radiation, and has survived, according to the paper.
Bulkin, however, is now a poster cat for ChipMeNot.org, a pet advocacy group that argues against the use of microchips in pets. "Corporations must be held accountable when their products take innocent lives. It is time for the truth to be told: implantable microchips pose a health risk to pets," according to a statement from Katherine Albrecht, who runs the site.
Maybe animal health isn't the cat's meow, after all?
15 Comments
I think those chips are responsible for my cat's "Terminators' Eyes" syndrome, as well! [Do see the video, of the affliction, in HD, there.]
Where do I sign up?!
Namaste -- great stuff, Ed!
Let me start with a disclaimer - I have only lived in houses where dogs are the pets.
The wording of this statement troubles me a bit: "Animal rights lawyer Steven Wise, who is Rutherford’s attorney, tells the Globe that she filed suit to EXPLORE whether tracking chips are a major cause of health problems in pets."
Is there a difference between "explore" and "fishing expedition?" Cats may be fond of fish but I would prefer eploration that is done in a lab or the field, rather than in the press/ courts.
while there seems to be a risk associated with it, I would imagine it's fairly low considering the number of animals that get chipped regularly.
Under the law, pets are considered as property. Owners will be entitled to replacement costs, that's it.
Surprise, surprise! Nothing in life is without risk, adding some technical stuff to your animal might result in health risks. Start thinking before....
This suit is complete hogwash. A few basic facts:
ALL needle sticks (including vaccines) are implicated in a very small, but predictable, increase in tumors at the injection site.
Cats are particularly prone to needle-stick cancers because the area in which injections are done is very small (about the size of a 50-cent piece between the shoulders) and because cats are over-vaccinated (as are dogs, see basic T-cell immunity research here).
yes ID microchips are a large-needle insert, but they are a single insert of a device that is the size of a piece of rice. They are made of boro-silicate glass (entirely neutral and non-degrading).
As a previous poster mentioned, millions of cats and dogs have been chipped and no massive cancer problem has been seen (and it has been looked for).
The cancer problem in cats is due to over-vaccination needle sticks, not chip implants.
For cancer in cats and needle stick information, see >> http://www.avma.org/vafstf/ownbroch.asp
"Maybe animal health isn’t the cat’s meow, after all?"
Get used to this. Target has allocated as much shelf space to pet Halloween costumes as they have to children's this year.
Looks like Merck is busy countering the evidence. Check out chipmenot.com for documented cases.
There is no central reporting mechanism so how do we really know how many cases there are?
I guarantee that if the problem was identified in children, no one would say, "what's all the commotion over a few cases?"
At the very least, pet owners have the right to know the risks. They should also be informed about how to examine the microchip injection site for signs of cancer.
Pets aren't just property to many of us!
Ed, why is this story worthy of posting? Is it a joke? Of all the issues facing pharma on a daily basis, is this really newsworthy?
Thanks for posting this Ed. I would think twice before getting my pet chipped if I knew that it increased the risk of cancer.
Nathan, don't be so hard on Ed. It is not as serious a story as some, but it is an interesting parallel to some of the issues in human medicine. Some of the issues are: - "medicalization" of non-medical problems. (Cats don't actually get "lost," and people don't actually "own" cats. The people with whom the cat has lived, may not know where the cat has gone, but trust me, the cat itself is not lost.) - desire for a "quick fix" treatment. - minimization of risk of commercially available products by both care providers and recipients. - the use of legal action as a means to "expose" potential risk information, as well as to shift responsibility/blame to someone else. Differently stated, using lawyers or media to determine safety and effectiveness rather than science. - the continual hope and reliance on the idea that somehow technology will save us from all pain or loss.
I also see some clear parallels to interest groups relating to human health. From vaccines to mental health treatment to fluoride in the drinking water, there is no lack of "advocacy" groups that are anti-something relating to human health, isn't it reassuring to know that there are some folks equally interested in small semi-domesticated animals too. Good to know also that "animal-rights" lawyers exist.
Since the cat is fine now, I wonder how one would calculate "reasonable compensatory damages and interest?" (Assuming that a jury could actually determine that the chip CAUSED the tumor.) I really wonder if this will settle or actually go to trial (kind of hope it goes to trial - should be entertaining).
As stated previously, pets aren't just property to many of us, and the pharma dollars spent on pets are huge and growing as are potential markets for pet-related medications and devices. Why isn't it newsworthy? Mascots abound and are nothing to sneer at just because you don't have one. I don't have kids but I don't complain about all the pharma $$$ relegated to them :)!
To be clear, I disagree with Nathan -- I do this story is worthy of coverage -- my snark is aimed more at the lawyer, than the client.
That said, I wouldn't chip my cat, or my kid(!), FYI.
Namaste -- this joint rocks, Ed!
I've chipped a few of my cats and not had issues with it. I am opposed to collars on cats and wanted a reasonable method of claiming them in case they fell into the hands of the law. even with this risk, if I had a roamer, I'd chip 'im.
@PBurns - you are correct that this is a known issue, which is why a good vet does not give vaccinations all in the same place. also, in case of reaction, they know which shot it was. new research has shown that after the booster shot phase of vaccinations, they need only be given once every three years. this is also true for the rabies vaccine in dogs, but I think they need some of the others more frequently.
Andrea wrote, "I don’t have kids but I don’t complain about all the pharma $$$ relegated to them :)!"
Yes, but you were once a child. And someone's child will be your doctor one day (or maybe I should use 'vet' as an example).
I agree this is newsworthy. Animal health has had my attention since the compounding pharmacy refused my daughter's prescription, saying they only did pet meds now. Insurance reimbursements wouldn't be an issue for them any longer, plus they didn't have to hire as skilled a pharmacist to do the compounding for non-humans. I'll be interested to see how that works out for them. We drive way, way out to the suburbs now for my daughter's medicine.