Microchip implant (animal)
[1] Externally attached microchips such as RFID ear tags are commonly used to identify farm and ranch animals, with the exception of horses.
Microchips are also used by kennels, breeders, brokers, trainers, registries, rescue groups, humane societies, clinics, farms, stables, animal clubs and associations, researchers, and pet stores.
[3] In dogs and cats, chips are usually inserted below the skin at the back of the neck between the shoulder blades on the dorsal midline.
Horses are microchipped on the left side of the neck, halfway between the poll and withers and approximately one inch below the midline of the mane, into the nuchal ligament.
[5] Humans report swelling and bruising at the time of implant, two to four weeks for scar tissue to form and itching and pinching sensations for up to two years.
Some veterinarians leave registration to the owner, usually done online, but a chip without current contact information is essentially useless.
Some veterinary tests and procedures require positive identification of the animal, and a microchip may be acceptable for this purpose as an alternative to a tattoo.
The three major reasons for microchip implantation are delocalization[clarification needed], recording, domestication and showing proof of ownership.
[8] Due to the advantages of microchips, there are many concrete applications of RFID in the agri-food sector covering the majority of usual foods, such as all kinds of meats as well as various vegetables, fruits.
[10] Using microchips in wild animals in biology began with fisheries studies to determine the efficacy of this method for measuring fish movement.
[11] Later, studies that use microchips to track wild animals expanded over the years, including researches on mammals,[12] reptiles,[13] birds,[14] and amphibians.
Due to the fact that traditional identifications are on the exterior of the animal, tags can be lost, scars can heal and tattoos can fade.
[2] Other researches on small mammals like rats and mice also adopt this technology to determine body temperature of terminally ill animals.
[2] The microchip is enclosed in a biocompatible glass cylinder[2] and includes an identifying integrated circuit placed under the skin of an animal.
The coil and capacitor together form a resonant LC circuit tuned to the frequency of the scanner's oscillating magnetic field to produce power for the chip.
The results show that the problem of microchip data may reduce the possibility that a pet's owner will be contacted to reclaim the animal.
[28][29] Additionally, microchipping is mandatory for certain invasive species that threaten Japan’s ecosystems or agriculture, as well as for special animals classified as dangerous to human life, health, or property.
105 of 1973) requires owners and pet sellers to register microchipped dogs and cats with the Ministry of the Environment database and update registration details as needed.
[citation needed] In April 2012, Northern Ireland became the first part of the United Kingdom to require microchipping of individually licensed dogs.
[clarification needed] Though, California law requires any animal control agency, shelter or rescue to only release a cat or dog, including to the owner, if they are microchipped or will be within 30 days.
[38] According to the LDAF and the state veterinarian, this requirement made contributed to better determining the owners of horses displaced during Hurricane Katrina in fall 2005.
One may find claims that early ISO adopters in the United States endangered their customers' pets by giving them ISO chips that work at a "different frequency" from the local shelter's scanner, or that the United States government considered forcing an incompatible frequency change.
RFID chips are used in animal research, and at least three studies conducted since the 1990s have reported tumors at the site of implantation in laboratory mice and rats.
[65] The UK's Veterinary Medicines Directorate (VMD) assumed the task of adverse event reporting for animal microchips there in April 2014.
[68] Noted veterinary associations[69] have responded with continued support for the microchip implant procedures as reasonably safe for cats and dogs, pointing to rates of serious complications on the order of one in a million in the UK, which has a system for tracking such adverse reactions and has chipped over 3.7 million pet dogs.
A 2011 study found no safety concerns for microchipped animals with RFID chips undergoing MRI at one Tesla magnetic field strength.
[6] The broader impacts on inflammatory disorders and cancer have not been determined and most of the health risks that were defined in the FDA Guidance developed for human implants[72] should be considered.
[76] Unauthorized reading of microchips can present a risk to privacy and can potentially provide information to identify or track packages, consumers, carriers, or even owners of different animals.
Several prototype systems are being developed to combat unauthorized reading, including RFID signal interruption, as well as the possibility of legislation.
As early as in 1997, some scholars believed that microchip implantation was technically possible, but it was suggested that it was the time to consider strategies for preventing potentially grievous intrusion into personal privacy.
