Micro Chips! Whats the deal and the feel here?

Post by **kninebirddog** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 5:40 pm

I'll just say 18 with plenty of years of experience

highcotton · Post by **highcotton** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 7:39 pm

Sonny you are treading on some pretty dangerous turf.

Post by **Ayres** » Thu Aug 23, 2007 10:30 am

Sonny Hawkins wrote:Its so cold that it SMOKES.

Actually, liquid nitrogen at that state is so hot that it's BOILING. What you're seeing is the nitrogen turning from a liquid into a gas, similar to water boiling and giving off steam.

Sonny Hawkins wrote:HEY K9------------------------How old did you say Brenda will be in OCT???

Sonny Hawkins · Post by **Sonny Hawkins** » Thu Aug 23, 2007 1:53 pm

High Cotton-------- I know. Just thought I could maybe LURE Brenda in on this thread, Maybe she wont CUSS me OUT. :roll: :roll: :roll: Sonny

snips · Post by **snips** » Thu Aug 23, 2007 1:56 pm

I'M HERE :angryfire: :angryfire: :angryfire: :angryfire:

Sonny Hawkins · Post by **Sonny Hawkins** » Thu Aug 23, 2007 2:02 pm

Slistoe-------- I had one of the best tanks made, and it would hold 6 or 8 months. I had about eight hundred straws in it, Just to make sure it didnt dry up, Ied top it off every 3 months. Sonny

snips · Post by **snips** » Thu Aug 23, 2007 2:02 pm

YOU GUYS NEED TO STRAIGHTEN UP AROUND HERE!!! Looking foreward to DOY, lots of friends going to be there. Going to sell shirts and HAVE FUN!!!

Post by **kninebirddog** » Thu Aug 23, 2007 2:23 pm

Brenda where we going to go Eat this year

Wall's EP · Post by **Wall's EP** » Thu Aug 23, 2007 5:48 pm

Wildrose. Do us all a favor and you try it first and please give us daily updates as to how much pain you are in. Pictures too, especially once it gets all infected and is draining fluids. I once had an employee who thought he was cool and branded some flames on his arm. Well after three weeks he finally wanted to come back to work but his position no longer existed. Now go to the store and by yourself some cheep whiskey and get it done. Please make sure to put it on your forearm so everybody can see how much you jumped and screamed as your flesh was burning.

CW

GL · Post by GL » Thu Aug 23, 2007 6:08 pm

I have been wondering about that!
Remember as a kid playing with some dry ice.

It didn't have the same instant effect as hot but it sure did leave the same blisters and pain afterwards.

I won't be branding any dog I own, hot or cold, but think the question in my original post has been answered and I will get her chipped and probably tatooed if I can find a place to do it reasonably.

May I suggest that any one here with what they think are better ideas ought to try it on themselves first!

Gary

WildRose · Post by **WildRose** » Thu Aug 23, 2007 6:48 pm

Wall's maybe you've already been to the liquor store because what you are describing is not a freeze brand, but a hot brand. If you are thinking I would ever put a hot iron to a dog or to myself you are either drunk, stupid, or can't read.

Since i've put freeze brands on about a hundred horses and quite a few cattle over the years I really don't feel like I need to do it on myself as I know the effect. Properly done freeze brands do not produce any sort of an open wound.

I've also hot branded tens of thousands of steers and heifers and I know the difference between the two.

All you are doing with freeze branding is damaging the melanocytes (cells that produce color in the skin and hair). That is why the hair keeps growing but turns white, and there is no scarring. You are not freezing the skin solid such as in severe frost bite (which I have also had).

Perhaps some of you need to better understand the process before you criticize it.

"May I suggest that any one here with what they think are better ideas ought to try it on themselves first!"

Gary by that logic we should all have ourselves chipped and tattooed before doing it to the dogs.... . I'll pass on them as well for myself but they both work very well on the dogs. CR

Post by **kninebirddog** » Thu Aug 23, 2007 7:10 pm

Here is a little bit of info on freeze brand
http://www.manyponies.com/articles/freezebranding.htm

Post by **topher40** » Thu Aug 23, 2007 7:17 pm

GL wrote: May I suggest that any one here with what they think are better ideas ought to try it on themselves first!

Gary

Gary I actually have a brand, and not a little one ( dont ask, all I can say is YOUNG DUMB AND STUPID

). Saying that I would still do it to a dog any day of the week. Thats no different than having a dog nuetered and saying you do it first and then you can do it to your dog. Some things just need to be done and the aint pretty.

I like WildRoses argument also, very well put Charlie!

GL · Post by GL » Thu Aug 23, 2007 7:27 pm

I am not one for argueing via my keyboard!

Lets face a couple of facts. Dog and people are already being Tatooed.
Dog are already being Microchipped and the technology is there to MC children or anyone else. I don't know if they do it on humans yet.

Cattle and Horses are branded and have been for many years. I know they do it with a Hot Brand but don't know if they ever do it with cold brands.

Here is my take, Cow and horse hide is pretty thick and tough. The hide on my dog happens to be thin and soft and I happen to love her enough to want to cause as little pain and discomfort as possible.

You are welcome to do as you may and I don't have to agree!

I began this post asking a rather simple question, whats the benefit of Microchipping my dog? You can find that in post # 1

I had some valuable input on page one and here we are on page 5 talking about stoking up the fires and getting the branding irons glowing.

Start your own thread so I don't have to bother reading it!

Gary

Post by **topher40** » Thu Aug 23, 2007 7:54 pm

GL-
Not trying to argue here

, they do cold brand horses and cattle though. Just wanted to let you know

.

WildRose · Post by **WildRose** » Thu Aug 23, 2007 8:35 pm

Gary again you should maybe familiarize yourself with the subject. Horses have a very thin hide and it's much more sensitive to pain and abrasion than that of our dogs.

Freeze branding involves no pain, no open wounds, and no scarring or even blistering unless it's fouled up pretty badly. It's a common process for marking horses for that reason (thinner more sensitive skin). It is much less invasive than tattooing which requires puncturing the skin.

I simply offered the tatooing information to add to this topic for the reasons I stated; and kicked out the freeze branding idea as well as, as I said I've pondered doing it but don't know of anyone that has done it with dogs so I was hoping to get some input back from anyone that might have.

That some other's reacted poorly out of ignorance and misunderstanding it is not my fault. CR

Post by **kninebirddog** » Thu Aug 23, 2007 9:51 pm

Incase any one missed the link i posted above

here is the info click on link above

Freeze Branding Horses

Freeze Branding

To apply "super cooled" iron to a horse's hide resulting in an easily read, identifying mark or brand, can be applied to any age horse. Freeze branding destroys pigment-forming (color) cells of the hair follicle. Hair continues to grow, but will grow in white. With white, gray or roan horses the iron is applied longer resulting in destruction of the hair follicle, which results in a hairless or bald brand.

Ghost Warrior & his freeze brand. He was branded 11/7/2002. This photo was taken 1/30/2003. Shows white hair growing in.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why Freeze Brand?
Freeze branding has become popular because it is safe, economical and easy to do. The brand is legible, permanent and can be read from a distance. Branded horses are less likely to be targets of thieves, if stolen marked horses can be more easily traced by law enforcement officers. Brands can discourage fraudulent practices with registration papers. Some breeders freeze brand to distinguish horses they have bred. Freeze branding is relatively painless for the horse, especially compared to hot iron branding. Hot iron branding can result in a blotched, unreadable brand.
Our home state of South Dakota is a brand state; brands are legal proof of ownership. A brand cannot be chosen and used at random; we must apply to the state Brand Board for a brand. It is illegal to brand a horse with an unregistered brand. Law regarding brands differ state to state. In South Dakota freeze branding became a legal horse brand in SD in 2002 so we decided to brand our horses. We are very pleased with the results and would recommend the practice of freeze branding to other horse owners.
Check for applicable laws in your state.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Equipment Needed

Branding Iron
Irons made of brass or copper especially for freeze branding give the best results as they hold cold better. We ordered ours from the NASCO Farm Supply Catalog. Existing metal hot brand irons can be used but may not give the best results. Brands with thin or chipped faces should not be used. Different sizes are available. Consideration has to be given to the fact that the brand will grow with the horse, thus we use a smaller brand for colts.

Coolant
We use liquid nitrogen as we have it available thru use of AI on our dairy farm. Liquid nitrogen is generally available from suppliers of artificial insemination equipment and semen. Cost will be for nitrogen and container rent. Liquid nitrogen should be handled with care. Don't allow contact with human skin. Wear gloves, eye protection and long sleeved shirt.

Container for Nitrogen
We use a small Styrofoam cooler, size need only be big enough to hold iron with coolant covering the brand. Too large wastes coolant. We used a towel over the top of the cooler to help prevent evaporation of the nitrogen. Coolant is added to the cooler as needed.
n
Gloves
For handling iron

Cooler and branding iron we use

Two different size irons we use,
showing the "face" of the irons

Clipper
Site to be branded will first need to be clipped, preferably with a very fine/surgical blade.

Squirt bottle with 99% Alcohol
used to clean the brand site, aids in transfer of cold to skin
n
Stopwatch
For tracking time iron is applied

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Branding Procedure

Handlers
Preferably 3, one to hold horse, one to do the branding, one to be the timer.
Restraint of Horses
Horses need to be restrained to prevent movement during branding. Some gentle horses may tolerate freeze branding just by being held. A twitch may be used on some horses. Various tranquilizers may be employed. We built a horse-handling chute that has worked very well for us for various procedures, including halter-breaking colts, worming horses, handling barely broke horses etc..

1. Place cooler near branding area. Chill irons by placing in container of liquid nitrogen. Irons are ready when liquid stops bubbling/boiling. Place cooler near branding area.
2. Clean brand site. Clip in a square shape. This will aid in proper placement of the brand, straight bottom = straight brand
3. Timer gets ready, positioned near branding area
4. Squirt room temperature alcohol over brand site to remove skin oil and help transfer cold from iron to skin.

Sequoyah's Blue Sky peeks out of the chute. Horses enter from the rear, can exit out the front. Sides open various ways to allow for different procedures.
5
5. Immediately after alcohol soak, remove iron from coolant, align and firmly press square on brand site. As iron is pressed to skin brander says "ON". This is the signal to the timer to start stopwatch. Brander should hold iron still as possible, applying 35 to 45 pounds of steady pressure. No part of iron should loose contact with skin. Subtle rocking motion is recommended, but don't wrinkle skin. When time is up timer should say "OFF", brander removes iron. Brand is finished.
In our experience horses don't move when brand is 1st applied, but several seconds into the process they may "jump". Brander should try to move with horse. If iron comes off before time is up, it is very hard to relocate exact area and determine how much time had elapsed before movement occurred. Application time is critical to look of final brand. Most problems in freeze branding occur due to improper application time. Following is a chart to use for a guide to branding times. Branders can "calibrate" their freeze branding by keeping accurate records of times and results. Brand times vary according to type of metal in iron and the age (skin thickness) and color of horses.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Branding Times For Two Types of Irons - to be used as a guide
Horse Color Stainless Steel Iron Copper/Brass Iron
Dark Horses 8 Seconds 7 Seconds
Light Horses 13 Seconds 12 Seconds

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Post Branding Results

After removing iron, brand mark will appear indented. Quickly this indent will disappear. After about 5 to 10 minutes a raised welt in the shape of the brand should be visible. After a few days the swelled pattern disappears. In approximately 1 to 2 months the top layer of skin sheds. After 2 to 3 months white hair starts growing in. 3 to 4 months later white hair growth will be complete. On light horses requiring longer branding times (or dark horses with irons accidentally left on too long) the chain of events will be the same until the 2 to 3 month mark when no hair will grow back, resulting in a bald brand. Occasionally a "streaked" brand, natural color along with white hairs, will be produced, resulting from a too short contact time.

Ghost's indented brand

Raised appearance of brand
Source of Freeze Branding Irons
L&H Branding Irons
410 6th Street SE
Mandan, North Dakota 58554
Phone 800-437-8068
web site www.lhbrandingirons.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Following are some of our
Freeze Branded horses.

MP Fancy Lacy
Branded 11/7/2002

MP Dream Keeper
Branded 5/31/2002
MP Mystic Illusion
Branded 5/31/2002
MP Masquerade
Branded 5/31/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Post by **kninebirddog** » Thu Aug 23, 2007 9:53 pm

well FINALLT get to board the airplane to canada off for a musk ox hunt
stay outta trouble everyone
not upland hunting but will hopefully post some pic when i get back on eh 29 TTYL

Sonny Hawkins · Post by **Sonny Hawkins** » Fri Aug 24, 2007 11:08 am

HEY GL from NY. This thing has gone on for five pages now. You should have all the info on MICRO CHIP that can be found. Now If you want to get a Pros opinion , Ied ask my VET.

Sonny HEY K9---You are getting carried away. Your off the subject Come back with us. :roll: :roll: :roll: Sonny

Post by **Ayres** » Mon Aug 27, 2007 10:30 am

shadymeadows wrote:http://www.freedom.org/news/200612/20/j ... iams.phtml

I was pro pro pro micro chipping until I read this and I REALLY hope that micro chipping proves in the long run to be safe for the animals because it certainly has undisputable benefits.

With regard to the article only... I don't see any cause for alarm. The article states in one anecdote that mice were microchipped for identification purposes during an experiment that would "investigate the influence of parental preconceptual exposure to X-ray radiation or to chemical carcinogens." The result was that, after keeping the mice for lifespan, tumors were discovered around the chip insertion site in roughly 0.84% of the mice.

Another story notes 52 tumors found associated with the chip, but does not tell the total number of animals nor what other conditions the animals were subjected to. Still another story notes a single case in which a tumor was found in a 9 year old French Bulldog. No other information was available other than the condition of the tumor.

Finally, in two studies conducted by Bayer for "chronic toxicity/oncogenicity," they found malignant tumors around the chip insertion site within 2 years on 1% of the animals. Somehow the article writer concluded that "it's only logical" if 1% of animals were affected within 2 years, then more time would cause an increase of infection. There's no data to back up that conclusion, and it's highly illogical to promote a hypothesis as a conclusion. There's also no taking into account the fact that these laboratory animals were exposed to other conditions that could have been cancer causing. Nothing at all states that the chip caused the cancer, but was merely correlated with tumors found by other conditions. Further, there was no control group mentioned (animals that were not chipped, animals that were chipped and then immediately had the chip removed, or were chipped with a "dummy" microchip, etc.).

In my opinion, it's an article that grabs at a lot of data out of context but does not use that data scientifically or statistically to come up to any rational conclusion. The title of the article is very misleading. It's journalistic, not scientific, made to get a reaction rather than to inform.

Post by **topher40** » Mon Aug 27, 2007 11:58 am

JMO, but I think this dead horse is just that DEAD. In the first 2 or maybe 3 pages in this thread had some good info and dialogue. After 5 pages of this thread I would doubt that there could be anyone in this forum that hasnt posted there opinion, knowledge, or rant.

Chips work. Are they perfect? No. But on the other hand we also feed our dogs dry dog food and just look what has happened with that industry in the past year! There is benefit and risk in everything we do. Ask yourself if this a risk you are willing to live with.

Lets get back to some other topics and find a new horse to beat.

Post by **topher40** » Mon Aug 27, 2007 12:37 pm

Boy a guy jumps you once and has to pay for it for the rest of eternity! :roll:

GL · Post by GL » Mon Aug 27, 2007 1:21 pm

The knowledge I have gained from reading topics posted in this forum is invaluable!
I can't agree with all the opinions but never expected to.

I know now that I will have my dog microchipped and it will be done when she goes in for spaying and this will be done before her first heat.

I don't know that chipping is completely safe but I do know I want my dog returned if she ever gets lost. The scales tip in favor of chipping and I would even have her tatooed if I can find a place to do it reasonably.

There are many schools of though here and I suppose they all are of some value to some of us. Same goes for spaying and some say young while others say after full maturity has been reached. All any of us can do is make decisions based on info that has some basis in facts that support those decisions.

I might think differently on some of these topics if I was a breeder of many dogs and keeping an eye on the bottom line was more important.

IMO, tatoos are the least offensive of the many topics discussed for marking a dogs Identity. Micro chips are not with out some negatives but the positives seem to out weigh them.

As for the other methods I am happy to leave them to those who care to go that route.

Gary

Post by **topher40** » Mon Aug 27, 2007 2:03 pm

Shady-
I thought it was only once, but I was wrong once a few years ago so I could be again!

I would love to come down there and go hunting, but how about you come up here and buy the out of state license! I hate to go out of state since I have a lifetime permit, but you never know I might get a wild hair and a free weekend sometime this year!

VZ-
I got a 3 yr old QH you are invited to beat any time you want, it might do her some good!

Post by **Ayres** » Mon Aug 27, 2007 4:07 pm

shadymeadows wrote:In fairness I don't think that they are presenting their article as scientific.

I came across with a different impression, since they cited sources and the title of the article states a scientific conclusion.

shadymeadows wrote:I would have to guess that if a person took the time to look up the referenced studies that they would quite scientific. They weren't exactly conducted by journalists. I would assume that The Toxicology Department of Bayer Corporation, The Institute of Experimental Pathology at Hannover Medical School in Germany, Ecole Nationale Veterinaire of Unite d’Anatomie Pathologique in Nantes, France, Marta Vascellari of Instituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale delle Venezie at Viale dell’Universita in Legnaro, Italy would all be very familiar with scientific procedure.

I don't question the organizations the author cited at all. Nor do I question the results that were produced. What I question is the author's taking those studies out of context and applying some observations as scientific conclusion when it, in fact, is not.

shadymeadows wrote:Probably down playing an article written by someone that has obviously done more research then any of us is not really appropriate.

"Not really appropriate" to look further into a journalistic article that may have issue with my dog's health? I'll have to disagree there. Something that's important to me, I'll look into it every time, and if I find something that discredits it I will point it out and take note. It certainly doesn't seem to me that the author did any research whatsoever, but merely cited off-hand results from studies where in many instances the subject was not even microchips.

shadymeadows wrote:If major medical corporations and scientific departments at very prestigious universities see call for alarm it would be naive on our part to just overlook it. It's not like any of them would have a vested interest in slanting their studies. It would be nice to see the actual studies but that's probably more time then I am going to be putting into it myself.

You'll note that it's not the organizations performing the studies that are calling foul, but rather it's the author. If she's not presenting it in a scientific manner (see above) then she's got no more credit than you or I in determining what those results say.

shadymeadows wrote:Realistically, the experience in the field that everyone on this thread has input has to count for something too. Which without all that experience the studies would stand on their own making implantation an irresponsible venture. Without the studies one would be led by the posted experiences to think that implantation is completely harmless. I would say the 2 relatively balance the scales and out of our responsibility to our pets call for further research. Hopefully more has been done and some of the members here can fill us in on it.

While I agree that firsthand field experience should count, I disagree that the studies cited in the article point to making chip implantation an irresponsible venture. I just don't interpret the results that way at all. That's where I completely disagree with the author.

Further research, sure, nobody's going to turn that down. But as it stands I see no reason to call alarm and put people off to microchipping by claiming that it has cancerous results. The most irresponsible thing I saw was the author claiming in the title that "Implanted Microchips Cause Cancer" when the results say otherwise.

topher40 wrote:JMO, but I think this dead horse is just that DEAD.

What's dead about an ongoing discussion concerning the safety behind microchipping when the original poster asked about the safety and reliability of the procedure?

P.S. Shady, you must be up to your eyeballs in puppies! (took a look at your shorthair litter page) How do you even have time to check the forum?

GL · Post by GL » Mon Aug 27, 2007 5:32 pm

Interesting that I came to pretty much the same conclusion as Ayres after reading the article.

I can't dispute what the journalist is saying but I do disagree with how she came to her conclusions.

Forgive me here but Mark Twain once said this regarding journalists.

"People who don't read News Papers are uninformed,
People who do read them are misinformed"!

Gary

bird · Post by **bird** » Mon Aug 27, 2007 6:34 pm

GL · Post by GL » Tue Aug 28, 2007 6:15 am

Did I miss a link here or not?

I have seen AVID and HOME AGAIN chips mentioned as the best two.

My Vet uses the AKC CAR chip and I haven't seen info, positive or negative about this brand.

I think if chipping is the way to go then I would prefer to use the one that is readable by the most scanners and that has the network connections to provide the info quickly.

Here are a couple of questions begging for answers.

I don't know how the info on the chip is connected to the registration service.

1- Are all the various brands connected to a common network?

2- Are some brands of chips more popular depending on geographical location?

3- When a chip is detected in a found dog, what info is provided to the person doing the scan?

4- Is there a cross reference data base so if my dog has the AKC chip and yours has the AVID or HOME AGAIN the scanner can still link the dog to the owner?

Thanks

Gary

Richard *UT* · Post by Richard *UT* » Tue Aug 28, 2007 10:06 am

I just thought I would post a bit on the studies. I wanted to see the context of the conclusions so I went looking for the studies. I work at the University of Utah, and have access to almost all the journals out there. I could not find any of the studies that were mentioned in the article. Also there is a way to site sources so that if someone wanted to find a study, it can be done. This article never sited any sources so no studies could be verified. I would think that it the chip "causes cancer" then I would be able to find an study supporting that in at least one of the vet journals I was searching.

One quick question, someone here mentioned that he or his club had a universal scanner. I just wanted to know how much one of these costs?

GL · Post by GL » Tue Aug 28, 2007 10:35 am

I'm not surprised you can't find the studies, they may not exist!

Check out this photo as reported by a News Agency!

The caption reads;

Iraqui woman holding bullets fired at her home by Coalition forces!

Must be some new fangled cartridge launcher!

Gary

CherrystoneWeims · Post by **CherrystoneWeims** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 10:47 am

I microchip and tattoo my dogs. The microchip that we use is AKC Car. I like this one because all of the information is in the database with AKC and that organization has been around for quite some time. A friend of mine got her cat back because of a chip. The cat had been missing for a whole year!

For tattooing I do it myself. I have a set-up from National Dog Registry. Once a year our Weim Club has a fun field day and I do a lot of dogs. We will have several people around to hold the dog down. I do the tattoo on the inside of the right hind leg. Ears can get cut off but most likely people aren't going to cut off a hind leg! We have a fellow club member who got her dog back from someone who had taken him. She took the cops to this guy's door. The guy denied that the dog was hers so she told the cop about the tattoo.

LOL I have quite a few Weims here and I can tell them all apart! I guess it is like parents who have identical twins. Each dog has a different look to its face, various whorls on its body, etc.

Sorry to show my ignorance, but what is DOY????

Hey Brenda, I bet you are about my age or maybe even younger! Happy Birthday if I don't see you before then.

WildRose · Post by **WildRose** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 12:55 pm

Richard *UT* wrote:I just thought I would post a bit on the studies. I wanted to see the context of the conclusions so I went looking for the studies. I work at the University of Utah, and have access to almost all the journals out there. I could not find any of the studies that were mentioned in the article. Also there is a way to site sources so that if someone wanted to find a study, it can be done. This article never sited any sources so no studies could be verified. I would think that it the chip "causes cancer" then I would be able to find an study supporting that in at least one of the vet journals I was searching.

One quick question, someone here mentioned that he or his club had a universal scanner. I just wanted to know how much one of these costs?

It's not suprising at all unfortunately, there is a whole cult/cottage industry swearing up and down that vaccines cause cancer and the diseases they are meant to protect animals against. Of course they don't have any science to back it up either. CR

Post by **Ayres** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 12:59 pm

Richard *UT* wrote:One quick question, someone here mentioned that he or his club had a universal scanner. I just wanted to know how much one of these costs?

I don't have one, but Home Again makes a "World Scanner" that you can read about on their website. I would guess that you need to enroll as a Vet or Shelter to obtain one (Rescue Worker?) and would just suggest that you contact them for more information: http://www.homeagain.com

Richard *UT* · Post by Richard *UT* » Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:35 pm

Thanks for the info. I was thinking it would be nice to scan dogs prior to running them in trials. I will check into it and post what I find.