RFID implants causing tumors in animals

Interesting story. I've asked that the thread be moved to science, medicine, etc. You'll probably get more reaction there.
 
I agree that it's an interesting story. I'd have to read the original studies as there's no mention whether or not the chips used in the troubling studies were glass-encased or not. I imagine encasing these devices would make quite a difference as exposed PCBs would leach heavy metals which might trigger tumor formation.
 
I don't know the studies either, but I can say that rats are cancer-prone to a degree that sounds extreme when you read about cancer due to implants. So, I don't know how well those figures apply to other animals.
 
JoeEllison said:
I don't know the studies either, but I can say that rats are cancer-prone to a degree that sounds extreme when you read about cancer due to implants. So, I don't know how well those figures apply to other animals.
Click to expand...
Isn't this how the whole idiotic conspiracy with artificial sugar started? They discovered that a problem with the study was that the mice were just disposed to having cancer.
 
technoextreme said:
Isn't this how the whole idiotic conspiracy with artificial sugar started? They discovered that a problem with the study was that the mice were just disposed to having cancer.
Click to expand...

That can happen, especially as lab animals are highly inbred, for the purpose of obtaining an homogenous population (animals that are very similar to one another), because it simplifies the design of studies.

Inbreeding causes problems which are assembled under the term 'genetic depression'. This term describes the tendency of a population to become homozygous for different genes (homozygous : having two identical copies (alleles) for one gene). Among the known problems it causes is a general decreased efficiency of the immune system.

the Kemist
 
Slimething said:
I agree that it's an interesting story. I'd have to read the original studies as there's no mention whether or not the chips used in the troubling studies were glass-encased or not. I imagine encasing these devices would make quite a difference as exposed PCBs would leach heavy metals which might trigger tumor formation.
Click to expand...

I've always thought that the whole RF cancer response was a load of cobblers (well, actually, I've always thought it was something else, but due to our friends here from GB, I've appropriated the word cobblers :D). However, one would almost think that the immune system would have something to say about putting foreign objects in the body...
 
Jimbo07 said:
I've always thought that the whole RF cancer response was a load of cobblers (well, actually, I've always thought it was something else, but due to our friends here from GB, I've appropriated the word cobblers :D). However, one would almost think that the immune system would have something to say about putting foreign objects in the body...
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. Plenty of people have foreign objects placed in their body every day. I don't think my grandpa needs any medication for his pacemaker. I want to say it depends on the material and that certain metals aren't attacked by your body.
 
technoextreme said:
Not necessarily. Plenty of people have foreign objects placed in their body every day. I don't think my grandpa needs any medication for his pacemaker. I want to say it depends on the material and that certain metals aren't attacked by your body.
Click to expand...

Good point. You're right that it would probably be material specific. Anyway, I suspect that even if an effect is verified, that it would be due more to the materials in the implant than the RF...
 
I agree that the RF part of the equation is not the factor in any carcinogenesis. There's enough RF everywhere we go give everything cancer, if that were the case. I'm just thinking that these transponders are being encased in glass for a reason. That makes me believe that the early transponders used in these studies may not have been encased inside an inert substance and that might explain the carcinogenesis found in the early studies, if it was, that is.
 
krazyKemist said:
That can happen, especially as lab animals are highly inbred, for the purpose of obtaining an homogenous population (animals that are very similar to one another), because it simplifies the design of studies.

Inbreeding causes problems which are assembled under the term 'genetic depression'. This term describes the tendency of a population to become homozygous for different genes (homozygous : having two identical copies (alleles) for one gene). Among the known problems it causes is a general decreased efficiency of the immune system.

the Kemist
Click to expand...

But you are assuming the high rates of cancer susceptibility are accidental.

I believe the rats are bred purposely to be very highly susceptible to cancer, even without exposure to possible carcinogens.

These are some of the reasons animal studies so often don't equate to humans.
 
Jimbo07 said:
Good point. You're right that it would probably be material specific. Anyway, I suspect that even if an effect is verified, that it would be due more to the materials in the implant than the RF...
Click to expand...

The most common material used for implants is titanium, mainly because it has a very low immune response. There are also plastic and composite materials designed specifically to be ignored by the body, although I don't know if any of them are actually in general usage yet. RFID chips used in animal trials are likely standard, off-the-shelf chips used for all kinds of commercial uses. I rather doubt that any attention was paid to reducing the effects of implanting them in the body.

I didn't really study the whole article, but most of the references are to studies of other things which just happened to note an increase in tumours. Since they weren't specifically looking for tumours there are two big problems. Firstly, it is unlikely they even thought about possible effects of implanting chips, they will have just done it as standard practice. Secondly, it is impossible to come to any conclusion based on results that weren't the object of a trial. At most, it says that something might be happening and trials looking into it are warranted.

A quick look around the interweb throws up no studies that have looked into this at all, even in animals, which I must admit is rather surprising. However, while it is quite possible this technology is being rushed out without enough thought about safety, claims that the sky is falling are completely unfounded. Far bigger concerns are with confidentiality of data and injury due to accidental heating. Reports about the approval of chips for humans say these concerns were looked at by the FDA, but I couldn't find and references to actual studies.
 
A quick look around the interweb throws up no studies that have looked into this at all, even in animals, which I must admit is rather surprising. However, while it is quite possible this technology is being rushed out without enough thought about safety, claims that the sky is falling are completely unfounded. Far bigger concerns are with confidentiality of data and injury due to accidental heating. Reports about the approval of chips for humans say these concerns were looked at by the FDA, but I couldn't find and references to actual studies.
Click to expand...
That's got to be an awful amount of energy for a chip to heat up.
 
There are certain strains of rats and mice that are raised for laboratory experiments studying cancer because they are very easy to induce cancer in. That article doesn't mention if these rodents getting cancer are the cancer prone variety. I think it has been shown that even injections of water have been shown to causer cancer in some strains.
 
Alareth said:
*** WARNING!!!! ***

Laboratory testing has been proven to cause cancer in rats.
Click to expand...
I can't really tell but you missed my point. Laboratory testing didn't actually cause the cancer in the rats in the case of the aspartame testing.
 
Cuddles said:
<snippage by TjW>
A quick look around the interweb throws up no studies that have looked into this at all, even in animals, which I must admit is rather surprising. However, while it is quite possible this technology is being rushed out without enough thought about safety, claims that the sky is falling are completely unfounded. Far bigger concerns are with confidentiality of data and injury due to accidental heating. Reports about the approval of chips for humans say these concerns were looked at by the FDA, but I couldn't find and references to actual studies.
Click to expand...

You could, theoretically, get some localized heating from the interrogator, but this is typically less than a watt at 125 kHz. The transponders themselves are entirely passive and dissipate just tens of microwatts, so it's not clear how you'd accidentally heat them up.
Diathermy machines worked down in that range, but it's my understanding that very few doctors use diathermy these days.
 
Transponder-induced sarcoma in the heterozygous p53+/- mouse.
The preneoplastic changes, including mesenchymal dysplasia, appeared to arise at the transponder's plastic anchoring barb and then progressed as a neoplasm to eventually surround the entire microchip. Capsule membrane endothelialization, inflammation, mesenchymal basophilia and dysplasia, and sarcoma were considered unequivocal preneoplastic/neoplastic responses to the transponder and were not related to treatment with either oxymetholone or p-cresidine.
Click to expand...
I couldn't readily find related studies but I'll look some more later.
 
Jimbo07 said:
I've always thought that the whole RF cancer response was a load of cobblers (well, actually, I've always thought it was something else, but due to our friends here from GB, I've appropriated the word cobblers :D). However, one would almost think that the immune system would have something to say about putting foreign objects in the body...
Click to expand...

Depends on the foreign object, I'd say. See my avatar for example.






Randi's head has yet to cause any cancer in me ;)
 
TjW said:
You could, theoretically, get some localized heating from the interrogator, but this is typically less than a watt at 125 kHz. The transponders themselves are entirely passive and dissipate just tens of microwatts, so it's not clear how you'd accidentally heat them up.
Diathermy machines worked down in that range, but it's my understanding that very few doctors use diathermy these days.
Click to expand...

It's a similar problem to non-lethal microwave weapons. They are essentially harmless to humans, but can heat up metalic objects being worn and cause severe burns. Obviously this particular method isn't a major concern for ID chips, but there are plenty of other sources of radiation around that could potentially induce heating. Apparently this has been considered and the risk is sufficiently low not to worry about, I just found it a little odd that I couldn't find any references to actual studies on the matter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom