So I got my pug microchipped today

I agree with Carola (but of course, I would, since I'm one of the ganger-uppers, right?).

I'm sorry, but anyone who comes on here and throws out statements like this:

"Take this site for example (or any internet message board like this for that matter) ... a sad state of affairs for humanity"

Deserves whatever they get thrown at them. IMHO.
 
Agreed with Carola 100%. B&G is entitled to her opinions. Her opinion regarding pet microchip is completely baseless, and I did my best to share the facts, but she didn't appear to absorb any of what I said. It was her hypocritical attidue after that, that really made us "gang up" on her. IMO, she got what she deserved! She was never interested in being a part of this online community. She just wanted to spy on us and then tell us we were all doomed to hell in a handbasket. That's just messed up!
 
Well said Carola & Evily.

My main issue is the superiority complex as well, in addition to her trying to force feed her position to us. If I saw a post with which I strongly disagreed I'd ignore it--especially one as innocent & (I thought) non-controversial as this. Even if I felt compelled to respond I would try to do it in a gentler way.

Mostly b/c I've unintentionally offended people I highly respect on this forum in the past by posting without thinking it all the way through. It's caused me to be sensitive of others' positions & realize I won't change anyone's mind by being so aggressive & opinionated--if anything I'd end up upsetting people, as B&G did.

Fortunately her response was so off the wall the thread turned humorous instead of ugly. :)
 
Still, NOT trying to stir things up, I just really enjoy DISCUSSION and seeing things from all persspectives...how else can one for an opinion?

But...my ? wasn't addressed. Why is it so far fetched to conceive that something we put inside our body will cause harm? We may not know it now, we may think it is 100% safe now but later learn it is only 30% safe....or whatever...more harmful than good.

Evily, (not trying to pick a fight, honest), you said "Her opinion regarding pet microchip is completely baseless, and I did my best to share the facts"

...what are the facts? Are the facts what the vet told you? Isn't that based on the information available right now? Is it at all possible that over time (short or long term) those "facts" change and we learn that the "facts" were simply what was thought to be true at that time?
 
Sarah - I think that Emily meant that Beauty&Grace said that the microchips emit a signal that she felt would be harmful, and Emily just advised her that the chips don't emit any kind of signal, they just contain information.
 
Sarah, I already presented the facts above, but I will restate them. The chip is not powered, so it cannot emit any radiation. It's encapsulated in a biocompatible material so that the body will not attack it. These are facts, and it's probably more than the average veterinarian understands about these chips. It's really no different than having a pacemaker or an artificial hip. Those things are foreign objects in the body, but they are engineered to be biocompatible, so that they can live in harmony with the body's natural tissues.

B&G kept pressing the notion that this chip emits some kind of "rays", and that is most definitely false. It cannot emit anything if it's not powered. As for other as-yet unknown effects... there's always a chance there could be something we don't know yet. But we (engineers, doctors, scientists) have a pretty firm understanding of biomaterials these days, and the risk of there being some kind of catastrophic unknown effect of this technology is extremely low. (I am a materials engineer, so I feel qualified to speak as a representative to the technical community)
 
>This is technical speak for "I am a geek" ;) :p
>
>Em, I mean that in the most loving way ;)

I know ya did, Catherine. ;) I'm a proud geek!
 
I'd like to get her some black, thick framed 50s glasses with tape in the middle and a flashy pocket protector.
 
She already has that ensemble. She only wears it in the privacy of her own home, though ;)

Seriously, I know Emily pretty well, well enough to be able to say with absolute certainty that she would never post information that she wasn't able to back up 100%. She's a smart cookie:)

Mmmmmmmmm.... cookies.
 
I'm like some other posters who were trying to figure out why a post on a pug getting microchipped resulted in so many comments.

I'm sorry, but I'm in the "WOW!" category. I remember when I was working in New Mexico for a company, part of the state. This was 1996 and I had the "pleasure" of listening to an open forum of a rather rural school district (and few places do rural as well as New Mexico - which is one of my favorite states, btw) discussing whether or not to have computers in the schools. I was shocked at the arguments and most were very similar to the ones stated by B&G. I don't remember feeling that sense of Twilight Zonish sense since then. And I really do not mean any disrespect, as I think everyone is entitled to her own opinion, but I kind of feel like I should break out the tin foil hat with all this talk of gamma rays...
 
Odd when one considers that the early internet (ARPANET) was been around since circa 1967 and computers longer than that.
 
>>
>But...my ? wasn't addressed. Why is it so far fetched to
>conceive that something we put inside our body will cause
>harm? We may not know it now, we may think it is 100% safe
>now but later learn it is only 30% safe....or whatever...more
>harmful than good.
>
>...what are the facts? Are the facts what the vet told you?
>Isn't that based on the information available right now? Is
>it at all possible that over time (short or long term) those
>"facts" change and we learn that the "facts" were simply what
>was thought to be true at that time?


My thinking on this is the 'facts' is the information that is available to us now. Of course, it is completely conceivable the current 'facts' can become obsolete or wrong on ANYTHING. I mean, in 20 years it is completely CONCEIVABLE that someone could find that broccoli is really bad for us. It's ALWAYS POSSIBLE that the 'facts' can change. Look at what is going on with the whole sunexposure debate right now. No one saw that coming...

If we go around thinking like this too much we won't be able to eat, drink, do, etc., anything.
 
>
>My main issue is the superiority complex as well, in addition
>to her trying to force feed her position to us. If I saw a
>post with which I strongly disagreed I'd ignore it--especially
>one as innocent & (I thought) non-controversial as this. Even
>if I felt compelled to respond I would try to do it in a
>gentler way.
>

Well, I took her post as sort of paranoid, mis-informed and a bit unrealistic rather than having a superiority complex. I mean, come on - how the heck does anyone function without a computer and the internet?

Anyway, whatever.
 
"I am disheartened by the way in which some posters who disagree with B & G have thought nothing of robbing her of her dignity by ganging up on her and heaping on mockery and ridicule. Is this any way to handle disagreement no matter how strongly you feel it?

Just my observation for what it's worth.
Manmohini"

Thanks Manmohini :) I've read many of your other posts on this site and sense that you are a very intelligent and respectful person, so I value your input here as well.

I've not read any more of the posts here, but saw you had posted and so I clicked into that, as I've always been intersted in your thoughts, experiences, and opinions. So I'm not aware of what has been said in other's posts, nor do I have the need to be aware as I summed up my contributions in my last post and don't have a need to exchange thoughts beyond that. Even if I did read all the posts that I can at least see have come in since my last one, they would not affect me anyway, as I am confident in what I know and feel. But thank you for your kinds words. :)

I do agree with you though ... there are ways to express yourself that are more rspectful, mature, productive, dignified, and intelligent than others ... I could just as easily have expressed my thoughts using such harsh and disrespectful terms as "ignorant" "blind" "stupid" etc, but I did not. So it does illuminate differences between people. Like I mentioned before, it certainly is eye-opening to observe these kinds of thoughts and behaviors that can be accessed through the internet.

THanks again for your words Manmohini. :) And despite the negative/ disrespectful attitudes in response to my posts that you have read, hopefully there are a couple of posts mixed in there from folks whose minds are open to new awarenesses and ideas, or from folks who disagree in ways that are productive and intelligent.
 
I have skimmed through the threads....some people have remained open-minded (Sarah comes to mind with some very good points).

Sometimes people can be really mean, you know....just ignore it. If people are laughing in the office at your expense then they probably either need to be working or getting a life.

Sara
 
Sara - Did you happen to skim post 41? I think that is where things became apocalyptic and spiraled downhill. :( If you missed that one, then it would be hard to understand the reactions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Our Newsletter

Get awesome content delivered straight to your inbox.

Top