IT was twenty-six years ago that the (now discredited) Doctor Andrew Wakefield claimed a link between human vaccination and enterocolitis and autism.

In an article published in the highly respected Lancet medical journal, he put forward (now discredited) ‘evidence’ that the Measles, Mumps and Rubella (MMR) vaccination was causing autism in children.

In fact, many of the patients in his ‘study’ were actually litigants in a claim against the manufacturers of the vaccine and his (now discredited) ‘research’ was funded by the same group.

Ultimately, Doctor Wakefield was struck off by The British General Medical Council for his fraud after a 2004 Sunday Times investigation proved financial conflicts of interest, with Wakefield reportedly standing to earn around £30 million annually from the sale of test kits, but mud, as they say, sticks.

So much so that it took two decades for vaccination levels in children to climb back up to their pre-1998 levels. Indeed, vaccination rates dropped from 92 per cent to 73 per cent and, in some parts of London, were as low as 50 per cent.

The consequences of the scandal have been far reaching, with recent outbreaks of measles affecting hundreds across Europe and in the UK. All preventable infections.

Recent discussions about the issue have caused the National Autistic Society to issue a statement saying, ‘There is no link between autism and vaccines. Despite research proving this comprehensively, damaging myths about autism persist in some circles – and must be challenged.’

But still there are people who believe him!

But can you imagine if there had been Facebook and the internet as we know it in 1998? How quickly would Dr Wakefield’s utterly unethical, spurious, fraudulent nonsense have gone viral? How many people with no knowledge of vaccines, immunology or autism would have pressed ‘comment’ and added their tuppence-worth with their opinion presented as ‘fact’?

Unfortunately, this is happening with canine vaccination. Out of the woodwork have appeared delusional individuals who have decided, in their eminent wisdom, that their poorly-trained pet has become autistic as a result of vaccination.

Let’s be clear here, the British Veterinary Association stated unequivocally that there is ‘no scientific evidence to suggest autism in dogs or a link between vaccination and autism’. And so say all of us.

Have little doubt that many of the 700,000 people who are affected by the developmental disorder will be deeply offended on two counts. First, to suggest that autism is a condition that can be contracted and, second, to suggest that autism can be compared to the aberrant, bad behaviour of some dogs.

In my opinion, to do so is insulting. But it will happen.

The posts on social media will continue and the flames of mistruth, misinformation and anecdote will be fanned.

The outcome is inevitable.

Parvovirus will rear its ugly head. Leptospirosis will debilitate and kill. Distemper, so prevalent in the 1970s but virtually vaccinated out of the UK, has returned with imported dogs and unvaccinated dogs will be at risk.

But vaccinations, which have done so much good across the world, will continue to be the whipping boy of the conspiracy theorists.