Dogs cannot get ‘autism’, British Veterinary Association warns after ‘anti-vaxx’ movement spread to pets

Dogs cannot get ‘autism’, the British Veterinary Association has warned, after the ‘anti-vaccine’ movement spread to pets.

'Anti-vaxxers' believe that immunisations have harmful side effects and may be the cause of autism in children - beliefs widely debunked by the medical community.

This theory is increasingly being applied to pets, particularly in the US, and there are fears it is spreading to the UK and could cause already low vaccination rates to fall.

The BVA said: “We are aware of an increase in anti-vaccination pet owners in the US who have voiced concerns that vaccinations may lead to their dogs developing autism-like behaviour.

“But there is currently no scientific evidence to suggest autism in dogs or a link between vaccination and autism.”

“All medicines have potential side effects but in the case of vaccines these are rare and the benefits of vaccination in protecting against disease far outweigh the potential for an adverse reaction.”

Senior Vice President Gudrun Ravetz added: “Vaccinations save lives and are an important tool in keeping our pets healthy.

“We know from the example of the MMR vaccine and its now disproven link to autism in children that scaremongering can lead to a loss of public confidence in vaccination and knee-jerk reactions that can lead to outbreaks of disease.


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/25/dogs-cannot-get-autism-british-veterinary-association-warns/

I’m not even sure how one would test for autism in a dog.

eddie wrote:I’m not even sure how one would test for autism in a dog.

Well if it cannot be tested, then no dog can then have autism then, can they.

As how then can any dog owner claim their dog has autism?

Think about it Eddie

Dunno.....

BUT....my english springer spaniel is just plain batshit crazy.....does that count?????

Didge wrote:

eddie wrote:I’m not even sure how one would test for autism in a dog.

Well if it cannot be tested, then no dog can then have autism then, can they.

As how then can any dog owner claim their dog has autism?

Think about it Eddie

Hahahahahahaha I had a point but can’t remember it now.

Sometimes I ain’t too bright.

Lord Foul wrote:Dunno.....

BUT....my english springer spaniel is just plain batshit crazy.....does that count?????

That’s the breed. They’re all batshit crazy.

                 

"Anti-vaxxers" the demented demon spawn offspring of Vegans interbreeding among themselves...

Those fruitloop anti-vaxxerss should be banned from both having children and keeping pets..

Any and all objectors and dissidents could then be taken out the back and shot.

This is a very debatable topic. Young dogs definitely need vaccinations. Old dogs? After 10 years old, my vet told me that they have built up enough defence and that boosters only needed to be given every three years or so, not every year, if at all. We didn't get any of our dogs booster vaccinated after 10 years old, and our last dog died of old age at 14. The one before that at 16.

Vaccinations are a huge income for vets. At £30 to £50 a shot, I'm sure they only pay pennies for the actual drug itself.

A small percentage of dogs do die from vaccinations but one has to weigh up the benefits.  

According to my vet leptospirosis vaccine needs to be given every year with parvo and distemper only needed every three years in older dogs.

Don't get me started on Vets, most are ripping off pet owners because they know we'll pay anything to stop our pets suffering.
Yesterday my Son took my Cat to the vets for nail clipping and health check.
Total time spent from when Cat started treatment, 8 mins,
Vet charges, £38.67.
If that's not a rip off what is?
Time the Government did something about this

A lot of vaccinations are all about the money.
Everyone knows that. Unless you’re a sucker.

nicko wrote:Don't get me started on Vets,   most are ripping off pet owners because they know we'll pay anything to stop our pets suffering.
Yesterday my Son took my Cat to the vets for nail clipping and health check.
Total time spent from when Cat started treatment, 8 mins,
Vet charges, £38.67.
If that's not a rip off what is?
Time the Government did something about this

There are vets that don't charge for a consultation. That alone knocks you back £30.

I get a discount from my vet

I take 7 dogs and 5 cats in one day for their vax........
on a more serious note...these antis should have their phone lines disconnected, be banned from the internet and ONLY allowed "non internet connected phones" with the potential for 20 years inside for breaching those conditions....

Oh and be placed on the "fookin idiots" register, visible to anyone who wants .....

eddie wrote:A lot of vaccinations are all about the money.
Everyone knows that.  Unless you’re a sucker.

Really?

They are not about helping animals and humans by providing protection from illnesses?

For fuck sake, please stop posting such bollocks

Didge wrote:

eddie wrote:
A lot of vaccinations are all about the money.
Everyone knows that.  Unless you’re a sucker.

Really?

They are not about helping animals and humans by providing protection from illnesses?

For fuck sake, please stop posting such bollocks

Apparently, eddie still believes that she knows much more, and better, than the medicos and vets...

No need for 5 or 6 years university and a five-year internship; nor all those $$billions$$ wasted every year on research and developmemt..

Everybody can simply listen to eddie's mutterings instead.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Didge wrote:

Really?

They are not about helping animals and humans by providing protection from illnesses?

For fuck sake, please stop posting such bollocks

Apparently, eddie still believes that she knows much more, and better, than the medicos and vets...

No need for 5 or 6 years university and a five-year internship;  nor all those $$billions$$ wasted every year on research and developmemt..

Everybody can simply listen to eddie's mutterings instead.

It annoys me no end, when Eddie comes out with such riduclous views around this

She sadly buys into conspiracy nonesense and to me and why others do so, is because they have no idea, what it was like before people did have vaccinations. If people starting dying in droves, she would understand how her views are so poor on this.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:                  

"Anti-vaxxers" the demented demon spawn offspring of Vegans interbreeding among themselves...

Those fruitloop anti-vaxxerss should be banned from both having children and keeping pets..

Any and all objectors and dissidents could then be taken out the back and shot.

Are you suggesting that veganism is a genetically inherited condition?

Raggamuffin wrote:

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:                  

"Anti-vaxxers" the demented demon spawn offspring of Vegans interbreeding among themselves...

Those fruitloop anti-vaxxerss should be banned from both having children and keeping pets..

Any and all objectors and dissidents could then be taken out the back and shot.

Are you suggesting that veganism is a genetically inherited condition?

https://phys.org/news/2017-06-modern-european-genes-favor-vegetarianism.html

Is there any evidence that being anti-vaccination is the result of genetically inherited veganism?

Raggamuffin wrote:Is there any evidence that being anti-vaccination is the result of genetically inherited veganism?

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2010/04/01/scientists-discover-gene-and-part-of-brain-that-make-people-gullible/

Is there any justification for saying that people who are opposed to vaccinations should be banned from having children or pets, and that anyone who disagrees with that should be shot?

Raggamuffin wrote:Is there any justification for saying that people who are opposed to vaccinations should be banned from having children or pets, and that anyone who disagrees with that should be shot?

Do you not think its a form of child abuse, to deny a child the medical help they need to prevent illnesses?

I dont think anyone should be shot, buts its certainly open for debate, whether such views by parents are completely irresponsible. When they place their children at risk. Children are not property to own by parents. I do not think the child needs to be taken away, only that the state takes action to ensure the well being of that child and ensures that they are vaccinated. To not do so, places that child, as well as many others at risk. As universal human rights, overrule the warped beliefs of any parent

Raggamuffin wrote:
Is there any justification for saying that people who are opposed to vaccinations should be banned from having children or pets, and that anyone who disagrees with that should be shot?

Why should a bunch of anti-social, anti-science crazies such as vegans and 'anti-vaxxers' be allowed to breed or keep animals...

Just because those vegans and anti-vaxxers were born, per chance..

Allowing them such undeserved freedoms is simply tantamount to cruelty and neglect against children, and animals, respectively.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:
Is there any justification for saying that people who are opposed to vaccinations should be banned from having children or pets, and that anyone who disagrees with that should be shot?

Why should a bunch of anti-social, anti-science crazies such as vegans and 'anti-vaxxers' be allowed to breed or keep animals...

Just because those vegans and anti-vaxxers were born, per chance..

Allowing them such undeserved freedoms is simply tantamount to cruelty and neglect against children, and animals, respectively.

Are you saying that only vegans are anti vaccination? It's interesting that you believe in selective breeding. Shades of Hitler?

Why shouldn’t Vegans keep pets? It’s not like they’ll be tempted to eat them.


And you are assuming that all anti-vaxxers are vegan.

Raggamuffin wrote:

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:


Why should a bunch of anti-social, anti-science crazies such as vegans and 'anti-vaxxers' be allowed to breed or keep animals...

Just because those vegans and anti-vaxxers were born, per chance..

Allowing them such undeserved freedoms is simply tantamount to cruelty and neglect against children, and animals, respectively.

Are you saying that only vegans are anti vaccination? It's interesting that you believe in selective breeding. Shades of Hitler?

Your deliberate misrepresentation of what I wrote simply shows poor comprehension on your part, Raggs...

When I clearly wrote "vegans and anti-vaxxers.."

eddie wrote:
Why shouldn’t Vegans keep pets? It’s not like they’ll be tempted to eat them.


And you are assuming that all anti-vaxxers are vegan.

I'm assuming nothing --  see my reply to Raggamuffin, above...

One simple reason why genuine "vegans" (as opposed to the lying pretend-vegans that so many of you seem to associate with..) are opposed to keeping pets ?

Genuine Vegans are opposed to all exploitation of animals --  and that includes having pets and companion animals..   Also --  just how would you expect vegans to feed dogs, cats, ferrets, raptors, snakes or lizards (all meat eaters..) kept as pets  ???

Ladies, he did not say that vegans are anti-vaxxers or vice versa.

Wolfie wrote:Why should a bunch of anti-social, anti-science crazies such as vegans and 'anti-vaxxers' be allowed to breed or keep animals...

Just because those vegans and anti-vaxxers were born, per chance..

To wit:

El Muchacho Tan Padre wrote:Why should a bunch of anti-social, anti-science crazies such as Americans and British be allowed to breed or keep animals...

Just because those Americans and British were born, per chance..

See? Two discrete groups of people, lumped together as being "anti-social, anti-science crazies" yes, but not being described as the same thing.

Ben Mothafuckin' Reilly wrote:Ladies, he did not say that vegans are anti-vaxxers or vice versa.

Wolfie wrote:Why should a bunch of anti-social, anti-science crazies such as vegans and 'anti-vaxxers' be allowed to breed or keep animals...

Just because those vegans and anti-vaxxers were born, per chance..

To wit:

El Muchacho Tan Padre wrote:Why should a bunch of anti-social, anti-science crazies such as Americans and British be allowed to breed or keep animals...

Just because those Americans and British were born, per chance..

See? Two discrete groups of people, lumped together as being "anti-social, anti-science crazies" yes, but not being described as the same thing.

Well, can't argue with the logic of either of those arguments 

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

eddie wrote:
Why shouldn’t Vegans keep pets? It’s not like they’ll be tempted to eat them.


And you are assuming that all anti-vaxxers are vegan.

I'm assuming nothing --  see my reply to Raggamuffin, above...

One simple reason why genuine "vegans" (as opposed to the lying pretend-vegans that so many of you seem to associate with..) are opposed to keeping pets ?

Genuine Vegans are opposed to all exploitation of animals --  and that includes having pets and companion animals..   Also --  just how would you expect vegans to feed dogs, cats, ferrets, raptors, snakes or lizards (all meat eaters..) kept as pets  ???

No matter which way you switch it to make yourself right/ feel better, keeping animals as a meat-eater, is still hypocritical. That goes for all of you.

I’m not returning to tell you why, because you’ve lied to yourself so for long about your logical bullshit and making it fit into your logical way of grouping animals, that I will never change it, nor should I want to, because I am NOT a hypocrite and I actually care very little for any animal.

But don’t sit there, chomping meat and feeding your dog off the same plate and also crying over the culling of dogs in China.

Either all animals are equal or they’re not but don’t make up rubbish excuses so you can lazily eat your cultural food out of habit.

Now, I’m off to eat eggs. They’re baby chickens....and I don’t give a fuck.

eddie wrote:

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:


I'm assuming nothing --  see my reply to Raggamuffin, above...

One simple reason why genuine "vegans" (as opposed to the lying pretend-vegans that so many of you seem to associate with..) are opposed to keeping pets ?

Genuine Vegans are opposed to all exploitation of animals --  and that includes having pets and companion animals..   Also --  just how would you expect vegans to feed dogs, cats, ferrets, raptors, snakes or lizards (all meat eaters..) kept as pets  ???

No matter which way you switch it to make yourself right/ feel better, keeping animals as a meat-eater, is still hypocritical. That goes for all of you.

I’m not returning to tell you why, because you’ve lied to yourself so for long about your logical bullshit and making it fit into your logical way of grouping animals, that I will never change it, nor should I want to, because I am NOT a hypocrite and I actually care very little for any animal.

But don’t sit there, chomping meat and feeding your dog off the same plate and also crying over the culling of dogs in China.

Either all animals are equal or they’re not but don’t make up rubbish excuses so you can lazily eat your cultural food out of habit.

Now, I’m off to eat eggs. They’re baby chickens....and I don’t give a fuck.

1.  I've twisted ("switched") nothing...

2.  I'm not "lying to (myself..)."

3. 5here's nothing "hypoctitical" about my position..

The only way that eddie can honestly be true to herself on this subject, with all of her irrational attacks on the omnivores, farmers (and gardeners..) and pet owners on here, is if :

*  she never eats meat, fish, dairy, nor any foods fertilised with manures or blood and bone;
*  she doesn't own any woollen, leather, cashmere or angora clothing;
*  nor should eddie be keeping any pets that eat meat..

Nor should eddie be killing any spiders, nor pests in her garden --  that's just not kosher.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

eddie wrote:

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:


I'm assuming nothing --  see my reply to Raggamuffin, above...

One simple reason why genuine "vegans" (as opposed to the lying pretend-vegans that so many of you seem to associate with..) are opposed to keeping pets ?

Genuine Vegans are opposed to all exploitation of animals --  and that includes having pets and companion animals..   Also --  just how would you expect vegans to feed dogs, cats, ferrets, raptors, snakes or lizards (all meat eaters..) kept as pets  ???

No matter which way you switch it to make yourself right/ feel better, keeping animals as a meat-eater, is still hypocritical. That goes for all of you.

I’m not returning to tell you why, because you’ve lied to yourself so for long about your logical bullshit and making it fit into your logical way of grouping animals, that I will never change it, nor should I want to, because I am NOT a hypocrite and I actually care very little for any animal.

But don’t sit there, chomping meat and feeding your dog off the same plate and also crying over the culling of dogs in China.

Either all animals are equal or they’re not but don’t make up rubbish excuses so you can lazily eat your cultural food out of habit.

Now, I’m off to eat eggs. They’re baby chickens....and I don’t give a fuck.

1.  I've twisted ("switched") nothing...

2.  I'm not "lying to (myself..)."

3. 5here's nothing "hypoctitical" about my position..

The only way that eddie can honestly be true to herself on this subject, with all of her irrational attacks on the omnivores, farmers (and gardeners..) and pet owners on here, is if :

*  she never eats meat, fish, dairy, nor any foods fertilised with manures or blood and bone;
*  she doesn't own any woollen, leather, cashmere or angora clothing;
*  nor should eddie be keeping any pets that eat meat..

Nor should eddie be killing any spiders, nor pests in her garden --  that's just not kosher.

You didn’t read my post, or any of my other numerous posts that tell you this....

I don’t claim to care about animals. I don’t care how they die or how they live....So I really don’t see your point. YOU claim to care, as do all the othe meat eaters on this thread.

Does anyone read what people actually write? It’s a waste of my time.

You don't care how they live or how they die ?You really are a caring person--------Not !

nicko wrote:You don't care how they live or how they die ?You really are a caring person--------Not !

I care enough that I hope that no animals ever suffer, but I’m not a hypocrite. You eat meat so you don’t care how animals live or die either, do you?

Would you send your cat to the slaughterhouse if it needed putting down due to an incurable illness?

That, eddie is why nicko and I prefer if possible to get as much meat as possible whilst shooting,rather than from butchers etc.However, common sense pragmatism requires that a certain amount must be sourced from shops.Of course if we culled the hopeless/useless from society, along with the plain unnecessary we would have bigger hunting grounds.

On the subject of vaccinations,one thing your cat and dog are immunised against is leptospirosis.......this is deadly to humans too and is caught from rodent pee. SO vaccinating your pet is necessary from a human health view point too.

YOU do realise dont you that the idiot anti pet brigade ALSO intend to remove ALL assistance animals from service, so no guide dogs....the blind can just get on with it.....No PTSD dogs, so the sufferers can just "pull themselves together and learn to cope" or alternatively just f **k off and die.

All horses would be allowed to die out

And in the attempt to replace wool the use of plastics with its consequent toxic legacy would increase many fold......And the replacement would be inferior in every respect........just at a point in time when we should be doing everything possible to move away from such artificial and environmentally damaging items.

I’m not against vaccinating dogs. I never said I was.
I also said I’d never buy medicine online.

My point is exactly what I’ve been saying throughout the thread.

Oh, and MORE shite from the anti pet brigade is the idiotic claim that Cats, are the cause of the decline in song birds....utter tosh.
This may be true in the urban centers.....though cities are hardly the best environment anyway,and even in towns the figures are doubtful, but in rural areas the decline is largely down to increased predadtion by rapidly rising corvid (crows,magpies,jays etc) populations. Songbird populations in my woodland have risen 300%this year due to a heavy cull of crows and magpies I carried out last year.

I like how you seize upon one small part of my post ......

Sorry eddie that post is total rubbish, [when your in a hole, stop digging] !

Lord Foul wrote:I like how you seize upon one small part of my post ......

I like how you ignored my points. I’m not going to keep repeating myself.

nicko wrote:Sorry eddie that post is total rubbish,    [when your in a hole, stop digging] !

Okay, you think it’s rubbish. Fair enough.
You didn’t answer my question though.
People often don’t answer my questions directly. They skirt around and change the subject to something I’m not even debating.

eddie wrote:

nicko wrote:You don't care how they live or how they die ?You really are a caring person--------Not !

I care enough that I hope that no animals ever suffer, but I’m not a hypocrite. You eat meat so you don’t care how animals live or die either, do you?

Would you send your cat to the slaughterhouse if it needed putting down due to an incurable illness?

I will answer your question and have stated before I am a hypocrite, as I do eat meat

Have never denied this

I do not "fully" care about "all" animals, as i do eat meat, but I do certainly care about many animals. Many of which are ones i do not eat. The ones I eat, tend to be in abundance and produced solely for the purpose to eat meat. Though some of these practices are also poor, to say the least. It does not then mean i do not care about the welfare and well being of many animals. Espcially those endangered.

My point on the likes of Victor, Wolf and Nicko, is they do care about animals in how they hunt them and that they do so in many cases to eat. If all the world lived actually by their lifestyles and only hunted what was need to be eaten. Then it would be unlikely that many animals would be on the endangered list.

No I would not send a terminal ill cat to a slaughterhouse, as again its not something that I would eat.

A family pet pig? No problem, as bacon is delicious.

Thank you for your honesty.

I don’t know why people try so hard to hide that they can be inconsistent. I sure am! But at least I admit it.

Thank you didge. I really mean that. I do love raw honesty.

eddie wrote:I’m not against vaccinating dogs. I never said I was.
I also said I’d never buy medicine online.

My point is exactly what I’ve been saying throughout the thread.

We used to buy our dog's insulin on line. It was a third cheaper than at the vet's and exactly the same stuff. Mind you, you needed a prescription from the vet to purchase it.

eddie wrote:

nicko wrote:You don't care how they live or how they die ?You really are a caring person--------Not !

I care enough that I hope that no animals ever suffer, but I’m not a hypocrite. You eat meat so you don’t care how animals live or die either, do you?

Would you send your cat to the slaughterhouse if it needed putting down due to an incurable illness?

that's just being unrealistic though
Life feeds on life, suffering is life and life is suffering. it is the natural order, it is how it was long before our ancestor came down from the trees and it will be the way it is long after we are gone.

Just because you class some life as unfeeling because it doesn't have a face, doesn't mean it wasn't every bit as alive as a chicken or ourselves. You are a Sentient life form you cannot sustain your own life without feeding on other life forms. that is just reality, You are not a Plant(which I propose are Spiritually superior beings for the fact they can sustain their existence off water and sunlight alone).

Interesting side note an Egg is less of a life form than an Apple
An Egg is just the chicken's period, it has to be fertilised to become a chicken and most we eat aren't fertilised
the Apple on the other hand IS the fertilised offspring of the Apple tree(it is the equivalent of a foetus) if you don't eat it and plant it, It will grow into a living thing.

Lord Foul wrote:
Oh, and MORE shite from the anti pet brigade is the idiotic claim that Cats, are the cause of the decline in song birds....utter tosh.
This may be true in the urban centers.....though cities are hardly the best environment anyway,and even in towns the figures are doubtful, but in rural areas the decline is largely down to increased predadtion by rapidly rising corvid (crows,magpies,jays etc) populations. Songbird populations in my woodland have risen 300%this year due to a heavy cull of crows and magpies I carried out last year.

Too true that, Victor...

Down here, it is mostly the smaller birds (finches, wrens, warblers) that are disappearing from suburban areas..

The number one cause here is habitat loss, as smaller trees and shrubs are being clearfelled enmasse to make way for housing, farms and industrial estates, removing both their main food supplies and protection from larger predatory and bullying birds.

This is just weird, why is it impossible to care about animals while still eating meat? Caring about animals doesn't mean you pretend that without hamburgers, cows would never die.

Also, let's say you care about both lions and gazelles. Then you're just sitting on the fence! One's trying to eat the other; the other's trying to starve the other.