The MMR vaccine, since it was wrongly and fraudulently associated with autism, has been a favourite of media scare stories concerning healthcare.  A recent example was the Mail on Sunday’s recent story linking a legitimate and successful claim for compensation following a possible injury caused by the vaccine to autism, despite this forming no part of the claim nor the reasons given for its award. Both Evan Harris and Martin Robbins have good analyses of this story in the Guardian’s new science blogs section, citing statements by Nadine Dorries, MP, a member of the Health Select committee, suggesting that she, despite having responsibilities as a politician, in intent on fanning the dying embers of a seemingly settled controversy.

Dorries has some ability to attract press attention thanks to questionable judgement and simplistic, and factually wrong, moral judgements but she shows little sign of being much of a threat to society’s understanding of healthcare via her political career.  She is not an obvious choice for any ministerial or lesser government role and has shown a reluctance to attend the meetings of any committee of which she is a member.

However, the views of politicians can have an impact on healthcare.  Tony Blair, the former Labour Prime Minister, whose willingness to indulge his wife, Cherie’s, association with alternative health gurus, who are typically associated with anti-vaccination views, has been accused of giving credibility to opponents of MMR when he refused to say whether or not his son, Leo, born when he was in office, was vaccinated despite eventually issuing a statement following press attention.

The reason we have refused to say whether Leo has had the MMR vaccine is because we never have commented on the medical health or treatment of our children.

The advice to parents to have the MMR jab is one of scores of pieces of advice or campaigns the government supports in matters ranging from underage sex to teenage alcohol abuse or smoking, to different types of advice for very young children on a huge range of activities from breastfeeding to safe play.Once we comment on one, it is hard to see how we can justify not commenting on them at all.

However, the suggestion that the government is advising parents to have the MMR jab whilst we are deliberately refraining from giving our child the treatment because we know it is dangerous, is offensive beyond belief.

For the record, Cherie and I both entirely support the advice as we have consistently said throughout.

It is not true that we believe the MMR vaccine to be dangerous or believe that it is better to have separate injections, as has been maliciously suggested in the press, or believe that it is linked to autism.

We now know that, according to Cherie Blair’s autobiography, Leo was vaccinated and a Daily Mail report on Tony Blair’s autobiography suggests that the press were briefed off the record at the time that this was the case, although he appears to regret that he had not been clearer on this issue.

Tony Blair is yesterday’s man though, and while his past actions may influence current events he is no longer a frame of reference for current UK politics.  He is out of parliament and out of favour with respect to his party, the press and the public.  We have a new government, a coalition between Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, whose views will now influence public health care.  Given that the Prime Minister, David Cameron, has a new baby it is inevitable that some questions of infant healthcare will be framed with reference to his new born daughter.  With this in mind it is worth considering his and his party’s previous views on MMR.

In the past Cameron has stated that his children have had the MMR but that he supports the option of single vaccines if vaccine uptake continues to fall.  This support for single vaccines was a feature of the Conservatives when they were in opposition with the then shadow, and now current Health Secretary Andrew Lansley sharing these views.  Single vaccines are regarded as being no safer than the MMR vaccine, and carry additional risks with respect to intervals between vaccinations, and single mumps vaccines are now not licensed for use in the UK.  By contrast the Liberal Democrats, primarily via Evan Harris, then an MP, have supported the MMR vaccine as the best option.

However, as supporters of the coalition government often argue, positions held in opposition are often lost in the compromises that come with the wielding of actual power and there is little sign that the current government is going to change policy on MMR, despite the Conservative Party’s previous views.  Jeremy Lefroy, a Conservative MP, recently asked the Health Secretary if he would ‘assess the merits of reintroducing a license for the single mumps vaccine?’.  The answer was to defer to the MHRA – which typically uses an evidence based approach to drug licensing and has opposed single vaccines in the past.

The Daily Mail remain opposed to MMR, despite all the evidence of safety and the punishment inflicted on the disgraced Andrew Wakefield, and it would be wise of politicians not to give credibility to their views.  I hope that questions with respect to MMR will not be asked of Cameron, but that if they are he answers sensibly and in accordance with the evidence.