The study is referenced as: "JAMA, 2-20-81". The actual full reference is this: "JAMA 1981 Feb 20;245(7):711-3 Rubella vaccine and susceptible hospital employees. Poor physician participation." This study stated that the rubella susceptible physicians did not participate in a vaccination program. The hospital arranged a vaccination program for all susceptible hospital employees and does not specify how many doctors were actually able to attend. The article did not state that physicians *refused* to be vaccinated. (This same reference is used quite frequently on various anti-vaccination websites - all claiming that the doctors had "refused" vaccination). The study does go on to state: "Systematic analysis of WHY employees, particularly physicians, failed to accept vaccination was NOT performed." and "Fears regarding the frequency of serious reactions or increased absenteeism are NOT confirmed by this study".
The reference is this: "Mendelsohn, Dr. Robert, “The Drive to Immunize Adults,” Herald of Holistic Health Newsletter, Sept.-Oct. 1985." Dr. Mendelssohn is well-known for his stance against vaccinations. The citation is not from a study but, rather, a newsletter written by Dr. Mendelssohn which expresses his opinion - not a scientific study.
The reference is this: "Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine, Dec. 1996. (AMA)". This citation is not a study - it is a letter written to the journal referring to a 1994 study where the authors found that the majority of doctors who were not vaccinated for influenza cited reasons such as lack of time and failure to remember - not that they "refused" to be vaccinated.
Perhaps someday I will have the time to review the remainder of this page but suffice it say that following the very first "fact", it appears that the PAVE site actually falls short of presenting true facts.
PAVE (People Advocating Vaccine Education)
(http://www.vaccines.bizland.com)
The PAVE website, founded by Lisa K. Jillani, is similar in many respects to the Whale and Mercola sites, where misrepresentation of the scientific literature is used in an attempt to validate claims. One example is an article entitled "Five Baffling Vaccination Facts"
The first "fact" listed is that "Approximately 1/3 of doctors refuse vaccinations" and goes on to list citations that seemingly support this contention. When examined closely, one finds: