GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum - View Single Post

WarChild · 04-23-2005, 07:25 PM

There is no credible report or survey saying 100,000 Iraqi Civillians have died as a result of the war. You're talking about the Lancet Study.

The Lacet Survey reports with a 95% confidence rating that the death toll from the invasion was only somewhere between 8000 and 194,000. SOMEWHERE BETWEEN. It could be as low as 8000.

How did the Lancet Survey come up with these numbers? Its researchers interviewed 7868 Iraqis in 988 households in 33 neighbourhoods around Iraq, allegedly chosen randomly, and asked who in the house had died in the 14 months before the invasion and who in the 18 months after. They then concluded there had been 100,000 extra Iraqi deaths since the invasion ? by applying the difference in the two rates to all Iraq's 24 million people.

According to the survey, Iraqis before the war were dying at the rate of just five in 1000 people each year. The death rate among infants was around the average for the region ? about 29 in 1000.

But what evidence we have tells us these pre-war death rates were actually much higher. Dated United Nations figures suggest the overall death rate was well over seven in every 1000 ? or close to, if not higher than, the present rate of 7.9 in every 1000 that the Lancet survey suggests.

But even more persuasive are 2002 figures from UNICEF, which in a much bigger survey of 24,000 households found the infant mortality rate in Iraq before the war was actually a tragic 108 deaths per 1000 infants.

This is more than three times higher than the Lancet survey claims was the case ? and double what even the survey claims is the infant mortality rate today.

Anyone running around spouting "100,000 dead Iraqis" is no more informed than people running around shouting "But Saddam had WMD".

Whatever supports your case though, right?

04-23-2005, 07:25 PM
WarChild Let slip the dogs of war. Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Bermuda Posts: 17,263	There is no credible report or survey saying 100,000 Iraqi Civillians have died as a result of the war. You're talking about the Lancet Study. The Lacet Survey reports with a 95% confidence rating that the death toll from the invasion was only somewhere between 8000 and 194,000. SOMEWHERE BETWEEN. It could be as low as 8000. How did the Lancet Survey come up with these numbers? Its researchers interviewed 7868 Iraqis in 988 households in 33 neighbourhoods around Iraq, allegedly chosen randomly, and asked who in the house had died in the 14 months before the invasion and who in the 18 months after. They then concluded there had been 100,000 extra Iraqi deaths since the invasion ? by applying the difference in the two rates to all Iraq's 24 million people. According to the survey, Iraqis before the war were dying at the rate of just five in 1000 people each year. The death rate among infants was around the average for the region ? about 29 in 1000. But what evidence we have tells us these pre-war death rates were actually much higher. Dated United Nations figures suggest the overall death rate was well over seven in every 1000 ? or close to, if not higher than, the present rate of 7.9 in every 1000 that the Lancet survey suggests. But even more persuasive are 2002 figures from UNICEF, which in a much bigger survey of 24,000 households found the infant mortality rate in Iraq before the war was actually a tragic 108 deaths per 1000 infants. This is more than three times higher than the Lancet survey claims was the case ? and double what even the survey claims is the infant mortality rate today. Anyone running around spouting "100,000 dead Iraqis" is no more informed than people running around shouting "But Saddam had WMD". Whatever supports your case though, right? __________________ . Last edited by WarChild; 04-23-2005 at 07:26 PM..