Another bogus body count from those who brought us the last bogus body count!

Since Election Day is around the corner, the left-wing propagandists at the British medical Journal Lancet (which used to be one of the premier medical journals in the world) have decided to update the thoroughly debunked study which they published around Election Day 2004. That study purported that almost 200,000 Iraqi civilians had been killed in the Iraq War. The updated study claims that 600,000 Iraqi civilians have so far been killed.
Unfortunately for us all, the same “reseachers” intentionally did just as slipshod a job as they did the first time around. What are the main problems? Well, for one the NY Times reports that the margin for error of the updated study “ranged from 426,369 to 793,663 deaths.”

Pretty amazing, huh? That alone would make the results completely useless. But how did these numbers even come about? Well, the researchers interviewed 1800 Iraqi families, from which they were able to actually confirm 527 deaths. They then extrapolated from there to get the outrageous figure of 600,000. Now, the website Iraqi Body Count keeps track of actual deaths reported by morgues, the military and the media, and reports a number of about 47,000, or less than 10% of what the Lancet researchers report. So, somebody is way off base here, and I don’t think it’s the people at Iraqi Body Count.

One of the many problems with the original study from 2004 was that deaths not actually due to the war were included as war deaths.

In addition, the study includes deaths that the researchers have arbitrarily determined were caused by the invasion but not caused by violence. If they are using the same criteria as the 2004 study, some of these causes of death include:

  • Malnourishment due to bad economic conditions as a result of the invasion.
  • Illness due to degraded health care infrastructure.
  • Deaths due to domestic violence.
  • Deaths due to criminal activity unrelated to the insurgency.
  • And “… civilian deaths resulting from the breakdown in law and order, and deaths due to inadequate health care or sanitation.”

If the researchers continued to include these non-war related causes of death, it would help explain why their numbers are so inflated. But the biggest reason why the numbers are so silly is that deaths of insurgents, Iraqi police, and Iraqi army personnel were all included as civilian deaths! How much more ridiculous can you get? All in all, the timing of the worthless study is designed to effect the November elections, and the media is complicit in the whole episode.


Stumble It!

Discuss this article

Print this page

Share/Save/Bookmark

More from Eye Doc

Trackback

Posted in: Vox Populi | 25 views

 


Comments • comment feed

Thanks VOx, meanwhile this death number factoid estimate was “frontpage” news on the BBC today all over Europe, as though it was declered by God himself.

They even gave a break-down on how scientific and accurate it surely was. I’ll hold my breath waiting for the MSM to debuke the figures. Hell, I’m still holding my breath waiting for some truth about global warming. My lungs are presently the size of beer kegs.

Posted by Zoro Gravatar
October 11th, 2006
 

I have heard of that weird bodycount. I have to agree, it sounded bogus to the get-go. Mostly, that survey counted all the deaths unrealted to accidents or natural causes. The rest seems to be the fgault of the “Evil Americans”.

To those who don’t remember; the Iraquis were under an embargo since the first Gulf War because of the acts of war made by Saddam Hussein. A decade is long enough to send any medical infrastructure back to medieval times.

There’s also the idea that the majority of deaths right now are due to ethnic clashes, not direct millitary actions. We con’t saw Al Quada briging in medecine and food, right?

The more I think of it, the more I believe that the Coalition should put back Saddam Hussein in power and leave Iraq. That would be the best thing they can do for those who regret the “Good Old Times”…

Posted by Toubrouk Gravatar
October 11th, 2006
 

Please leave a reply...




You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>


 
 
 
 
 
tos | privacy policy
MensNEWSdaily® © 2001 - 2009 Java King, Inc.. Opinions found on this website are expressly those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of this publication, its editorial staff or contributors. Words, graphics, audio, video, and all other content published on this domain must adhere to our Terms of Service . JAVA KING, INC AND ITS SUBSIDIARIES, ADVERTISERS, SPONSORS AND AFFILIATES, DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, REPRESENTATIONS OR ENDORSEMENTS HEREIN EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED.
Site Meter