• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

100,000 Iraqi deaths DUE to war

Status
Not open for further replies.

BorkBork

The Legend of BorkBork: BorkBorkity Borking
Household Survey Sees 100,000 Iraqi Deaths

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm.../ap/20041028/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_death_toll_4

Excerpt:
"LONDON - A survey of deaths in Iraqi households estimates that as many as 100,000 more people may have died throughout the country in the 18 months after the U.S. invasion than would be expected based on the death rate before the war."



That just totally blows my mind. I was thinking around ten or twenty thousand would have been quite a lot, but a HUNDRED THOUSAND? To be fair, this has a small sample size but it's the same method they used in Kosovo to measure war deaths and it is going to be published in the Lancet... Just unbelievable...
 

Particle Physicist

between a quark and a baryon
you forgot this part::


The scientists who wrote the report concede that the data they based their projections on were of "limited precision," because the quality of the information depends on the accuracy of the household interviews used for the study. The interviewers were Iraqi, most of them doctors.
 
D

Deleted member 1235

Unconfirmed Member
I'd believe some Iraqi doctors.

They treated Jessica lynch ok, seem like a good bunch.
 

Willco

Hollywood Square
Considering how quickly the mods have locked every other Iraq-related thread, I am kind of surprised (and somewhat not surprised) that this one is still open.
 
D

Deleted member 1235

Unconfirmed Member
quadriplegicjon said:
while 50,000 is quite a lot. 100,000 is double. .of course it matters.

none of them are part of our monkeysphere.
 

RiZ III

Member
Damn thats horrible. This war has caused the deaths of so many people, and for what? So it can ease the neo-cons paranoia? Selfish scumbags.
 

Dan

No longer boycotting the Wolfenstein franchise
Since when were household surveys used to determine death counts?
 

duderon

rollin' in the gutter
Dan said:
Since when were household surveys used to determine death counts?

How else are civilian deaths going to be estimated?

The military sure as hell isn't keeping track.
 

Pochacco

asking dangerous questions
That's absolutely terrible.
They (specifically the US) better clean things up in Iraq, make things safe, and establish a working society so that those who died actually died for SOMETHING.
 
Saddam would of killed them anyway. With his torture chambers of mass discomfort.

A survey of deaths in Iraqi households estimates that as many as 100,000 more people may have died throughout the country in the 18 months after the U.S. invasion than would be expected based on the death rate before the war

:-|
 

Mooreberg

is sharpening a shovel and digging a ditch
This is like the lolapalooza epidsode of the simpsons.

"Dude, are you being sarcastic?"
"I don't even know anymore."
 
quadriplegicjon said:
you forgot this part::

"The scientists who wrote the report concede that the data they based their projections on were of "limited precision," because the quality of the information depends on the accuracy of the household interviews used for the study. The interviewers were Iraqi, most of them doctors."


Also this part:
Even with Falluja factored out, the survey "indicates that the death toll associated with the invasion and occupation of Iraq is more likely than not about 100,000 people, and may be much higher," the report said.

Or as it's put in another article:
The figure of 100,000 is based on "conservative assumptions", notes Les Roberts at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, US, who led the study.

That estimate excludes Falluja, a hotspot for violence. If the data from this town is included, the study points to about 200,000 excess deaths since the outbreak of war.
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99996596
 

BorkBork

The Legend of BorkBork: BorkBorkity Borking
Like I said earlier, this type of survey was considered accurate and acceptable for war deaths for Kosovo, so it should provide a ballpark figure here as well. The Lancet's a very very big medical journal, so it's not just some dude throwing out crazy numbers.

Plus:
Even with Falluja factored out, the survey "indicates that the death toll associated with the invasion and occupation of Iraq is more likely than not about 100,000 people, and may be much higher," the report said.

If this many people died, then it stands to reason that there is several times this figure in the numbers of injured and permanently disabled. It's just hard to imagine how much suffering the Iraqis have endured pre- and post-war.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom