savoir-faire

The latest study really backed up the Lancet study. You do not have the full text-I have an online subscription to the NEJM-I will copy and paste that this study states it is most likely an underestimate by 50%. BRB.

savoir-faire

Discussion

The IFHS 2006 was a large health survey that included the collection of data regarding rates of death. In spite of the difficult circumstances in Iraq, the experienced survey coordinating teams managed to visit 89% of the 1086 selected clusters, and household response rates were high throughout the country.

Recall of deaths in household surveys with very few exceptions suffer from underreporting of deaths. None of the methods to assess the level of underreporting provide a clear indication of the numbers of deaths missed in the IFHS. All methods presented here have shortcomings and can suggest only that as many as 50% of violent deaths may have gone unreported. Household migration affects not only the reporting of deaths but also the accuracy of sampling and computation of national rates of death

savoir-faire

NEJM -- Violence-Related Mortality in Iraq from 2002 to 2006

If you read this study carefully they concluded it was most likely a 50% underreporting which put this study within the margin or error of the Lancet study. Furthermore both studies concluded before the period of greatest violence-so clearly hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have died in this conflict.

Tashah

Yes... Violence-Related Mortality in Iraq. There is little doubt that a significant number of Iraqi's have perished since OIF. The basic problems I have with these survey's is threefold. One, it is virtually impossible to identify the causal perpretrator of death in each instance. Two, the pertinint circumstances in each instance are not deliniated nor examined in-depth. Three, in light of the previous two shortcomings, these survey's can be easily manipulated for political and/or propaganda purposes.

__________________

Diogenes

Agreed, Tashah. I recall the "mass graves" in Kosovo that turned out to have individual markers - here in the US we call them cemeteries and every town has at least one, but that sort of description did not serve the political agenda of the time.

Billo_Really

What is the formula for telling that a particular survey has been politically manipulated? And why didn't you take such apprehension during the pre-war bull**** we were getting from the Administration? Why didn't you demand more proof to back up their (the Administrations') claims? Maybe if people, such as yourself, would have used more scrutiny after hearing claims of WMD's in Iraq, we wouldn't be in this war?

__________________

"With neocons, it just goes to show, when the
bar is low enough, you can never be too wrong!"

Tashah

How does one guarantee absolute veracity in such a survey while in the midst of a war zone? No matter what the morgue numbers may be, it was virtually impossible to determine the causal party of responsibility. It was also beyond the ability of the survey to assign degrees of culpability to the deceased.

This is one of the problems I have with people like you Billo. You throw up numbers from a statistically incomplete survey and with malice...imply that America is wholly responsible for the sum total. Such a generalized scenario is statistically impossible. I therefore can only attribute your attitude to either mathematical incompetence, political agenda, or perhaps both.

Lol. You've got to be jesting. Like untold millions of fellow citizens, I placed my faith in the sitting US administration, the sitting US Congress, US and foreign intelligence agencies, the media watchdogs, and the verifiable history of Saddam's usage of chemical WMDs and previous Iraqi attempts to explore and fabricate nuclear WMDs.

To even suggest at this juncture that the millions of duped American citizens are somehow complicit in the illicit invasion of Iraq is dishonest and insulting in the extreme. Shame on you.

Joe Hill

Since "credibility" and "GOP" are mutually exclusive, I have consistently found that the critics of this NeoCon Mafia's war claims have been proven right time after time. The Lancet will be no exception.

Just Foreign Policy - Iraqi Death Estimate

Chicken Hawks that simply deny all sources have no credibility. They have effectively debunked themselves. Since the US has been relying on more air power to reduce their own contact with the Iraqi public and thus bring down politically damaging casualty figures, a higher Iraqi death count is inevitable, with about seven civilians killed for every armed defender.

__________________
"We can have democracy in this country or we can have
great wealth in a few hands, but we can't have both.":
Louis D. Brandeis

Joe Hill

Hmmmm. I love the sound of chirping crickets.

Billo_Really

Since you are not an epidimeologist, you're not really qualified to make a statement like that.

I "throw up numbers" like that as one of the options on the table. You cannot tell me with any certainty that survey is not true. And I challenge you to show one post of mine where I said that it was "absolutely" true.

A month before we attacked, Hans Blix told the UN his team of inspectors hadn't found any WMD's. Didn't that present a red flag for you? I mean, if the man whose job it was to physically find them, had not of found them at that time, why believe that war-mongering idiot in Washington? I didn't believe all this talk about Iraq from day one and I've been against this war since before it started.
Whether you like it or not, as a US citizen, yes, we are all culpable in this war since it is being fought in our name. We all share responsibility for all these deaths because it was OUR decision (collectively as a nation) to go to war.