I don't know that I care what the number is. It's too high no matter what it 
is. That said, The Lancet is a peer-reviewd journal so there has to be some 
sort of argument to be made for the methodology. I do not know what the 
methodology is, or whether the number is accurate, but if you think that their 
review protocols are invalid, welp let's hope you don't visit the doctor much. 
Unless you think that it's some sort of story they made up in this one 
instance. A new variation on "you're only saying that because you hate 
America/George Bush/Baby Jesus" I guess.

>Getting a very accurate count, akin to the U.S. military count, is virtually
>impossible. But getting a decent count- within an order of magnitude, say,
>should be fairly simple. Despite the dangers and the limitations, reporters
>seem to have done a pretty good job of reporting specific incidents of
>violence around Iraq, as the daily rattle of bombings, shootings, and
>discoveries of dead bodies would suggest.
>
>Given that reporting, you could go back and calculate an average daily total
>for deaths and then arrive at a number of total deaths over a specific
>period. It wouldn't be very accurate- nothing more than an estimate, really,
>but it would certainly be accurate within an order of magnitude. Let's
>assume that 50 civilians a day died, on average, during that time period.
>That comes out to around the 50,000 number that various groups have
>estimated. Does anyone really believe that daily toll is significantly
>higher than 50? Say 100, or 200, or even 300? Many of us have been following
>the war since the beginning, and I for one have never gotten a sense that
>100 or more people were dying everyday. Yesterday, for example, more than
>100 people were killed in suicide attacks, and it was a very prominent story
>because of the body count. If there were body counts like that everyday, the
>stories on the news would be totally different than what we see.
>
>
>
>On 3/7/07, So Kenfused wrote:
>>
>> I find it hard to believe that anyone considers the Lancet report to
>> have any credibility. It made big splashy headlines but was immediately
>> refuted by just abut everyone, including those against the war.
>>
>> It would not surprise me that Iraqi casualties have been under reported.
>
>
>
>
>-- 
>---------------
>Robert Munn
>www.funkymojo.com

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Upgrade to Adobe ColdFusion MX7
Experience Flex 2 & MX7 integration & create powerful cross-platform RIAs
http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/

Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:229727
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5

Reply via email to