Lawry,

News last night reported 22 civilians died during the day.

Somehow, the other 778 civilian deaths forecast by the highly
scientific Lancet survey have all been buried surreptitiously.

And the 5,446 family members belonging to these deaths have all
kept quiet about the carnage. (Families average 7 members.)

I'm still using my approximate 800 a day until I get the exact
dates that were included in the survey. I saw another figure of
713 civilians a day dying - but when I change it will be to as
'exact' a daily figure as I can get.

In any event, the Lancet figures are so far from reality as to be
laughable - as were the figures from the first survey.

It reminds me of the IPCC statistics that showed that by 2050, or
thereabouts, the GNP of South Africa would be greater than the
GNP of the US.

I must say the resistance to commonsense appraisal of the results
of this statistical "science" is on all fours with the religious
people's refusal to recognize anything that might conflict with
their devout faith.



Harry

*********************************
Henry George School of Los Angeles
Box 655  Tujunga  CA  91042
818 352-4141
*********************************
 
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ldb
>Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 12:54 PM
>To: Barry; [email protected]
>Subject: Re: [Futurework] Slaughter of Armageddon proportions: 
>theLancet report
>
>Hi, all,
>I'm on the road right now but wanted to confirm the 650,000 
>figure; it is approx. the same as the figure that US intel 
>came up with independently and currently uses.
>
>Cheers,
>Lawry 
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: "Barry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [email protected]
>Sent: 10/13/06 1:00 PM
>Subject: Re: [Futurework] Slaughter of Armageddon proportions: 
>the Lancet     report
>
>
>An interesting mathematical exercise is to check the CIA World 
>Factbook entry for Iraq 
>(https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/iz.html). 
>Here we find that the population of the country is 26,783,383, 
>and the death rate is 5.37 deaths/1,000 population (5.5, 
>according to the Lancet).  
>Now, if we multiply the death rate by the population, we get 
>143826.8 deaths per year. If we then multiply this annual 
>death toll times 4 (approximately the duration of US-Iraq 
>hostilities to date), we get
>575307.07 - quite close to the 650,000 figure that is met with 
>such disbelief in some areas.
>
>  Now, I know that a number of different criticisms can be 
>leveled at my fairly simplistic formula. And, I realize that 
>it is not very precise.  
>But, I think it lends quite a bit of credence to the 650,000 
>figure from the Lancet article.
>
>
>
>
>On Oct 12, 2006, at 1:43 PM, Karen Watters Cole wrote:
>
>> In case anyone is interested, here is the full report in The 
>Lancet, a 
>> pdf of 8 pages 
>> http://www.thelancet.com/webfiles/images/journals/lancet/
>> s0140673606694919.pdf
>>  
>> with this extracted:
>>  
>> The crude mortality rate in the pre-invasion period was 5·5
per 1000 
>> people per year (95% CI 4·3–7·1) and for the overall
post-invasion 
>> period was 13·3 per 1000 people per year (10·9–16·1; table 3).
A 
>> four-fold increase in the crude mortality rate was recorded 
>during the 
>> study period, with a high of 19·8 per 1000 people per year 
>(14·6–26·7) 
>> between June, 2005, and June, 2006 (figure 2 and table 3).
>>  
>> Post-invasion excess mortality rates showed much the same
escalating 
>> trend, rising from 2·6 per 1000 people per year (0·6–4·7)
above the 
>> baseline rate in 2003 to 14·2 per 1000 people per year
(8·6–21·5) in
>> 2006 (figure 2 and table 3). Excess mortality is attributed 
>mainly to 
>> an increase in the violent death rate; however, an increase in
the 
>> non-violent death rate was noted in the later part of the 
>> post-invasion period (2005–06). The post-invasion non-violent
excess 
>> mortality rate was 0·7 per 1000 people per year (–1·2 to 3·0).
>>  
>> Violent deaths that were directly attributed to coalition 
>forces or to 
>> air strikes were classified as coalition violent deaths. In 
>many other 
>> cases the responsible party was not known, or the households
were 
>> hesitant to specifically identify them. Deaths attributable to
the 
>> coalition accounted for 31% (95% CI 26–37) of post-invasion
violent 
>> deaths. The proportion of violent deaths attributable to the 
>coalition 
>> was much the same across periods (p=0·058). However, the 
>actual number 
>> of violent deaths, including those that resulted from
coalition 
>> forces, increased every year after the invasion.
>>  
>> Deaths in men of military age, defined as 15–44 years of age,
were 
>> disproportionately high and accounted for 59% (52–65) of 
>post-invasion 
>> violent deaths, despite this subgroup accounting for only 
>24·4% of the 
>> Iraqi population.16 No difference in the proportion of 
>violent deaths 
>> in men of military age was noted between deaths attributed to
the 
>> coalition or other/unknown sources (p=0·168). Mortality rates
by 
>> Governorate are shown in figure 3.
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> _______________________________________________
>> Futurework mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Futurework mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
>



_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to