http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htiw/articles/20061016.aspx

October 16, 2006: The British medical journal, The
Lancet, has again turned over its pages to political
propaganda pretending to be science. The latest report
claims that a very flawed survey of the Iraqi
population proves that military and terrorist
operations have killed over 600,000 Iraqis in the past
three years. Several things should be noted. First,
the normal death rate of the Iraqi population would
leave about 550,000 dead since early 2003. Second, the
terrorist, and counter-terrorist, violence in Iraq is
largely restricted to four of the 18 provinces. About
a third of the population is involved, mainly because
Baghdad is a principal battleground. But the Lancet
study implies that a third of the population has
suffered these losses, which means over seven percent
of the people living in that area would have died
since 2003. That's a lot of bodies. Where are they?
Where are the standards required for statistics and
data in a study like this? No matter, the Lancet did a
similar study in 2004, just before the U.S.
presidential elections. That study was eventually
discredited, just as the recent one will be. The
editors of The Lancet know that their statistical and
data misdeeds will not be completely known, and
condemned, for several months. Apparently, The Lancet
believes they can get away with this sort of thing,
because they do not run these kinds of deceptions with
their regular medical material. That's great from a
medical point of view, rather less appealing from a
moral standpoint.



Right Wing Gear
http://www.cafepress.com/rightwingmike


_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Reply via email to