Iraq - Lancet Study and 100000 casualties
The Lancet study was done last year by a British medical journal and released a few days prior to the US election (Released 29/10/2004, Election Dat 2/11/2004).

That should be the first clue. A study released just prior to the election that looks at the number of deaths that the invasion of iraq supposedly caused. What are the odds it is going to be fair and unbiased (in either direction)?

For some bizarre reason, news outlets in the western world have once again started trumpeting out this bogus 100,00 figure. Maybe its the recent democratic shudders coming from all over the middle east. Egypt, Lebanon, Qatar,Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Palestine. Or because Iraqi Civilians are now taking on the Insurgents and terrorists. The anti-war crowd is being left with the option that maybe Bush was right and are consoling themselves by pushing this bogus study.

For those who don't know, the study found that the increase in deaths from the Iraq invasion was somewhere between 8000 and 196000 at the 95% confidence interval. News organisations and anti-war people are averaging this to be 'about 100,000'. You cannot use this 100,000 figure with any accuracy, as any statistics person will tell you.

Many other bloggers are all over this, so if you want to read more, head on over to Chicago Boyz and Brendan Nyhan and The age of unreason for a few more links and facts and problems with the Lancet Study.

Just remember, next time you hear the 100,000 figure, the person either doesn't know what they are talking about (and is just reiterating a 'fact' they heard somewhere else) or is not being very honest.

The real question is, if a journalist reports this 'fact' have they done their homework and looked into the figure and its source. If they haven't, then they are not being a good journalist. If they have...well, I'll leave you to work out the reasons....
- posted by Alan Grey @ Wednesday, March 23, 2005