There’s a report in National Journal today that demolishes the credibility of the 2006 Lancet survey of Iraq war casualties. According to the report, the failures are threefold:
On the first count, there are numerous examples provided, including an estimate that “two months before the start of the second major American military operation to restore order,” 52 deaths in 29 households were used to extrapolate a casualty estimate for the city of 50,000 to 70,000 dead. That in a city of 250,000. The result was so absurd that the Lancet “dropped it from the study.” As for the lack of transparency:
Combine the fact that George Soros funded the study and the timing of its release, just days before the 2006 election–it can’t be claimed that this survey, which boasts a figure for Iraqi deaths an order of magnitude greater than any other figure out there, was anything but a fraud. Update: A fried writes, “but you didn’t mention many other ridiculous features of the Hopkins studies, such as the first study’s claim that 30 Iraqis were killed each day in road accidents with US vehicles, or Cluster 33 in the second article, or Lafta’s work for Saddam and Allah, or Roberts’ acknowledgment that high-death claims would aid jihadis…” Yes, there’s a lot more in the piece. It’s worth plodding through the whole thing.
