Archive for October 11th, 2006

Brecht on Iraqi mortality estimates

When Evil-doing Comes Like Falling Rain

Bertolt Brecht

Like one who brings an important
letter to the counter after
office hours: the counter is already closed.

Like one who seeks to warn the
city of an impending flood,
but speaks another language. They do not understand him.

Like a beggar who knocks for the
fifth time at the door where he has four times been given
something: the fifth time he is hungry.

Like one whose blood flows from
a wound and who awaits
the doctor: his blood goes on flowing.

So do we come forward and report that evil has been done us.

The first time it was reported that our friends were being
butchered there was a cry of horror. Then a hundred
were butched. But when a thousand were butchered
and there was no end to the butchery, a blanket of
silence spread.

When evil-doing comes like falling rain, no body calls out
’stop!’

When crimes begin to pile up they become invisible. When
sufferings become unendurable the cries are no longer
heard. The cries, too, fall like rain in summer.

Add comment October 11th, 2006

CNN and Zogby on Iraq mortality study — “as good as it gets”

CNN has more positive coverage of the new mortality survey. It includes our Great Epidemiologist denouncing the study as not credible and “it’s metholodology is pretty well discredited.” CNN consulted several experts, including John ogby, who praised the study and its methodology. Watch:

Or read transcript here. Extract:

JOHN ZOGBY, ZOGBY INTERNATIONAL: The methodology of the survey, I think, from what I’ve seen so far is quite good, following all the rules of random sampling to a degree that it’s possible in a country like Iraq, and cluster sampling. zeroing in on sampling points that are representative.

I think where some of the disconnect may very well be is that this was indeed according to the methodology statement that I read a nationwide survey, including clusters of areas that are not within the daily purview of where the media are and where many public officials are who report those body counts.

And so, I mean, translated, the media clustered in about five or six cities, and that’s where much of the body count comes from. There is so much more to Iraq than just five or six cities.

HOLMES: You make a really good point. I’ve been there many times, and as recently as last month. When we were there then, we were talking about these numbers, and how rubbery, if you like, they are. The U.S. would say numbers are down, and then you’d find out they weren’t counting car bomb victims. And as you say, the Baghdad morgue is perhaps the biggest source of death tolls, but it’s just one morgue. And a lot of people aren’t taken to that morgue. Do you think that this could really be an accurate figure?

ZOGBY: I can’t vouch for it 100 percent, but I’ll vouch for it 95 percent, which is as good as it gets in survey research. I know PIPA, the group at the university that conducted the polling in the U.S. I know of the group that — the university that published and conducted the survey on the Iraq side. In fact, we’ve used them ourselves. These are good researchers. I have read their methodology statement. It is a good one and a sound one.

I don’t know the specific questions they asked. One of the things I’d like to know is, above and beyond the count, where they place blame, where the public places blame for the deaths. That can get a little squidgy, in the sense that you’re going to get a lot more people blaming allied forces, blaming America than might be directly involved in the killings.

But in terms of the sampling of methodology that was used, this is sound and this is going to generate quite a bit of debate.

I don’t think that there’s anybody in my business who responsibly believes that 30,000 to 40,000 or 45,000 Iraqis have been killed since March of 2003.

HOLMES: Right. That was always a nonsense figure. I mean, you just needed to do the math day to day with 100 people being found in the streets some days.

ZOGBY: Excuse me, Michael. But 100 people found in Baghdad, or Mosul or Al Ramadi (ph).

HOLMES: Yes, absolutely. Actually normally just in Baghdad. And there are a couple of areas in Iraq that are far more violent than Baghdad itself, believe it or not.

Just finally, John, do you think this group being fairly reputable. The number I saw being criticized. The number of the sampling, I think was 1800 people, but that’s a decent-sized sample. We recorded our own CNN poll today there was only 1,000 people.

ZOGBY: And CNN, and my company are others are able to call U.S. elections and European elections with pinpoint precision using a sample of a thousand; 1,800-plus sample in a country like Iraq is more than enough to do the job and to get the ballpark figure that they got here.

HOLMES: Right. Very, very important coming from you, John. Appreciate that. John Zogby of Zogby International. A lot of criticism over this report already from the White House, saying it’s not credible. But as you say, there’s a lot there to be taken very seriously. [Emphasis added]

1 comment October 11th, 2006

More comments on Iraq mortality study

Juan Cole defends the Lancet study, providing additional arguments as to why it should be taken seriously:

I follow the violence in Iraq carefully and daily, and I find the results plausible….

There is heavy fighting almost every day at Ramadi in al-Anbar province, among guerrillas, townspeople, tribes, Marines and Iraqi police and army. We almost never get a report of these skirmishes and we almost never are told about Iraqi casualties in Ramadi. Does 1 person a day die there of political violence? Is it more like 4? 10? What about Samarra? Tikrit? No one is saying. Since they aren’t, on what basis do we say that the Lancet study is impossible?

There are about 90 major towns and cities in Iraq. If we subtract Baghdad, where about 100 a day die, that still leaves 89. If an average of 4 or so are killed in each of those 89, then the study’s results are correct. Of course, 4 is an average. Cities in areas dominated by the guerrilla movement will have more than 4 killed daily, sleepy Kurdish towns will have no one killed.

If 470 were dying every day, what would that look like?

West Baghdad is roughly 10% of the Iraqi population. It is certainly generating 47 dead a day. Same for Sadr City, same proportions. So to argue against the study you have to assume that Baquba, Hilla, Kirkuk, Kut, Amara, Samarra, etc., are not producing deaths at the same rate as the two halves of Baghad. But it is perfectly plausible that rough places like Kut and Amara, with their displaced Marsh Arab populations, are keeping up their end. Four dead a day in Kut or Amara at the hands of militiamen or politicized tribesmen? Is that really hard to believe? Have you been reading this column the last three years?

Or let’s take the city of Basra, which is also roughly 10% of the Iraqi population. Proportionally speaking, you’d expect on the order of 40 persons to be dying of political violence there every day. We don’t see 40 persons from Basra reported dead in the wire services on a daily basis.

But last May, the government authorities in Basra came out and admitted that security had collapsed in the city and that for the previous month, one person had been assassinated every hour. Now, that is 24 dead a day, just from political assassination. Apparently these persons were being killed in faction fighting among Shiite militias and Marsh Arab tribes. We never saw any of those 24 deaths a day reported in the Western press. And we never see any deaths from Basra reported in the wire services on a daily basis even now. Has security improved since May? No one seems even to be reporting on it, yes or no.

So if 24 Iraqis can be shot down every day in Basra for a month (or for many months?) and no one notices, the Lancet results are perfectly plausible.

And David Lindorff noticed an aspect of the study that has so far been ignored by the press, namely that 30% of the violent deaths were attributed to U.S. troops. 30% of 600,000 is around 180,000 deaths from U.S. troops! If true, these results that the U.S. has been butchering Iraqis at a phenomenal rate.

That means U.S. forces have, since the March 19, 2003 invasion, killed between 132,000 and 246,000 Iraqis. It should be recalled that the Pentagon has estimated that the insurgency numbers perhaps 20-40,000 individuals, and they have only succeeded in killing a fraction of them. Assuming generously that the military has succeeded in killing maybe a quarter of the enemy fighters, that would be 10,000 people at most, leaving the U.S. civilian death toll at 122,000-236,000. The Christian Science Monitor, no radical rag, once did a survey and found that U.S. forces were killing civilians in Iraq at a rate of 30 for every enemy fighter slain. At that rate, it would appear, if the peer-reviewed Lancet study is correct, that the U.S. invasion and occupation forces have killed between 127,000 and 238,000 civilians

I guess they call it Operation Iraqi Freedom because the Iraqi subjects are freed from their [now wretched] lives..

Add comment October 11th, 2006

Reporting on Iraqi deaths better than expected

The reporting on the new Lancet report of 650,000 “excess deaths” in Iraq is far better than was true of the 2004 study. In addition to the Washington Post article, I’ve already posted, see for example, the BBC’s ‘Huge rise’ in Iraqi death tolls; the Guardian’s ‘655,000 Iraqis killed since invasion’; and the New York TimesIraqi Dead May Total 600,000, Study Says. Also, view the NBC and CNN coverage in this YouTube clip:

Add comment October 11th, 2006

Full report: Human costs of the war in Iraq

To supplement the Lancet paper published today estimating 650,000 “excess deaths” in Iraq, the authors have also published a detailed technical report: The Human Cost of the War in Iraq: A Mortality Study, 2002-2006.

Here is the Summary of the report:

A new household survey of Iraq has found that approximately 600,000 people have been killed in the violence of the war that began with the U.S. invasion in March 2003.

The survey was conducted by an American and Iraqi team of public health researchers. Data were collected by Iraqi medical doctors with analysis conducted by faculty of the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health. The results will be published in the British medical journal, The Lancet.

The survey is the only population-based assessment of fatalities in Iraq during the war. The method, a survey of more than 1,800 households randomly selected in clusters that represent Iraq’s population, is a standard tool of epidemiology and is used by the U.S. Government and many other agencies.

The survey also reflects growing sectarian violence, a steep rise in deaths by gunshots, and very high mortality among young men. An additional 53,000 deaths due to non-violent causes were estimated to have occurred above the pre-invasion mortality rate, most of them in recent months, suggesting a worsening of health status and access to health care.

Methods

Between May and July 2006 a national cluster survey was conducted in Iraq to assess deaths occurring during the period from January 1, 2002, through the time of survey in 2006. Information on deaths from 1,849 households containing 12,801 persons was collected. This survey followed a similar but smaller survey conducted in Iraq in 2004. Both surveys used standard methods for estimating deaths in conflict situations, using population-based methods.

Key Findings

Death rates were 5.5/1,000/year pre-invasion, and overall, 13.2/1,000/year for the 40 months post-invasion.We estimate that through July 2006, there have been 654,965 “excess deaths”—fatalities above the pre-invasion death rate—in Iraq as a consequence of the war. Of post-invasion deaths, 601,027 were due to violent causes. Non-violent deaths rose above the pre-invasion level only in 2006. Since March 2003, an additional 2.5% of Iraq’s population have died above what would have occurred without conflict.

The proportion of deaths ascribed to coalition forces has diminished in 2006, though the actual numbers have increased each year. Gunfire remains the most common reason for death, though deaths from car bombing have increased from 2005. Those killed are predominantly males aged 15-44 years.

As I write, the President has just proclaimed himself an expert in epidemiology and informed us that this study’s methodology has been discredited. This, I assume, will be the mainstream response. We have an obligation to read this study carefully and to disseminate its findings.

At the same time, we researchers know that we never rely on a single study. Thus, am I confident that 650,000 Iraqis have died? No. But I am confident, unfortunately, that hundreds of thousands have died? Yes.

As was true after the 2004 study was published, it is the responsibility of critics of this study to themselves count the Iraqi dead. So far, there has been deafening silence, with the inadequate exception of the Iraq Living Conditions Surey, which, in spring 2004 used a single question to assess war-related mortality. According to the Washington Post, the present study cost $50,000! Obviously, others could do a much more comprehensive study. One must wonder whythey haven’t. Perhaps, because they know they won’t want to disseminate the results? Or because Iraqi lives simply don’t matter when they get in the way of imperial designs?

6 comments October 11th, 2006

New horrifying estimate of Iraqi deaths

It is with incredible sadness that I report the newest study from the Johns Hopkins epidemiologists who, in October 2004 reported that Iraq had suffered an estimated 98,000 “excess deaths” since the U.S. invasion. The Washington Post today reports that this same group has repeated the study, this time with a much larger sample . The results: they found 655,000 excess deaths, of which 601,000 resulted from violence.

Evidently the study will be published online today by the Lancet, which published their 2004 study. [Hopefully, they will give freee access, as they did last time.] We should reserve judgement until the paper appears, so that it can be examined in detail. However, given the high quality of the previous study [I use it to teach sampling methodology and survey design in my research methods classes], I would be surprised if it was not also excellent.

In the meantime, here’s the Washington Post article:

A team of American and Iraqi epidemiologists estimates that 655,000 more people have died in Iraq since coalition forces arrived in March 2003 than would have died if the invasion had not occurred.

The estimate, produced by interviewing residents during a random sampling of households throughout the country, is far higher than ones produced by other groups, including Iraq’s government.

It is more than 20 times the estimate of 30,000 civilian deaths that President Bush gave in a speech in December. It is more than 10 times the estimate of roughly 50,000 civilian deaths made by the British-based Iraq Body Count research group.

The surveyors said they found a steady increase in mortality since the invasion, with a steeper rise in the last year that appears to reflect a worsening of violence as reported by the U.S. military, the news media and civilian groups. In the year ending in June, the team calculated Iraq’s mortality rate to be roughly four times what it was the year before the war.

Of the total 655,000 estimated “excess deaths,” 601,000 resulted from violence and the rest from disease and other causes, according to the study. This is about 500 unexpected violent deaths per day throughout the country.

The survey was done by Iraqi physicians and overseen by epidemiologists at Johns Hopkins University’s Bloomberg School of Public Health. The findings are being published online today by the British medical journal the Lancet.

The same group in 2004 published an estimate of roughly 100,000 deaths in the first 18 months after the invasion. That figure was much higher than expected, and was controversial. The new study estimates that about 500,000 more Iraqis, both civilian and military, have died since then — a finding likely to be equally controversial.

Both this and the earlier study are the only ones to estimate mortality in Iraq using scientific methods. The technique, called “cluster sampling,” is used to estimate mortality in famines and after natural disasters.

While acknowledging that the estimate is large, the researchers believe it is sound for numerous reasons. The recent survey got the same estimate for immediate post-invasion deaths as the early survey, which gives the researchers confidence in the methods. The great majority of deaths were also substantiated by death certificates.

“We’re very confident with the results,” said Gilbert Burnham, a Johns Hopkins physician and epidemiologist.

A Defense Department spokesman did not comment directly on the estimate.

“The Department of Defense always regrets the loss of any innocent life in Iraq or anywhere else,” said Lt. Col. Mark Ballesteros. “The coalition takes enormous precautions to prevent civilian deaths and injuries.”

He added that “it would be difficult for the U.S. to precisely determine the number of civilian deaths in Iraq as a result of insurgent activity. The Iraqi Ministry of Health would be in a better position, with all of its records, to provide more accurate information on deaths in Iraq.”

Ronald Waldman, an epidemiologist at Columbia University who worked at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for many years, called the survey method “tried and true,” and added that “this is the best estimate of mortality we have.”

This viewed was echoed by Sarah Leah Whitson, an official of Human Rights Watch in New York, who said, “We have no reason to question the findings or the accuracy” of the survey.

“I expect that people will be surprised by these figures,” she said. “I think it is very important that, rather than questioning them, people realize there is very, very little reliable data coming out of Iraq.”

The survey was conducted between May 20 and July 10 by eight Iraqi physicians organized through Mustansiriya University in Baghdad. They visited 1,849 randomly selected households that had an average of seven members each. One person in each household was asked about deaths in the 14 months before the invasion and in the period after.

The interviewers asked for death certificates 87 percent of the time; when they did, more than 90 percent of households produced certificates.

According to the survey results, Iraq’s mortality rate in the year before the invasion was 5.5 deaths per 1,000 people; in the post-invasion period it was 13.3 deaths per 1,000 people per year. The difference between these rates was used to calculate “excess deaths.”

Of the 629 deaths reported, 87 percent occurred after the invasion. A little more than 75 percent of the dead were men, with a greater male preponderance after the invasion. For violent post-invasion deaths, the male-to-female ratio was 10-to-1, with most victims between 15 and 44 years old.

Gunshot wounds caused 56 percent of violent deaths, with car bombs and other explosions causing 14 percent, according to the survey results. Of the violent deaths that occurred after the invasion, 31 percent were caused by coalition forces or airstrikes, the respondents said.

Burnham said that the estimate of Iraq’s pre-invasion death rate — 5.5 deaths per 1,000 people — found in both of the Hopkins surveys was roughly the same estimate used by the CIA and the U.S. Census Bureau. He said he believes that attests to the accuracy of his team’s results.

He thinks further evidence of the survey’s robustness is that the steepness of the upward trend it found in excess deaths in the last two years is roughly the same tendency found by other groups — even though the actual numbers differ greatly.

An independent group of researchers and biostatisticians based in England produces the Iraq Body Count. It estimates that there have been 44,000 to 49,000 civilian deaths since the invasion. An Iraqi nongovernmental organization estimated 128,000 deaths between the invasion and July 2005.

The survey cost about $50,000 and was paid for by Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Center for International Studies.

Note on American morality: While it is great that the Washington nPost published this piece, without the need to demolish the study upon release, it seems that 655,000 Iraqi lives are only worth a page A12 article.

There has been an intense debate as to the magnitude of casualties in Iraq, since the original October 2004 Lancet study by Les Roberts and colleagues that estimated 98,000 dead as of September, 2004: Mortality before and after the 2003 invasion of Iraq: Cluster sample survey. [See my article on this study: 100,000 Iraqis Dead: Should We Believe it? ] The Iraq Body Count group, using only newspaper reports, have produced much lower estimates. Some of us have been very critical of IBC [See my When Promoting Truth Obscures the Truth: More on Iraqi Body Count and Iraqi Deaths, David Edwards: Iraq Body Count Refuses to Respond . Speculation is no substitute: a defence of Iraq Body Count and Les Roberts responds to criticism by Iraq Body Count ]

This is one time I would have preferred to be wrong. I have read every estimate of Iraqi mortality, hoping that a definitive study would prove me wrong. Then comes today’s news. While we should reserve judgement until the Lancet publishes the full study [supposedly online today, but not yet]. But it looks like the situation in Iraq is far worse than anyy of us have imagined. If my quick calculation is corect, this is over 2.5% of the total Irai population and over3% of the non-Kurdish population.

Any pretense that American troops in Iraq play a protective role has been demolished today.

UPDATE:

The paper is now online: Mortality after the 2003 invasion of Iraq: a cross-sectional cluster sample survey by Gilbert Burnham, Riyadh Lafta, Shannon Doocy, & Les Roberts. Have not read it yet. Will not have time to do so until later.

Add comment October 11th, 2006


Pages

Calendar

October 2006
M T W T F S S
« Sep   Nov »
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031  

Posts by Month

Posts by Category