Estimated 655,000 Iraqi deaths due to invasion
 

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/11102006/32...-invasion.html

LONDON (Reuters) - American and Iraqi public health experts have calculated that about 655,000 Iraqis have died as a result of the March 2003 U.S.-led invasion and subsequent violence, far above previous estimates.

Researchers used household interviews rather than body counts to estimate how many more Iraqis had died because of the war than used to die annually in peacetime.

"We estimate that as a consequence of the coalition invasion of March 18, 2003, about 655,000 Iraqis have died above the number that would be expected in a non-conflict situation," said Gilbert Burnham of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in the United States.
That means 2.5 percent of the Iraqi population have died because of the invasion and ensuing strife, he said.

The team's study, published online by the medical journal The Lancet, estimated pre-war deaths in Iraq at 143,000 a year, and said Iraq's death rate is now 2-1/2 times that of the pre-war period.

"Although such death rates might be common in times of war, the combination of a long duration and tens of millions of people affected has made this the deadliest international conflict of the 21st century," Burnham said.

The survey was a follow-up to an earlier study which showed that nearly 100,000 more people than normal died in Iraq between March 2003 and September 2004.

The number of extra Iraqis who have died since March 2003 includes deaths from all causes, including those due to a rise in certain diseases and illnesses, the study said.

Nearly 60 percent of the dead were boys and men aged 15-44 years old. Gunshots were the main cause of violent deaths.

"As we found with our previous survey, the majority of deaths in Iraq are due to violence, although we also saw a small increase in deaths from non-violent causes, such as heart disease, cancer and chronic illness," Burnham said in a statement.

HOUSEHOLD SURVEY

The figures are based on a survey conducted by researchers from Johns Hopkins and Al Mustansiriya University in Baghdad between May and June of 1,849 households including 12,801 household members in 47 randomly selected sites across Iraq.

They questioned the inhabitants about births, deaths, and migrations. The same survey methods were used to measure mortality in other conflict areas such as the Congo, Kosovo and Sudan, according to the researchers.

Deaths were confirmed in 92 percent of cases with a death certificate. In about half of the households which reported a death there was uncertainty about who was responsible.

The death rate in Iraq rose to 13.3 per 1000 people per year, compared with 5.5 per year before the invasion, according to the study.

Other estimates based on think tank figures and media sources calculate the number of extra Iraqi deaths to be much lower. The Iraq Body Count Database calculates that between 43,850 and 48,693 civilian deaths have occurred since the invasion.

"Our total estimate is much higher than other mortality estimates because we used a population-based, active method for collecting mortality information rather than passive methods that depend on counting bodies or tabulated media reports of violent deaths," Burnham explained.

The researchers reiterated their earlier call for an international body to assess the increasing death toll in Iraq.

"With reliable data, those voices that speak out for civilians trapped in conflict might be able to lessen the tragic cost of future wars," Burnham added in the study.

__________________________

Lower death tolls have occured for genocides... Democracy on the way?


Ponrauil

so that's 650k only due to invasion.
anybody know what the total casualties are in iraq (all nations), just wondering..

edit: and bush sr + bush jr

That's horrible. We should never have invaded their country, and those responsible should be held accountable.

Adrian

Hindsight is 20/20. We underestimated the determination of the insurgents in wreaking havoc. If it wasn't for them, we'd have been out of there a long time ago.

Whether we could leave quickly or not in no way affects the righteousness of our cause. We should not have invaded, even if we could've been out a day later.

Adrian

I don't agree. We ousted a PITA dictator that killed his own people. There wouldn't be a conflict right now if it wasn't for the insurgents. Blame them for the ongoing (re: ongoing, not start) conflict.

Your damn right he should be held accountable. As a matter of fact. He is right now. If you all watch the news, Sdadam Hussein is currently on trial in Iraq. If you have been paying attention, he is currently being tried for killing 180,000 of his own people. Burying many of them alive. Spraying Women & Children with experimental chemicals. This is only 1 case against him.

Also, Bush did the same thing Clinton did in Kosovo. Except the people in Kosovo aren't a bunch of loosers.

youve got to question the thinking behind: hey lets use people instead of body counts to get our figures.

that's a death toll comparable to the battle of the somme...... seriously high imo.


or to look at it another way: if you'd to ask people in my work if they'd ever had drugs or hung around with people who did drugs, you'd get a tiny % compared to glasgows average as a whole on account of most of the girls i work with never even having touched a cigarette never mind anything harder.... it really is a ridiculous way to do research.

Harsh as it is, not our business. Human rights abuses go on all over the globe. It's not the business of the US taxpayers to send the US military to fly around like Superman and try to right every wrong.

Yes, the insurgents are doing bad things. I do not support their attacks, but can understand their desire to strike back at the occupiers.

Adrian

if there were no allied forces in iraq there'd be no insurgency...

there's shit going on all over the world that nations pick and choose where they will and won't intervene.