MODERN TIMES
Art Hobson
ahobson@uark.edu
NWA Times 28 Oct 2006
How Many Iraqi
Deaths?
A
recent survey implies that the Iraq War has killed twice as many Iraqis in four
years as Saddam Hussein did in 20 years.
Is this plausible?
President Bush didnÕt think so.
When informed of this survey, he instantly pronounced it Ònot
credible.Ó
Most
estimates of war deaths rely on ÒpassiveÓ data such as military reports or
hospital reports. ÒIraq Body
Count,Ó which estimates 47,000 civilians killed, is the best-known of these.
The last guess from President Bush was 30,000 civilian dead.
The
new survey utilizes ÒactiveÓ interviews of a statistical sample of households
throughout Iraq, much as the Gallup Poll samples the U.S. population. It was conducted by four members of the
Johns Hopkins School of Public Health and published in the Oct 21-Oct 27 issue
of the British medical journal ÒLancetÓ (available in the university
library).
The
survey used a method called Òcluster samplingÓ thatÕs standard in epidemiology: 50 geographical locations, called
Òcluster centers,Ó were randomly chosen from all over Iraq. Interviewers surveyed the 40 households
nearest to each cluster center. So
about 2000 households, having nearly 13,000 household members, were interviewed
in all. Interviews were done by
trained 5-person teams of medical doctors. As you can imagine, the process was dangerous for the
interviewers.
Many
precautions were taken to ensure truthful, accurate responses: no incentives were provided, the survey
purpose was carefully explained, oral consent was obtained, deaths were
reported only if the deceased had lived in the household continuously for 3
months before the event. Most
importantly, at the conclusion of any interview in which a death was reported,
surveyors asked to see the death certificate. 92 percent of these families produced a death certificate;
the remaining 8 percent were judged to be truthful in their claims of losing
the certificate (remember, thereÕs a chaotic war on), because the pattern of
deaths in these households was no different from those with certificates.
The
survey tallied all Iraqi deaths, whether combatant or civilian, because this
distinction is difficult to make in any objective fashion. The cause of death was noted, including
both non-violent causes such as accident, old age, disease, etc., and violent
causes such as explosions, gunshot, air strikes, etc.
The
results, stated as mortality rates per 1000 people per year, were as
follows: During the 15 months immediately
preceding the U.S. invasion in March 2003, the mortality rate was 5.5 per 1000
people per year, while during the 40 post-invasion months the mortality rate
was 13.3 per 1000 people per year.
Ponder those numbers: Since
the war began, Iraqis have been dying at more than twice the normal (if the
Saddam Hussein era can be called ÒnormalÓ!) rate. Nearly all the excess deaths were violent, but some were
non-violent, perhaps from such causes as the danger of getting expectant
mothers and others to hospitals quickly during wartime—a common cause of
wartime deaths.
Extrapolating
to the entire population, during the 40 wartime months there were an estimated
655,000 excess (above the pre-war rate) deaths, 601,000 of them violent and
54,000 non-violent. In addition,
there were 495,000 non-violent non-war-related deaths (the pre-war rate).
Like
the Gallup Poll, these results come with statistical uncertainties. Because of the difficulty of surveying
under wartime conditions, the number of clusters was only 50. Epidemiology surveys usually use 100 or
even 1000 clusters. The small
number of clusters meant that uncertainties were much larger than the usual 3
percent associated with the Gallup Poll.
For example, the researchers could state with 95 percent confidence that
there were between 393,000 and 942,000 excess Iraqi deaths during the war
years, of which 426,000-793,000 were violent.
The
estimated number of violent deaths, 601,000, is twice the number killed by
Saddam Hussein during his 20-year rule.
So the annual rate of violent deaths has increased by a factor of 10
since Saddam was replaced by our invasion. Even the lowest plausible number, 426,000 violent deaths, is
enormous in a nation of only 27 million.
Extrapolated to a nation the size of the USA, 426,000 deaths becomes 4.7
million!
Right
wing attempts to discredit this article have gone into overdrive. The Wall Street Journal hastily published an article by Steven Moore
claiming that the survey was statistically flawed. Moore was formerly director of a pro-Iraq-war website, and a
former advisor to Paul Bremer, head of the U.S. provisional authority that
governed Iraq right after the invasion.
Moore argues strenuously that the small number of clusters invalidates
the survey. But in fact the small
number of clusters simply implies a wide uncertainty range, and even the lowest
numbers in this range are far larger than previous estimates.
The
survey authors published a similar survey of Iraq in 2004, after 18 months of
war, with results entirely consistent with the recent results.
The
Lancet editor, apparently expecting controversy, wrote an editorial supporting
the validity of the recent survey, pointing out that the article was reviewed
by four expert peers who provided detailed comments, and that all reviewers
recommended publication with relatively minor revisions.
The Lancet results are certainly more credible than previous passive
estimates, and probably correct. They
are shocking and incredibly important.
They imply not only that this war was a dreadful mistake from the start,
but also that far more people are killed in modern wars than had been thought.
This has vast implications for anyone contemplating the benefits and
costs of any future war. We will
be making a big mistake if we allow our widespread ignorance of science and
mathematics, and our right-wing biases, to obscure this survey.