The Lancet publish article estimating 186,000 death toll in Gaza

@EasterIssland if only I'd known we could give equal weight to tabloid articles and publications in internationally respected academic journals, I could have really beefed up that section of my CV.

And? Many others are happy with the thread title.

Five others are actually.

Indeed. Articles with much less credibility are held up as incontrovertible proof when it comes to dismissing the harms being caused to certain populations.

Seriously, OP. Ignore the pressure. Do NOT change the title of this thread. It is an accurate title based on The Lancet's work. The Lancet and 'gross inaccuracies' are not bedfellows. The poster arguing this point is not above The Lancet. None of us are.

@AhNowTed please don’t change the title to please some. Your title has said what has happened if some don’t like it it’s their fault. Not yours.

I am currently present on this thread to contest the inaccurate nature of the title.

I'll reiterate: Go tell The Lancet they're causing 'title inaccuracies' on MN. Go straight to the source if it's such a thing to you.

Because it talks about Israel’s actions and leaves Israel in a bad place. If it was about festivals celebrating terrorism or all pro Palestinians being antisemetic then many wouldn’t bat an eyelid.

And why should the OP change the title? They're only sharing what The Lancet has published. Write to The Lancet directly, keenforhelp. You're kind of tilting at windmills over here on MN. Go make noise at the source if it's THAT important to you.

Why is a disagreement about a thread title more important than the content of the published work? Would we be discussing the thread title if the article said it wasn't implausible that not far off 200,000 people could die as a result of something happening elsewhere?

Huh?

I am currently present on this thread to contest the inaccurate nature of the title.

If the thread title changes, then discussion of the title will stop.

Up to the OP.

You grossly insult me to say I have been taught a wrong lesson.

Give us your thoughts on say, a death toll at 40k. Let's put that number out there as the factual and current death toll. What are your thoughts? Genocide? Massacre? Tragic? Because your response will tell me right now how much you value the lives of others. You feel grossly insulted, you say. Well, maybe I've hit a stone cold nerve of truth. People often feel insulted when that happens.

Whatever to suit your story.

Thank you for admitting @EasterIssland that the thread title might be inflammatory and have inaccuracies.

I respect that.

Where have I said that one person's life is more important than another. You grossly insult me to say I have been taught a wrong lesson.

Indeed, most people on these boards know that I lost 600 of my family in the Shoah.

The thread title is misleading. That is all I have said.

I think it's pretty clear that this is a piece published in The Lancet, using data that estimates how the current conflict may impact upon the population. It's not claiming to be an RCT, or claiming a current death toll of over 180,000. I'm not sure why it's confusing to people or why people can't get that from reading the posts and the published link.

The title of the thread is pretty clear. 'Article' isn't a word which only applies to clinical trials or studies - people use it to refer to everything from RCTs through to journalists' blogs.

The fact that on page 5, people are still more upset about whether they would have chosen different wording for the title, rather than about the significant health and mortality implications for the affected population, is an example of the phenomenon of dehumanisation. Would we be having this particular discussion if the population being discussed by the authors had been a different population? Or would we instead be concerned about the points raised - that the population being discussed is at risk of what really are societally and individually devastating harms - and would we instead be feeling and expressing compassion and empathy for the people affected?

I mean most of the worlds organisations (who are more important and expert than me) believes these figures … as far as I can see , only those that are pro Israel are the ones that are trying to reduce them

“That sentence I’ve highlighted is good. For those that say that the figures are fake because they’re coming out from Hamas .”

But his evidence is shoddy to prove the figures veracity.
You believe Hamas figures?

And I hope the reality doesn’t match what they’re expecting. It would mean many innocent civilians won’t die as a result of Israel’s actions.

These writers do not have a crystal ball.

And ? That doesn’t mean that the op is going to change the title just because those 6 want the op to change it. I’m not happy with the titles of other threads. The op is aware in those threads as the title has been questioned. Had the op changed it ? No.

you can continue complaining on this thread about the title all you want and reporting the thread. That won’t change the reality. Lancet has published a letter where the experts estimate that 186k Palestinians could die as a result of what Israel is doing in Palestine.

You've heard the saying, "opinions are like assholes....everyone has one"?

Yeah.

If you're going to claim I've insulted people, you're going to need something much stronger than a 🤦‍♂️ in response to anyone who thinks this letter is a Lancet study or view.

You don't, so that IS weak.* *