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

I agree with you. It’s interesting how the title of one thread is ok but but not another one. Double standards ? Or censorship ?

Only the OP can request the thread title change despite the gross inaccuracies but the thread title still remains in its original wording.

So why comment on a thread you haven't read? and insult people commenting on that thread when you haven't even read what they said?
How is the title misleading? By one word?

It is not whataboutery to point out your obvious bias and double standards

I linked to this before from the Lancet and I think that one paragraph should be thought about by our war cheer leaders on here:

"Although valid mortality counts are important, the situation in Gaza is severe, with high levels of civilian harm and extremely restricted access to aid. Efforts to dispute mortality reporting should not distract from the humanitarian imperative to save civilian lives by ensuring appropriate medical supplies, food, water, and fuel are provided immediately."
No evidence of inflated mortality reporting from the Gaza Ministry of Health - The Lancet

Uh, uh...yet misleading thread title still remains.

I neither read nor post in most threads, but half decent attempt at very blatant Whataboutery from you.

As usual.... 🤦‍♂️

You're quite bias in the thread titles you take issue with. No comment from you on the Glastonbury thread which hasn't produced a shred of evidence but yet major issue here. Would changing the word from article to letter in the thread title pass your bias thread title standards

Yes, and also being passed off as a study from The Lancet at the same time
That was discussed and corrected in the first two pages of this thread rtft.

Yes, and also being passed off as a study from The Lancet at the same time. 🤦‍♂️

But not surprising.

Yes, quite extraordinary that this "article" is being lauded as factual.

that people no longer feel or feel the need to express empathy for those populations in the same way as they would for other populations.

Didn't take long to demonstrate your point

I see the title has still yet to be corrected. 🧐

It's a non-peer reviewed letter which contains a future looking set of speculation. Nothing more and nothing less.

And it's not a study from Lancet or their view.

The Lancet is one of the most rigorous academic medical journals and everything that gets published in it has to meet certain standards, depending upon the type of article. Medical and scientific journals' 'letters pages' are different from letters pages in newspapers and magazines - the pieces published there are still reviewed and held to certain standards. While the piece that is the focus of this thread is not a fully-completed S-tier research project, it is still more deserving of consideration and reflection than most of the media articles published and held up as 'fact', which go through considerably less scrutiny pre-publication.

This is another example of double standards coming into play against Palestinians and majority-Muslim demographics. When a journalist with a track record of political bias writes an opinion piece that is critical or minimising of Palestinians and Muslims, it is held up as something which must be given weight and value, respect for it is demanded, and it is cited as evidence even when it's just someone's opinion. When professionals with relevant expertise write a piece which is published in a highly respected academic journal, but that piece does not minimise casualties and in fact extrapolates that casualties could end up being considerably higher than what is generally being discussed in the media, it is subjected to a much greater degree of criticism and efforts to dismiss it. It is also very telling that people (in general, not in relation to any particular people) can read published articles about horrendous death tolls and suffering, but express very little (if any) sadness or compassion for the population affected and instead jump straight to being 'experts' in critical appraisal - it speaks volumes about how certain populations have successfully been de-humanised in the eyes of many, that people no longer feel or feel the need to express empathy for those populations in the same way as they would for other populations.

I'm sure that's already been discussed

Thread title and first post completely misleading

Those disputing the number or minimising, lets say they over estimated and its 'only' 100k, that's still 5% of the population. That would be like 3.5 million people in the UK killed.
How many is too many? Is there no number that’s too high?

Interview to American doctor

As many amputees as there are from trauma, there are amputees from diabetes uncontrolled, because they’re not allowing insulin to be brought in” “ The total death toll is a severe undercount. It’s 5, 6 times the number because people are dying from treatable injuries … lack of medical supplies”

https://x.com/brokenmirror33/status/1809974437380301150

Agree and apologies for derailing.

I’ve always assumed the Hamas estimate was very much an underestimate. The IDF have killed so many journalists on the ground it’s hard to get a clear picture. However the destruction of infrastructure, including hospitals , water sanitation etc is bound to lead to so many deaths. Gaza was already a very vulnerable population anyway with so many people forced to live in such a small place under occupation. The full horrors of this situation will be revealed in time and Shame on anyone who defended the IDF and tried to minimise their actions.

Maybe what would be helpful is focusing on the horrific death toll rather than quibbling.

That's what you got from my comment?????

Nothing could be further from the truth but perhaps not framing a second hand opinion as a lived experience and fact may be helpful here.

Well the solution surely is to let Palestinians speak to the world.

Yes there is a clear sense of desacrediting many of the information that is provided.
1 if it’s from a twitter link then it’s because they’re not experts

1. If you provide links from experts then they’re antisimetic or they’ve not been there.

it’s interesting how this doesn’t apply to many of the threads some people open , and their titles are perfect and not inflammatory at all even if they’re picturing a part of the society as terrorists and/or vandals

on my opinion there is a part of the society that rejects what is happening in Palestine in general and want the rest of us to do it as well. Not happening

And those “Twitter videos” you scoff at are posted by Gazans. Imshin reposts their videos along with time stamps etc to verify when they were created.

She’s been doing so since 2018 after she started to notice inconsistencies between the accepted narrative and what Gazans themselves were actually saying.