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

[AhNowTed]

The Lancet has just published this article "conservatively" estimating that the death toll in the Gaza genocide could be 186,000 people or more. That's 8% of the population, obliterated.

www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(24)01169-3/fulltext

This is a letter to the lancet. It is not a study which has been peer reviewed. There is absolutely nothing to suggest that type of casualty rate - the UN just removed about 10,000 alleged casualties made up by Hamas. This is a letter written by partisan individuals- it should not have been published in a medical journal.

The un didn’t remove 10k casualties and it’s been explained what they did several times

I am also of the opinion that predicting a future total is unhelpful and unscientific.

It is neither unhelpful nor unscientific to predict an outcome based on current knowledge and project what the total may be if things don't change

Do please elaborate.

Where have I started a thread where I inflate by a factor of 5.5 x the deaths in a conflict?

The thread title does not claim 186,000 people have been killed in Gaza. It references an estimate of a death toll. In a board where posters regularly use the titles of opinion pieces as statements of fact in their own thread titles, a thread title which gives the name of a journal and says there is an estimated death toll in something published in that journal is hardly the most confusing title people will read today.

Lol - it’s someone’s opinion that has been published in the lancet. It’s not a peer reviewed study or based on any sort of evidence. It’s just someone’s opinion (not the lancets faod).

So let's change things.

Let's see multiple threads calling for Hamas to release the hostages, give themselves up and protect Israel's future security from stated annihilation.

Because much as I disagree with some of IDF action and mourn for the death of innocents, nothing will change.

Can you explain to me how taking the number that lancet has said in their report is incorrect to put in a title ? As someone has told you if you’re not happy with the numbers then take it with lancet it’s not the ops or the titles thread.

ps. You know for well which thread @poshsnobtwit means

Is there a reason why you’ve not opened that thread if you’re so keen on it ? Why do you expect (want) others to do it and not yourself?

If lancet wasn’t happy with it they’ve have taken it down. I’m pretty sure if I went and wrote my opinion about something they’d not allow it to stay in their web if they didn’t agree with it. Also, the people that have written it have got more knowledge and experience than myself at least on the topic

Yes,

It estimates that the current death toll is 186000. Outrageous.

Not confusing at all. Just accept there is an issue with the thread title.

The OP could change it if he or she so chooses, but has so far not chosen to do so and so the the objections will continue - that's inevitable with such a grossly inaccurate figure.

It's the opinion of several professionals who have written a coherent summary of their modelling of projected mortality as a result of this conflict. It's incorrect to say it's not based on any evidence. The authors have used recognised approaches to modelling in such scenarios.

It's not some randoms writing an angry letter to a tabloid - everything published in journals like The Lancet has to meet certain standards.

Wow. If those numbers are anything close to accurate, surely it's very hard to deny the genocide claims.

A huge number of those deaths will be innocent children. We can't just stand by and let this continue.

From the Jewish Chronicle:

https://www.thejc.com/news/israel/did-the-lancet-really-estimate-the-gaza-death-toll-at-186-000-tp50gw2f

"Did the Lancet really estimate the Gaza death toll at 186,000?
The figure was shared by MPs and UN officials, but is purely speculative and not a peer-reviewed study"
"Last week, the Lancet, a well-respected British medical journal, published a letter from three academics – Rasha Khatib, Martin McKee, and Salim Yusuf – discussing the death toll in Gaza.
The letter, which is not peer-reviewed, suggests that, if the death toll in Gaza is 37 396, then it is “not implausible” to estimate that up to 186 000 deaths could be attributed to the war at some point in the future.
Already, the figure has taken on a life of its own. Zarah Sultana, writing on X, said “The Lancet - the most prestigious medical journal in the world - conservatively estimates that the death toll in Gaza could be 186,000 or more. That’s 8% of the population”. The “Gaza Genocide” entry on Wikipedia already cites the figure.
A former UN official also shared that “1 in every 12 Gaza inhabitants [have been] killed in the last 9 months of genocide”.
But what does the figure actually reference? The letter, which is speculative, and not a peer-reviewed article, makes the estimate that up to 186,000 deaths could be attributable to the current conflict due to “indirect health implications”.
This figure was decided by multiplying the current death toll, as reported by the Hamas-run Gaza health ministry, by five. The forward-looking estimate does not suggest that 186,000 have been killed in the 9 months of war so far.
The death toll in Gaza has long been difficult to report accurately. This is not unusual in wartime, but worsened by the specific situation in Gaza. Relying on the Gaza health ministry, figures are often revised.
The Hamas health ministry reports deaths recorded in hospitals, deaths reported by family members, and deaths from “reliable media reports”.
The letter sent to the Lancet was signed by Radha Khatib, Martin McKee, and Salim Yusuf. Khatib – the lead signatory – works at Birzeit University, near Ramallah, which has been outspoken on the war in Gaza. On October 15, Birzet called for international academic instituions to “take concrete action to stop the genocidal war on the Palestinian people and to end Israeli settler colonialism”.
Khatib has also previously shared Anti-Israel posts on social media. During the 2014 war in Gaza, she shared an article which stated there are “no ‘Both Sides’”. She also posted: “Palestinian violence is the inevitable response to… occupation and apartheid-like inequality. Violence therefore will only end when the occupation and Israeli apartheid end”.
Hillel Neuer, Executive Director of United Nations Watch, criticised the validity of the letter in the Lancet. “Nowhere does the lancet say this amount ‘were killed in the last 9 months,’” he shared on social media.
"

Couldn't have put this better myself.

I hope this puts this to bed now.

https://x.com/JewishChron/status/1810638958373863879

The title doesn't claim that the 186,000 is the current number of dead people in Gaza. The title, post and article aren't difficult to understand - I genuinely can't see an issue with them being posted and I think it's a real shame that people aren't more concerned about the actual content of the published piece. If the price of this conflict is potentially 186,000 lives, are people actually ok with that? Should we not question the processes which are leading to that sort of outcome? Should we not try to stop that from happening?

Up to you.

Letters published in The Lancet don't have to meet standards remotely close to articles which they publish.

Letters are not peer reviewed. These are simply "our reader's reflections".

Why would an article with other people's opinion put anything to bed? What makes the option of the people in the article you linked more credible than the people who wrote into the lancet?

They might not be peer reviewed but if it caused as much controversy as this one has created and they didn’t agree with it or were happy with what is written in there I’m sure they’d quietly remove it.

also, what’s wrong with it ? This letter is saying if things don’t change in Gaza we could have up to 186k deaths. Is the numbers what is wrong? Would 100k make it better ? 400k?

people are not only dying in Gaza because Israel is killing them directky. They’re also dying because of Israel’s actions in Gaza. This has to stop for people to continue dying and that’s what the writers in lancet are saying

That's interesting @DownNative .

Thank you for posting this. So really, these letters are simply unscientific, non-peer reviewed, not attributable to The Lancet, speculative missives.

I don't see the need to change the title.

The Lancet, as I've explained, call all their contributions "articles" throughout their website, so it wasn't intentional and you can take it up with them.

Further the title clearly says "estimating" and nowhere does it claim the death toll is 186K today.

Upon reading, the reader quickly establishes the number includes indirect deaths from the ongoing results of this deadly conflict.

Action on Armed Violence, a London-based charity conducting research on the impact of armed violence, produced a similar report back in February.

https://aoav.org.uk/2024/leading-experts-foresee-up-to-74290-excess-deaths-in-gaza/

Crisis in Gaza: Scenario-based Health Impact Projections

Here is the pdf:

https://aoav.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/gaza_projections_report.pdf

The projections – outlined in their report Crisis in Gaza: Scenario-Based Health Impact Projections – underscore the dual threats of infectious diseases and traumatic injuries as the primary causes of these excess deaths.
As the report states: “The projections are not predictions of what will happen in Gaza but provide a range of projections of what could happen under three distinct scenarios: 1) an immediate permanent ceasefire; 2) status quo (a continuation of conditions experienced from October 2023 till mid-January); and 3) a further escalation of the conflict.”

It's safe to assume we are in "further escalation of the conflict" territory now.

And for those enquiring about my whereabouts, sadly I have a full time job.

Thanks @AhNowTed

Why would The Lancet remove a letter they are very clear is simply "our reader's reflections"?

When the content of said letter is NOT the view of The Lancet itself?

When the letter is clearly NOT a study by The Lancet?

Therefore, the Appeal To Authority Fallacy in this thread vis a vis The Lancet falls down immediately.

Answers on a postcard as they say. 🤷‍♂️

Your thread title and link has been proven to frankly be fiction as it stands so it really does not matter whether or not you change the thread title.

And not sure why you having a full time job is relevant - I don't think anybody was actually asking whether you do or not. Or whether this matters a jot to them.