Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 101

Thread: BS Lancet Survey on Iraqi civilian deaths debunked by AAPOR

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Protector Domesticus
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    4,045

    Default BS Lancet Survey on Iraqi civilian deaths debunked by AAPOR

    So...the Study was deliberately manipulated for political purposes and was totally ting when it came to reporting how many Iraqi civilians have actually died in the war.

    How shocking!

    Source
    By GARY LANGER
    Feb. 4, 2009

    In a highly unusual rebuke, the American Association for Public Opinion Research today said the author of a widely debated survey on "excess deaths" in Iraq had violated its code of professional ethics by refusing to disclose details of his work. The author's institution later disclosed to ABC News that it, too, is investigating the study.

    AAPOR, in a statement, said that in an eight-month investigation, Gilbert Burnham, a faculty member at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, "repeatedly refused to make public essential facts about his research on civilian deaths in Iraq."

    Hours later, the school itself disclosed its own investigation of the Iraq casualties report "to determine if any violation of the school's rules or guidelines for the conduct of research occurred." It said the review "is nearing completion."

    Both AAPOR and the school said they had focused on Burnham's study, published in the October 2006 issue of the British medical journal the Lancet, reporting an estimated 654,965 "excess deaths" in Iraq as a result of the U.S.-led invasion in 2003. An earlier, 2004 report, in which Burnham also participated, estimated approximately 98,000 excess deaths to that point.

    In its original news release on the 2006 study, the Lancet said, "The mortality survey used well-established and scientifically proven methods for measuring mortality and disease in populations." Today, Tony Kirby, the Lancet's press officer, said in an e-mail to ABC News: "The Lancet is making no comment."

    Burnham did not reply to e-mail and telephone messages.

    AAPOR's standards committee chair, Mary E. Losch, said the association, acting on a member's complaint, had formally requested from Burnham "basic information about his survey, including, for example, the wording of questions he used, instructions and explanations that were provided to respondents, and a summary of the outcomes for all households selected as potential participants in the survey."

    Losch said Burnham gave some partial answers but "explicitly refused to provide complete information about the basic elements of his research."

    Burnham is not a member of AAPOR, a 2,200-member professional organization of public opinion and other survey researchers in the United States. It last levied a charge of ethics violation for non-disclosure 12 years ago against public opinion researcher Frank Luntz.

    Both Iraq casualty studies were widely debated at the time of their release, shortly before U.S. elections. The 2004 report was released Oct. 29, just before that year's presidential election; an Associated Press report at the time said the lead author, Les Roberts, had described himself as anti-war and said he'd insisted the study be released in advance of the election to prompt debate on the subject. The 2006 lead author, Burnham, said he had no political motivations: "We do this from science."

    Questions about the studies have included the sampling approach, the estimate of baseline deaths (necessary to compute an "excess" figure) and the sheer level of deaths reported – in 2006, the equivalent of more than 500 a day for more than three years, far outstripping other estimates.

    In AAPOR's statement, its president, Richard A. Kulka, said: "When researchers draw important conclusions and make public statements and arguments based on survey research, then subsequently refuse to answer even basic questions about how their research was conducted, this violates the fundamental standards of science, seriously undermines open public debate on critical issues, and undermines the credibility of all survey and public opinion research."

    The inquiry by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School was disclosed in an e-mail from Tim Parsons, the school's public affairs director, as follows:

    "The level of civilian mortality in Iraq is a controversial subject. Questions have been raised regarding the findings and methodology of the 2006 Iraq mortality study conducted by Dr. Gilbert Burnham and published in The Lancet. The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health takes any allegation of scientific or professional misconduct very seriously. It believes that the correct forum for discussing the reported findings of the Lancet study and the general methodology that led to those findings is in the regular exchange of views in the scientific literature. The Bloomberg School of Public Health has undertaken a review of the study to determine if any violation of the school's rules or guidelines for the conduct of research occurred in the conduct of the study. That review is nearing completion and the school is unable to discuss the results at this time."

    Parsons added: "The American Association for Public Opinion Researchers (sic) chose to criticize Dr. Burnham for failure to fully cooperate with the organization's review of his 2006 study. The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health is not a member of the organization and does not know what procedures or standards were followed in reaching the decision regarding this study and therefore is not in a position to comment on the decision."

    Parsons declined to specify what initiated the school's review, or when it began.

    Full disclosure: Gary Langer is a member of AAPOR and past president of its New York chapter.

  2. #2

    Default Re: BS Lancet Survey on Iraqi civilian deaths debunked by AAPOR

    Unfortunately too late the lies of Lancet have been embraced by the whacky left antiwar crowd that anything that proves it was bs just proves to them its a government conspiracy. Must be nice to be so blinded by ones views that one can never be wrong. The damage of the study has already been wrought so its meaingless anyway, the moment Soros's name was leaked as being behind the funding of the story the study credibility should have been openly questioned by the media. So years later its oops sorry! Probably no real sense if irony that this comes out after the news ORB survey update a few days ago pushing the "death toll" to 1.03million. As I maintain with all these surveys why bother beating around the push, just put the death toll at 100 billion gazillion Iraqis and get it over with...hell if Pelosi can have 500million american losing their jobs each week/month then surely we can have 100 billion, gazillion dead Iraqis too.
    Last edited by danzig; February 04, 2009 at 06:45 PM.

  3. #3
    s.rwitt's Avatar Shamb Conspiracy Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Lubbock, Tx
    Posts
    21,514

    Default Re: BS Lancet Survey on Iraqi civilian deaths debunked by AAPOR

    Can't say I'm suprised.

  4. #4
    Zephyrus's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    4,598

    Default Re: BS Lancet Survey on Iraqi civilian deaths debunked by AAPOR



    Well, regardless, we went in iraq for the wrong reasons. And that was hoodwinking americans into following the supposedly truthful casus belli and lying to them. So its still morally unacceptable.

    If even one civilian died from us, it'd still be wrong.
    SEMPER FIDELIS Remember Constantinople Κωνσταντινούπολη


  5. #5

    Default Re: BS Lancet Survey on Iraqi civilian deaths debunked by AAPOR

    Quote Originally Posted by Zephyrus View Post


    Well, regardless, we went in iraq for the wrong reasons. And that was hoodwinking americans into following the supposedly truthful casus belli and lying to them. So its still morally unacceptable.

    If even one civilian died from us, it'd still be wrong.
    Well that is besides the point since cant undo a mistake after its been done just seek to fix it but I wont disagree with you though. The amount of people killed in Iraq due to our action is irrelevant because we shouldnt have been their so whether its 1000 or 100,000 or 400,000 its meaningless. The problem with the studies is they have political goals rather then seeking just information so it reeked every bit of propaganda as stuff from the Bush admin.

    Our obligation though became after we messed things up to do out damnest to make sure future Iraq has a much better chance then it ever did under Saddam or our own meddling thru their OWN efforts. Given recent stability in the country and election, we can take a small bit of comfort that we may have screwed up everything else but we appear to have gotten this small part right atleast.

  6. #6
    Dunecat's Avatar Praefectus
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    The United States of America
    Posts
    6,438

    Default Re: BS Lancet Survey on Iraqi civilian deaths debunked by AAPOR

    Why even bother to prove the right point the wrong way? Men who deceive this way are no different than the fascists they hate. Aren't the "anti-war" crowd supposed to operate on principle and virtue? Isn't their creed that no war is just? They're trying to argue with the same reasoning they resent, which just gives me a headache.

    These are the same breed of "liberals" that steal the people's money in the name of equality. The same that forsake their morality and lose sight of their goals. A story like this always depresses me.

    Perhaps instead of "studying" how many are murdered in the name of liberty they should inspire the cause within the people themselves. Have them stand up, instead of trying to persuade those who'll always see cause for war. What a tragic misplaced sense of justice .
    Last edited by Dunecat; February 04, 2009 at 08:38 PM.

  7. #7
    Senator
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,499

    Default Re: BS Lancet Survey on Iraqi civilian deaths debunked by AAPOR

    Quote Originally Posted by Zephyrus View Post


    Well, regardless, we went in iraq for the wrong reasons. And that was hoodwinking americans into following the supposedly truthful casus belli and lying to them. So its still morally unacceptable.

    If even one civilian died from us, it'd still be wrong.
    So removing a murderous dictator was the wrong reason?

  8. #8

    Default Re: BS Lancet Survey on Iraqi civilian deaths debunked by AAPOR

    Quote Originally Posted by Quadratus View Post
    So removing a murderous dictator was the wrong reason?
    It is when your stated reasons for doing it are different

  9. #9
    Senator
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,499

    Default Re: BS Lancet Survey on Iraqi civilian deaths debunked by AAPOR

    Quote Originally Posted by danzig View Post
    It is when your stated reasons for doing it are different
    indeed.

  10. #10
    Dunecat's Avatar Praefectus
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    The United States of America
    Posts
    6,438

    Default Re: BS Lancet Survey on Iraqi civilian deaths debunked by AAPOR

    Quote Originally Posted by Quadratus View Post
    So removing a murderous dictator was the wrong reason?
    Oh god PLEASE can we stick to the topic of just the report?

    In the past 5 years we've had plenty of time to debate how and why the U.S. invaded Iraq. I'm not one for strict forums rules but this road will inevitably end up with 20 pages of different excuses for the invasion and war in general. Wait a day until we get someone defending the study and then we'll have something juicy to scrap about.

  11. #11

    Default Re: BS Lancet Survey on Iraqi civilian deaths debunked by AAPOR

    Quote Originally Posted by danzig View Post
    It is when your stated reasons for doing it are different
    I guess Colin Powell's speech to the UN just up and disappeared, then.
    قرطاج يجب ان تدمر

  12. #12

    Default Re: BS Lancet Survey on Iraqi civilian deaths debunked by AAPOR

    Quote Originally Posted by motiv-8 View Post
    I guess Colin Powell's speech to the UN just up and disappeared, then.
    Uh whats your point? I said the stated reasons (WMD) do not match the reason to justify it by the poster above (murdering dictator) hence it is wrong.

  13. #13

    Default Re: BS Lancet Survey on Iraqi civilian deaths debunked by AAPOR

    Quote Originally Posted by Quadratus View Post
    So removing a murderous dictator was the wrong reason?
    come on, remove Hu Jintao too.
    Have a question about China? Get your answer here.

  14. #14

    Default Re: BS Lancet Survey on Iraqi civilian deaths debunked by AAPOR

    Quote Originally Posted by Quadratus View Post
    So removing a murderous dictator was the wrong reason?
    so murderous dictators are weapons of mass destruction

  15. #15

    Default Re: BS Lancet Survey on Iraqi civilian deaths debunked by AAPOR

    Quote Originally Posted by Quadratus View Post
    So removing a murderous dictator was the wrong reason?
    As far as I know, Bush left the Oval Office peacfully...

  16. #16
    Barry Goldwater's Avatar Mr. Conservative
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia
    Posts
    16,469

    Default Re: BS Lancet Survey on Iraqi civilian deaths debunked by AAPOR

    As far as I know, Bush left the Oval Office peacfully...
    And as far as I know, Quadratus was talking about Saddam Hussein - compared to him, Bush is nothing - like a microbe that carries the common cold when compared to a rampaging, carnivorous elephant.

  17. #17
    Zephyrus's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    4,598

    Default Re: BS Lancet Survey on Iraqi civilian deaths debunked by AAPOR

    Quote Originally Posted by The Man View Post
    And as far as I know, Quadratus was talking about Saddam Hussein - compared to him, Bush is nothing - like a microbe that carries the common cold when compared to a rampaging, carnivorous elephant.
    Saddamn didn't kill my family. He tried to mess with the USA and lost. Horribly so. Why should we suffer because some iraquis are ing about their government? Why is it that revolutions only happen in western countries and never in 3rd world ones??
    SEMPER FIDELIS Remember Constantinople Κωνσταντινούπολη


  18. #18

    Default Re: BS Lancet Survey on Iraqi civilian deaths debunked by AAPOR

    Why do we jump high they're not even saying ing jump... ALL political parties abuse stats.

    And that murderous dictator was America's friend.

    The whole Cold War was "the enemy of my enemy is my friend until I leave hanging' to dry."
    But mark me well; Religion is my name;
    An angel once: but now a fury grown,
    Too often talked of, but too little known.

    -Jonathan Swift

    "There's only a few things I'd actually kill for: revenge, jewelry, Father O'Malley's weedwacker..."
    -Bender (Futurama) awesome

    Universal truth is not measured in mass appeal.
    -Immortal Technique

  19. #19

    Default Re: BS Lancet Survey on Iraqi civilian deaths debunked by AAPOR

    Hm, perhaps Colin Powell's speech to the UN really DID up and disappear. You know, the one where he went before the world on behalf of the United States and presented the humanitarian and geopolitical reasons for the war?

    People are becoming forgetful in their recollection of events so soon.
    قرطاج يجب ان تدمر

  20. #20
    Dunecat's Avatar Praefectus
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    The United States of America
    Posts
    6,438

    Default Re: BS Lancet Survey on Iraqi civilian deaths debunked by AAPOR

    How is an invasion of a country and the dismantling of its infrastructure a "humanitarian effort"?

    Sure there are excuses to be there because of global position, perhaps to rival Iranian influence, to have the (air)bases there, to deny influence by Russia and China, to have sway in the region where the rest of the world get's its oil. A variety of reasons. But I'd hardly call a largely destructive war from the get-go a humanitarian effort.

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •