All Blog Posts from Public Eye

We noted last week that the results of a study in the medical journal Lancet, which revealed that an estimated 600,000 Iraqis have been killed as a result of violence in Iraq since the 2003 American invasion, were being greeted with a lot of skepticism – and media attention.

The Washington Institute for Near East Policy – which counts members of both sides of the political spectrum among its supporters (on its Web site, both Al Gore and Charles Krauthammer provide quotes praising it as a respected source of information) – has released a “critical examination” of the study. Given the amount of attention that has been paid to the Lancet study – and the spin that both sides of the aisle have put on its validity – it’s well worth reading the Washington Institute’s analysis. “The [Lancet] paper should definitely not be dismissed out of hand,” write authors Jeffrey and Loring White, “however, it may suffer from some methodological and analytical weaknesses. (These ‘scientific’ concerns could be readily addressed with public access to the sample data.) In addition, it seems to display some bias in its interpretation of data, especially in its attribution of responsibility for the violent deaths in Iraq. It also includes several potentially biased and controversial statements about the coalition.”

The authors examine some of these concerns in detail, specifically how the study authors arrived at their conclusions – and, notably, how commentary about the study has overlooked some specifics...UPDATE after the jump.

Read full post…