Do you remember the Lancet? Why isn't there more condemnation of their methodology? Or at least more note that it's not exactly accurate because it depends entirely on anecdotes, and takes no account of readily available statistics? I can see them wanting to prove the point that there are unreported deaths in Iraq, but if there were anywhere near as many decomposing bodies lying around (because if they're unreported, the at least don't get burried or taken care of as well as they would have in an un-rushed, organized operation), then the whole country would be sick from some disease or another. And I respect the fact that our troops are busy, but don't you think someone would see all the bodies lying around?
One more question...why is a medical journal publishing politically inspired articles like this? I mean, I can see publishing a reasonable study which takes account for uncertainties...but the way they are trumpeting this every time they put it out tells me there is more to it than just medicine.
I'd really like to hear the other side of this (at least in a coherant way), because there must be some facts that I'm missing. But I read a lot of news and I think I would have found at least some of them by now. Anyway, if you know the other side, please enlighten me. If you take the other side, even better.