>>Gabor Grothendieck wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I came across this one:
>>>
>>>http://www.nysun.com/article/32787
>>>
>>>which says that the violent death rate in Iraq (which presumably
>>>includes violent deaths from the war) is lower than the violent
>>>death rate in major American cities.
>>>
>>>Does anyone have any insights from statistics on how to
>>>interpret this?
I finally had time to follow up on this.
The NY Sun article compares apples and oranges, ie US cities to all of Iraq.
For data on Baghdad, see
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/press/pr13.php
Iraq Body Count Press Release 13, 9th March 2006.
"Figures released by IBC today, updated by statistics for the year
2005 from the main Baghdad morgue, show that the total number of
civilians reported killed has risen year-on-year since May 1st 2003
(the date that President Bush announced ??major combat operations
have ended??):
* 6,331 from 1st May 2003 to the first anniversary of the invasion,
19th March 2004 (324 days: Year 1)
* 11,312 from 20th March 2004 to 19th March 2005 (365 days: Year 2)
* 12,617 from 20th March 2005 to 1st March 2006 (346 days: Year 3)."
According to several websites, the population of Baghdad is about 5 million.
According to R the violent death rate per 100000 based on the
year 3 data is
> (12617/5000000)*100000
[1] 252.34
For comparison, see http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004902.html,
Crime Rates for Selected Large Cities, 2002: homicides per 100000 per year.
New York, N.Y. 7.3
Los Angeles, Calif. 17.1
Chicago, Ill. 22.1
Houston, Tex. 12.5
Philadelphia, Pa. 18.9
Phoenix, Ariz. 12.6
San Diego, Calif. 3.7
Dallas, Tex. 15.8
San Antonio, Tex. 8.4
Las Vegas, Nev.3 11.9
Detroit, Mich. 41.8
San Jose, Calif. 2.8
Honolulu, Hawaii 2.0
Indianapolis, Ind.3 13.9
San Francisco, Calif. 8.4
etc...
regards
albyn