In The Lancet, a Claim of 186,000 Casualties in Gaza

The Lancet is one of the most respected medical journals in the world. Yet it recently published a letter by three authors, two of them Muslim Arabs, claiming that the number of dead in Gaza may be as high as 186,000, more than four times the number —39,000 — claimed by Hamas itself, and Hamas is known to exaggerate. More on this astonishing claim, which was picked up by major media around the world, including the BBC and CNN, can be found here: “Grotesque Lancet Libel Reprinted by NYT, WaPo, MSNBC, The Independent and Irish Times,” by Rachel O’Donoghue, HonestReporting, July 11, 2024:

As predictable as it is frustrating, the letter penned by Rasha Khatib, Martin McKee, and Salim Yusuf and published in the supposedly respectable medical journal, The Lancet, has found its way into international media outlets that really should know better.

Earlier this week, we noted that a piece published in the “correspondence” section of the journal — so, not a peer-reviewed study or anything remotely rigorous — contained numerous grossly misleading and outright false statements.

Remember: this was not a peer-reviewed article, paper, or study. It was only a letter. No one at The Lancetchecked its contents, much less subjected it to the kind of review that is given to articles by the staff of The Lancet. But many people will not make that distinction, and will believe that the letter has as much peer-reviewed authority behind it as an article.

Among the more outrageous claims in this letter was the assertion that it is not “implausible” that the overall number of deaths in Gaza could be higher than 186,000 — a figure the authors concocted by comparing Gaza to other conflicts with no substantial basis. Meanwhile, even Hamas estimates casualties at figures four times lower.

It’s not “implausible,” the letter writers assert, that the deaths of Gaza might be even more than 186,000. Where does this come from? Was there a scientific study, with all work shown, arrived at that figure? No, there was nothing of the sort. And surely the first question one has to ask is this: if even Hamas, which always strives to exaggerate the number of Gazans killed, has never come close to that figure of 186,000, on what basis should we conclude that that number is correct?

Besides presenting wildly inaccurate numbers pulled out of thin air, the letter also featured several incorrect citations, questionable sources, and one footnote even linked to the wrong UN study. Not exactly thorough research.

It is, of course, embarrassing for a well-respected journal like The Lancet to publish such inaccuracies. However, it’s important to note that this piece is not a peer-reviewed study, paper, or article. Any attempt to present it as such is flat-out dishonest.

A number of anti-Israel media outlets, such as Al Jazeera, The National, and The New Arab, pounced on the Lancet letter, obscuring its nature to present it as a study, suggesting that either The Lancet itself or its “experts” are behind the 186,000 casualty figure.

All three of these Arab publications —Al Jazeera is owned by the Hamas-supporting government of Qatar, The National is owned by the UAE government, and The New Arab by a Qatari news company — that reported on the Lancet letter, taking it perfectly seriously, are anti-Israel media outlets, though The National occasionally manages to be less malign than the other two. In picking up the story, they referred not to a “letter,” but to a “report published in The Lancet, one of the world’s most authoritative medical journals.” Readers thus had no way of knowing this was not a peer-reviewed study, but the wild unsubstantiated conclusions of three cosigners of the letter, all of whom are virulently anti-Israel, and not one of the three is a specialist in estimating the number of casualties in a war.

And, as sure as night follows day, several supposedly trustworthy news outlets followed the Arab media’s lead, reprinting this grotesque libel without the slightest bit of scrutiny.

The Washington Post, for example, reported that “The Lancet, a respected British medical journal, calculated that the real death toll, including those missing in Gaza’s ruins and ‘indirect’ deaths from malnutrition, disease and other conditions brought on by the conflict, could be around 186,000 people — that is, roughly 8 percent of Gaza’s population.”

The Washington Post misinformed its readers. It was not “The Lancet, a respected British medical journal,” that calculated a “real death toll” of 186,000, but only the three writers of a single letter, all of them with anti-Israel backgrounds (as determined by their comments on social media), who — let it again be stated — came up with that figure that is more than four times as large as the largest Hamas figure put out to date.

While noting the piece was not peer-reviewed, MSNBC still described it as an “analysis” of the death toll and covered its findings in detail. However, MSNBC reporter Clarissa-Jan Lim did not perform even the basic due diligence of verifying the sources cited in the letter.

The MSNBC reporter did not check any of the sources cited in the letter. Had she done so, she would have discovered that it included several incorrect citations, doubtful sources, and a footnote that sent readers to the wrong UN study. Due diligence is not MNBC’s strong suit.

Several other news outlets also reported the journal’s “findings.” The UK’s Mirror stated that the “reputable medical journal” claimed deaths could exceed 186,000. The Independent, The Irish Times and New York Mag similarly reported that a “recent calculation by The Lancet puts the civilian death toll in Gaza at around 186,000 people, roughly 8 percent of the territory’s population.”

The figure of 186,000 possible deaths in not based on “findings” by The Lancet. The figure was not arrived at after a “recent calculation by The Lancet” — “that reputable medical journal” — but merely was contained in a letter which The Lancet, much to its shame, had not subjected to any review, despite knowing full well the inflammatory nature of the charges in that letter..

The Metro alluded to the “ever-present fear of death” among Gaza’s civilians and suggested that the “true death toll could be more than 186,000 people, according to correspondence recently published in the journal The Lancet.”

The “correspondence” was not a lively exchange of views among experts. It was only a single letter, not peer-reviewed, as are all the articles — studies, analyses — in The Lancet, and those relying on may not realize it has no authority behind it. Nor did those who quoted this letter, both absurd in its conclusions and malign in its effect (accusing the Jewish state of possibly being responsible for causing the deaths of 186,000 Gazans), realize that the letter was not peer-reviewed and had no more authority than a letter that you or I might send to The Lancet.

The New York Times’ Opinion Editor Meher Ahmad was one of the few journalists to correctly describe the piece as a “letter.” However, she still attempted to contextualize the authors’ “staggering” number, describing the contents of the missive as “more a call for open documentation of casualties than anything else.”…

No, the letter was not a call for “open documentation of casualties.” It was a call, rather, to accept lies about the casualties in Gaza as the truth.

Neither the English Daily Mirror, nor New York Magazine, nor the Irish Times, nor The Metro, have seen fit to correct their identification of the letter as “an article in The Lancet”; nor have they since rectified their credulous acceptance of the figure provided in that letter. Again, HonestReporting has corrected the record, but there are now millions of people who now believe that “experts” at The Lancet believe the IDF may be responsible for the deaths of 186,000 Gazans. How many will read what HonestReportng has reported on this letter in The Lancet? How many will read this corrective at Jihad Watch?

It’s as Mark Twain famously said: “A lie can go halfway around the world, while the truth is still putting on its shoes.”