Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Igel

(35,427 posts)
4. Perhaps.
Sun Nov 19, 2023, 05:15 PM
Nov 2023

But instead of comparing "most will die" versus "all will live" if left in place during war, I'd want to know the survival rate at that hospital pre-war.

That's the control situation, the 'null hypothesis.' That's what you compare against. Not "most would have died" versus "all would have survived"--an assumption that might be horribly wrong. (Actually, the "most would die" is also just a prediction. Data, I'm sure, is forthcoming.)

If most would have died in 9/23, then the difference is a detail. If most would have lived in 9/23, then there's unnecessary death caused by the declaration of war by Hamas on 10/7 in violation of the ceasefire and the rather lopsided war carried out by Israel after lots of evacuation warnings.

I don't know if Israel or Egypt or any other countries were called upon to help evacuate the most innocent and vulnerable from ash-Shifa. I'd imagine *that* could have been worked out. Hard to disguise a current Hamas fighter as a preemie or a newborn at-risk.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»30 premature babies have ...»Reply #4