Before arrival at displacement sites, mortality rates (expressed as deaths per 10 000 per day), were 5·9 (95% CI 2·2–14·9) in Zalingei, 9·5 (6·4–14·0) in Murnei, and 7·3 (3·2–15·7) in Niertiti. Violence caused 68–93% of these deaths. People who were killed were mostly adult men (relative risk 29·1–117·9 compared with children younger than 15 years), but included women and children. Most households fled because of direct village attacks. In camps, mortality rates fell but remained above the emergency benchmark, with a peak of 5·6 in El Geneina. Violence persisted even after displacement. Age and sex pyramids of surviving populations were skewed, with a deficit in men.
Depoortere et al, 2004, 'Violence and mortality in West Darfur, Sudan (2003–04): epidemiological evidence from four surveys', The Lancet
Put those numbers into a calculator and work out how long it would take to kill everybody if things stayed the same. It's fucking scary.
[…] « Mortality in Sudan […]
Fat Vegan › Lancent Study / 1:20pm / 4 November 2006
That’s fucked.
David / 4:59pm / 5 November 2006
I was looking at the numbers a comparing them to Iraq, and they were very similar. Then I realised that these numbers are in deaths per 10,000 per day, and not deaths per thousand per year. So the rate is about 30 times higher.
Ryan / 6:08pm / 5 November 2006