First of all, the number 100,000 is really the number 98,000. Minor point, really, but since we’re talking numbers let’s be accurate. Don’t exaggerate.
AND (and this is the important one)
The number 98,000 is really a number 95% likely to be between 8,000 and 194,000.
In the arcane world of mathematical statistics, this is what’s called a B.F.S., or “Big Spread”.
Although not a statician in any sense, I do believe that results with a 95% accuracy rating are considered not all that terribly accurate in the statistics world. Someone straighten me out if I’m off base here.
Nukevet on Random Nuclear Strikes commented about this number on a post that was originally about the Marines around Ramadi:
The Lancet study has been widely slammed as pseudoscience by a large group of epidemiologists – the study is flawed, the conclusions bogus, and completely unsupported by any semblance of facts.
I respectfully point out that calling this study pseudoscience is a direct insult to real pseudoscientists everywhere.
But some either don’t understand or don’t care.