3 ms·
I wasn't assuming pre-war birth rates. [1] suggests 45~50k/yr; [2] suggests ~34k/yr. They're rough figures, ignoring seasonality etc, but it's clear that there
by dlubarov 1y ago
I wasn't assuming pre-war birth rates. [1] suggests 45~50k/yr; [2] suggests ~34k/yr. They're rough figures, ignoring seasonality etc, but it's clear that there are significantly more births than GHM-reported casualties.
There's certainly food insecurity but it would need to get way worse to make a dent in these numbers; so far it's about 100 reported deaths linked to malnutrition during the conflict.
[1] https://www.savethechildren.net/news/about-130-children-born-daily-gaza-amid-total-siege-aid-and-goods https://www.savethechildren.net/news/about-130-children-born...
[2] https://news.un.org/en/story/2025/07/1165471 https://news.un.org/en/story/2025/07/1165471
- slashdev 1y agoIt has to be the most ineptly executed genocide in history - or it’s not a genocide. There are really only those two options.