I wrote last week about the World Health Organization revising down its numbers on maternal mortality, noting that the UN agency had arrived at basically the same place as some Seattle-based researchers roundly criticized for previously challenging WHO’s higher estimates.
Basically, it was good news. Maternal deaths are down to about 350,000 annually as opposed to the previous estimate of half a million. That’s still unacceptably high, of course, but it is progress.
Last spring, the New York Times quoted the editor of the Lancet, Richard Horton, saying he had been pressured “to delay or hold publication” of the Seattle group’s findings because some feared the lower numbers would hurt fund-raising and cause “potential political damage to maternal advocacy campaigns.”
WHO’s Colin Mathers was gracious enough to respond, explaining that they arrived at the same place as Seattle’s Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation but by a different path, and with a few variations.
“Maternal mortality is one of the most difficult indicators to measure,” says Mathers. Causes of maternal death are often incorrectly reported, he says, and health institutions are often loathe to report them because of the “stigma” of having high rates of maternal deaths.
Mathers’ complete response is detailed and long. For you data geeks, who want to read the whole thing, please Continue reading
