Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by JumpCrisscross 252 days ago
> Acute malnourishment going above 10% is not an inevitable outcome of war

I don't know enough about this topic to debate levels. I'd just point out that you're still specifying a level, and that level can't be zero if it's going to be taken seriously.
1 comments
Dylan16807 252 days ago
I'm specifying a level that is clearly too high, and everyone agrees has been hit, and avoids semantic arguments.

This solves the problem you were devil's advocating. And we don't need to theorize about other numbers.

link
foxglacier 252 days ago
Not sure this is defined the same way but 10% seems pretty common even without war. Even India is apparently already worse than that [1]. Who would you blame for starving the Indians?

[1] https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/malnutrit...

and "in 2019, the global rate of malnutrition was estimated to be approximately 9 percent." [1].

link
JumpCrisscross 252 days ago
> Not sure this is defined the same way

It's not.

According to the IPC, "acute malnutrition is a form of malnutrition that occurs when an individual suffers from current, severe nutritional restrictions, a recent bout of illness, inappropriate childcare practices or, more often, a combination of these factors. It is characterised by extreme weight loss, resulting in low weight for height, and/or bilateral oedema, and, in its severe form, can lead to death." [1].

Your chart measures undernourishment, which the FAO defines relative to "how many calories [one] need[s] to maintain a healthy life" [2].

[1] https://www.nutritioncluster.net/sites/nutritioncluster.com/...

[2] https://ourworldindata.org/undernourishment-definition

link