UN & UN ESCAP data sources

Re post #5 by Hieronymous and \"the authorities\" I quote.  
 
Read the references quoted in my reply and you find LINKS to the PRIMARY reference sources (the UN Population Division and the UN ESCAP (UN Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific) - they are not a \"tad interesting\" but rather \"extremely authoritative\".  
 
Thus from “World Population Prospects: the 2006 Revision Population Database” of the UN Population Division (see: UN Population Division ), we find that for 2007 (2005-2010) the “under-5 year old infant deaths per 1,000 births” is 29 for China (and a similar value for Tibet as indicated by UN ESCAP data) as compared to values in China’s “good outcome” neighbours of Russia (21), Vietnam (23) and Kazakhstan (29) and in its “poor outcome neighbours” of Mongolia (54), Kyrgyzstan (64), North Korea (65), Bhutan (65), Laos (67), Nepal (72), Tajikistan (78), India (79), Myanmar (97) and US Alliance-occupied Afghanistan (235). 
 
By way of comparison, for 2007 the “under-5 year old infant deaths per 1,000 births” were in the range 5 - 8 for the US (8), Australia (6) and other Western Occupiers of Afghanistan. 
 
These infant mortality statistics can also be presented as “annual under-5 year old death rate percentage” (the percentage of under-5 year olds dying each year) which for 2007 was 0.61% for China (and SIMILAR to this for Tibet according to UN ESCAP data)  
UNESCAP,  
as compared to a SHOCKING 6.2% for US- and Australia-occupied Afghanistan. 
 
The quote from the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica simply makes the point that a top authoritative source in the World saw Tibet as part of China in 1911 just as International Law and the UN (e.g. UNICEF) does in 2008.

http://mwcnews.net/gideon-polya

Guest