<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What does breastfeeding have to do with 22,000 missing girls?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://chrisblattman.com/2009/09/25/what-does-breastfeeding-have-to-do-with-22000-missing-girls/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://chrisblattman.com/2009/09/25/what-does-breastfeeding-have-to-do-with-22000-missing-girls/</link>
	<description>Research, international development, foreign policy, and violent conflict</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2010 19:38:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: John B. Chilton</title>
		<link>http://chrisblattman.com/2009/09/25/what-does-breastfeeding-have-to-do-with-22000-missing-girls/comment-page-1/#comment-7562</link>
		<dc:creator>John B. Chilton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Oct 2009 12:33:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chrisblattman.com/?p=3518#comment-7562</guid>
		<description>When preference for boys comes up, I&#039;m always reminded of the paradox that if parents do no more than stop having children once they have a boy, then the proportion of boys in the population will be the same as the unconditional probability of having a boy (close to 1/2). What has changed here is that girls are being killed, inadvertently or not.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When preference for boys comes up, I&#8217;m always reminded of the paradox that if parents do no more than stop having children once they have a boy, then the proportion of boys in the population will be the same as the unconditional probability of having a boy (close to 1/2). What has changed here is that girls are being killed, inadvertently or not.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim Ogden</title>
		<link>http://chrisblattman.com/2009/09/25/what-does-breastfeeding-have-to-do-with-22000-missing-girls/comment-page-1/#comment-7375</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Ogden</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 16:09:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chrisblattman.com/?p=3518#comment-7375</guid>
		<description>I think it may just be a copyediting error. Read as &quot;THESE missing girls are mainly...&quot;, e.g. that the 14% cited are mainly rather than 50+% of the total missing girls.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think it may just be a copyediting error. Read as &#8220;THESE missing girls are mainly&#8230;&#8221;, e.g. that the 14% cited are mainly rather than 50+% of the total missing girls.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew Gelman</title>
		<link>http://chrisblattman.com/2009/09/25/what-does-breastfeeding-have-to-do-with-22000-missing-girls/comment-page-1/#comment-7365</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew Gelman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 03:59:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chrisblattman.com/?p=3518#comment-7365</guid>
		<description>My first reaction was that of commenter JH above.  The paper says:  &quot;Back-of-the-envelope calculations suggest that breastfeeding accounts for 14 percent of the gender gap in child mortality (deaths between ages one and ve) in India, or 22,000 missing girls each year. Son preference is the underlying cause of this excess female mortality, but in a subtle way: Rather than resulting from parents&#039; explicit decisions to allocate more resources to sons, the missing girls are mainly an unintended consequence of parents&#039; desire to have more future sons.&quot;

How did the authors get from &quot;14 percent&quot; to &quot;mainly&quot;?  I haven&#039;t read the article in detail, and 14% is something, but what about the other 86%?  Perhaps there&#039;s another analytical step there that we didn&#039;t catch.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My first reaction was that of commenter JH above.  The paper says:  &#8220;Back-of-the-envelope calculations suggest that breastfeeding accounts for 14 percent of the gender gap in child mortality (deaths between ages one and ve) in India, or 22,000 missing girls each year. Son preference is the underlying cause of this excess female mortality, but in a subtle way: Rather than resulting from parents&#8217; explicit decisions to allocate more resources to sons, the missing girls are mainly an unintended consequence of parents&#8217; desire to have more future sons.&#8221;</p>
<p>How did the authors get from &#8220;14 percent&#8221; to &#8220;mainly&#8221;?  I haven&#8217;t read the article in detail, and 14% is something, but what about the other 86%?  Perhaps there&#8217;s another analytical step there that we didn&#8217;t catch.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tracy</title>
		<link>http://chrisblattman.com/2009/09/25/what-does-breastfeeding-have-to-do-with-22000-missing-girls/comment-page-1/#comment-7308</link>
		<dc:creator>Tracy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Sep 2009 14:47:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chrisblattman.com/?p=3518#comment-7308</guid>
		<description>Good theory. And so sad actually.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good theory. And so sad actually.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JH</title>
		<link>http://chrisblattman.com/2009/09/25/what-does-breastfeeding-have-to-do-with-22000-missing-girls/comment-page-1/#comment-7288</link>
		<dc:creator>JH</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Sep 2009 03:30:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chrisblattman.com/?p=3518#comment-7288</guid>
		<description>Clever, and entirely plausible.  But that leaves 100-14 = 86% of the excess deaths unexplained.  That does not exactly &quot;explain the millions.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Clever, and entirely plausible.  But that leaves 100-14 = 86% of the excess deaths unexplained.  That does not exactly &#8220;explain the millions.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
