Science is dedicated to solving puzzles. When one piece is missing, we see its silhouette. We can visualize its size, shape, even color or pattern. Thus, scientific research does not produce novelty. While research does take both money and talent, it is often confirming what we already know or what we want to know.

There is currently one piece missing to the puzzle in Iraq. In recent years, unusually large numbers of infants have been born with congenital birth defects (Al-Rubeyi, Al-Sabbak, Busby). The question is, what is causing these birth defects? The World Health Organization (WHO), a multi-billion dollar international organization, is often portrayed as an omnipotent do-gooder and public health superhero. Yet the WHO is caught on a tight leash, made up of crooked contributions and competing political interests. The WHO is funded through a combination of “assessed” and “voluntary” contributions, which include both public and non-government funders such as foundations, investment banks, corporations, and NGO’s (globalhealthpolicy). Evidently, the WHO is only as good as the powers that provide its web of funding.

In the case of congenital birth defects (CBD) in Iraq, many questions have been raised about the validity of the WHO’s findings. Co-authored by the Iraqi Ministry of Health (MOH), the study claims that there is “no clear evidence to suggest an unusually high rate of congenital birth defects in Iraq” (MOH). However, this conclusion was reached through shoddy research that catered towards a desired and expected response from interviewees. Busby mentions mothers were “very sensitive to the question about birth defects” due to stigma. A similar situation was noted for survivors of the Hiroshima bombing. This undoubtedly would skew the data in the direction of fewer reported birth defects.

Additionally, the MOH report claims an absence of comparable data. Of course, a firm baseline as a means of comparison is necessary for generating sound conclusions. However, the assertion that research collected in the 18 selected districts, “cannot be compared directly with data from congenital anomaly registries in high income settings” is a logical fallacy. The report is presenting only one alternative for consideration when other possibilities exist. This discrediting technique subtly moves the accountability downstream, away from the invading forces and into the hands of Iraqi individuals. Furthermore, it implies that SES and infrastructural issues such as inadequate hospitals, can be blamed for abnormal birth defects, absolving the WHO and MOH of any further responsibility to continue research.

Overall, the WHO conducted a study that acts as a successful confirmation of theories and beliefs already held. The fallacious argument is persuasive, but it does not logically support its conclusion. According to independent experts and former UN and WHO officials, there is abundant research affirming both abundant rates of congenital birth defects as well as “plausible link[s] to the impact of depleted uranium” (Ahmed).

Moreover, doctors such as Samira Alani provide very strong evidence of high rates of CBD’s in Iraq. While her proof is anecdotal, embodied knowledge and lay experience is one of the strongest assets in the midst of a dire, and deeply convoluted crisis.