Guns or babies?

As military spending increases, infant mortality rates increase as well, according to an analysis of data from 141 countries by Harvard and Boston University researchers. The relationship held for underdeveloped, middle developed and developed nations, they report in the June 14 LANCET. While the study shows a correlation and not a causation, the researchers say it is "highly plausible" that a causal link exists, since money spent on the military is unavailable for social programs that could decrease infant mortality.

The researchers considered 22 economic, social, health and military spending indicators independently. While the analysis did not permit a ranking of the factors, it did indicate which ones were strong enough to affect infant mortality, says Davis U. Himmelstein of Harvard.

As with previous studies, low infant mortality was linked with clean water, adequate nutrition and a high level of education in the country. The researchers looked at data from 1972 and 1979 and found that an increase in arms spending led to an increase in the infant mortality rate. A reduction in economic development, health resources and social spending was also related to a higher incidence of infant deaths.

Military spending is a "highly significant predictor of infant mortality," says Himmelstein. In Japan, which spends less than 1 percent of its gross national product on the military, the infant mortality rate is about 6 deaths before the age of one year per 1,000 live births, while the United States, with a 6 percent military spending rate, has an infant mortality rate of about 11 per 1,000, he points out. "The study suggests a good deal of the difference may be due to military spending," says Himmelstein.

But authors of several letters in the July 6 LANCET claim there is not enough evidence to support a direct causal relationship.