For those who have been wondering about the source and reliability of Myanmar disaster toll estimates, Slate provides an explanation: “eyewitnesses and guesswork.” Add a dash of data and a pound of politics, whirl in a blender and serve cold.

Government relief workers and agents from NGOs assess stricken neighborhoods for casualties. They literally count bodies, take down reports from district officials or locals who have lost family members, and make estimates based on damage to infrastructure. (If there are 20 people missing and they all worked in a building that collapsed due to a tremor, the relief workers might count those 20 people as dead.) The workers then report back either to a government agency in charge of emergency assistance or to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. An aggregate figure filters down to national media outlets. (Slate)

Population estimates derived from satellite imagery and demographic data provide ballpark estimates of the original populations, which are inflated or minimized depending on whether the estimator is trying to make sure relief supplies are generous (UN) or trying to play down culpability (Myanmar government). Newspapers and potential donors are caught in the middle .

Newspapers and wire services don’t have the resources to verify mortality statistics independently, so you’ll often see two or more numbers cited in the same article. (Slate)

Bottom line: accurate figures are elusive, but probably lie somewhere between the high (U.N.) and low (responsible government) estimates. Unfortunately, the difference in this case would populate a small city.