The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC), a U.N.-affiliated watchdog, altered its methodology in July to make it easier to declare famine in Gaza. This change has fueled accusations of political bias and manipulation, with critics warning that the move undermines the credibility of humanitarian reporting. The famine fraud controversy centers on the IPC’s decision to replace its longstanding 30% malnutrition threshold—based on detailed weight and height measurements—with a looser 15% threshold measured by mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC), a far less precise method.
Historically, the IPC has declared famine only when 30% of children in a region suffer acute malnutrition confirmed by weight-for-height data. The July Gaza report, however, used MUAC to claim famine-level conditions in Gaza City at 16.5%, while Deir al-Balah and Khan Younis measured below 8%. One veteran aid worker told the Washington Free Beacon it’s “like lowering the bar or making it more possible, essentially, to declare whatever it is that they’re going to declare.”
The IPC’s decision drew further scrutiny because much of its data comes from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Health Ministry and affiliated organizations with alleged terror ties. Critics say such sources are not independently verifiable, yet their claims are presented as fact in global media outlets. Richard Goldberg, a former White House and National Security Council official, said, “There is no famine in Gaza—the data thresholds don’t support that claim—and yet we have the United Nations changing the rules to fit the desired political outcome.”
