By John Q. Hosedrinker 
To avoid sending their sons to fight in Russia, North Korean families are paying exorbitant bribes—over 100 times the average monthly salary—for falsified tuberculosis diagnoses. This cost has increased dramatically as more families seek to prevent their sons’ deployment. The Kim Jong Un regime has reportedly sent thousands of troops to support Russia’s war effort in Ukraine, a deployment met with confusion and growing questions from North Korean citizens. Despite facing significant casualties, Russia may request additional troops from North Korea in the coming months.
Read the original article here
North Koreans faking tuberculosis to avoid military deployment to the war in Russia is a claim circulating online, but its veracity is highly questionable. The initial reports, often lacking rigorous sourcing, raise immediate red flags. The difficulty of obtaining reliable information from North Korea’s tightly controlled environment casts serious doubt on the credibility of these accounts. Independent verification would be extremely challenging, if not impossible, given the restrictions on information flow.
The idea that North Koreans are actively bribing doctors to fake tuberculosis diagnoses to escape conscription feels inherently implausible. The sheer logistics involved, the inherent risks within the authoritarian regime, and the likely exorbitant cost of such a bribe—potentially exceeding 100 times the average monthly salary—makes the scenario highly unlikely. The reported source’s background as a US government-funded organization further fuels skepticism, raising concerns about potential bias or agenda-driven reporting.
The sheer improbability extends beyond the bribery aspect. The suggestion that the average North Korean citizen even possesses sufficient awareness of the Russia-Ukraine war, the concept of military deployment, or the potential use of a fabricated tuberculosis diagnosis as an escape route seems far-fetched. The level of information dissemination needed for such a widespread practice to even be conceivable within the country is improbable. The claim is also contradicted by the low incidence of tuberculosis among North Korean defectors who successfully reach South Korea.
Comparing tuberculosis rates between North Korean defectors and the broader US population highlights the discrepancies in this narrative. The significantly lower rate amongst defectors strongly suggests that widespread faking of tuberculosis is unfounded. While the existence of tuberculosis is undeniable, the prevalence of fraudulent diagnoses to avoid conscription seems unlikely given the facts available. The extremely low rates of tuberculosis in the US population should further make anyone consider the possibility that the rate in North Korea is not actually that high.
The narrative’s reliance on anecdotal evidence and questionable sources significantly undermines its credibility. The comments raise valid points about the need for critical thinking and thorough source verification before accepting such claims at face value. Without substantial corroborating evidence from independent and credible sources, the notion of a widespread practice of faking tuberculosis to avoid military service remains unsubstantiated.
The challenges of independent verification in North Korea highlight the limitations of relying on unverified reports, particularly those originating from sources with potentially biased perspectives. The complexities of life under an authoritarian regime, the lack of accessible information, and the potential for misrepresentation call for a cautious approach when evaluating such accounts. Simply put, the available evidence does not support the conclusion that North Koreans are faking tuberculosis in significant numbers. The entire claim appears much more likely to be a form of sensationalist reporting than a reflection of reality.
In conclusion, while it’s possible isolated instances of individuals attempting to evade conscription might exist, the widespread claim of North Koreans faking tuberculosis on a significant scale to avoid military deployment lacks credibility. The lack of verifiable evidence, the logistical challenges, and the implausibility of the scenario, compounded by the questionable source of the original claim, strongly suggests that this narrative requires significantly more corroboration before it can be accepted as factual. A critical evaluation of the information presented suggests it warrants considerable skepticism.