[Rutles4Ever]

In proper context, it's one million. The article is referring to number of dead across ASIA, not just India. The KNOWN dead is already over 100,000.

I know it's a typo, but I think it's implying one million.

[SF Republican]

I know it's a typo, but I think it's implying one million maybe, that a big jump from 80,000 to 1,000,000

[sukhoi-30mki]

Here's the title of the original article

'Is India underestimating its tsunami dead?'

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/975541.cms

It clearly mentions the number at being 100,000(not a million).It was filed at 11.45am Indian time(That's about last midnight for you folks) & those estimates have been surpassed now.A lot of aerial surveys of the Andamans have been done during this time frame-the death toll there seems to be around 5,500.

In short,the title of this thread has been spiced up.

[ex-Libertarian]

I know this is trivial given the magnitude of this tragedy and the fact that the count is already well over 100,000 and rising, but to clear up any confusion on the India Times article...

In India they use commas in numbers differently than we do. 1,00,000 = 100000; they refer to 100000 as '1 lakh' and put the comma there to denote the # of "lakhs".

They don't use the terms "millions" and "thousands" in India. They use "lakh" (=100 thousand) and "crore" (which equals 10 million).

We put our commas in such a way as to easily identify "thousands" and "millions". They put the
commas so as to make it easy to identify lakhs and crores.

[camas]

no, 1 lakh is 1,00,000. that what the Indians say