class actions, disabled rights, copyright, attorneys general, online speech, law schools, obesity, New York, mortgages, legal blogs, safety, CPSC, pharmaceuticals, patent trolls, ADA filing mills, international human rights, humor, hate speech, illegal drugs, immigration law, cellphones, international law, real estate, bar associations, Environmental Protection Agency, First Amendment, insurance fraud, slip and fall, smoking bans, emergency medicine, regulation and its reform, dramshop statutes, hotels, web accessibility, United Nations, Alien Tort Claims Act, lobbyists, pools, school discipline, Voting Rights Act, legal services programs
   
   
 
   

FORUM

« Our editor: audio | Almanac: function of transactional lawyers »

January 21, 2005


Daubert's detractors

The American Medical Association may applaud the Supreme Court's efforts to exclude unsound science from the courtroom (see Jan. 4), but not all medical professionals share its enthusiasm. The American Public Health Association, to name one group, passed a resolution this past fall deploring Daubert and its effects. As Sally Satel has well documented, APHA has long aligned itself with a style of ostensibly progressive politics whose connection to traditional public health concerns can seem tenuous: see this piece (in 2001, by way of example, "the APHA put forth policy resolutions against national missile defense, the war in Southwest Asia, and the General Agreement on Trade in Services") and this one (APHA convention presenters keen on blaming capitalism and social inequality for disease).

Posted by Walter Olson at 12:02 AM | TrackBack (0)



categories:
Medicine and Law
Scientific Evidence









 

 

Published by the Manhattan Institute

The Manhattan Insitute's Center for Legal Policy.