As every school child knows, or at least every law student in the United States knows, Daubert was a Bendectin case. The plaintiff claimed that his mother’s use of Bendectin, a prescription anti-nausea medication, during pregnancy caused him to be born with a major limb reduction defect.
Filed in 1984, the Daubert case was pending,…

The version of the Reference Manual on the NASEM website still has the climate science chapter.
The FJC website has a version without the climate science chapter. There is a note that the chapter was removed on February 6, 2026.
Perhaps the two organizations should talk?
The FJC retraction has been covered by many media outlets, but…

When the new, fourth, edition of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence was released late last year,[1] I remarked that there were some new chapters,[2] including one on climate change. I found the addition of a chapter on climate change curious largely because I was unfamiliar with the science or the need to…

In May 1970, Selikoff testified in support of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, on which the Senate was then deliberating. By many accounts, Selikoff’s testimony helped overcome significant resistance to “federalizing” the workplace,[1] by establishing national standards for worker safety and health. Activists in the labor movement credit Selikoff’s testimony as…

After checking to see whether the new Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence[1] attended to some long overdue corrections, I turned my attention to the substance of the chapter on epidemiology. A cursory comparison between the third[2] and fourth[3] editions of the epidemiology chapter in the Reference Manual a lot of carry over…

The third edition of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence[1] had some problems with its discussion of so-called signature diseases.[2] There was a distinct need for the  epidemiology chapter in particular to improve in its fourth edition[3] on the issue of so-called signature diseases, diseases caused by only a single cause. The…

So now that the new, fourth, edition of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence,[1] has been released, inquiring minds may want to know whether it has corrected errors in the previous, third, edition.[2] The authors of the new edition have had 14 years to ponder and reflect upon errors and to correct them.…