首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>American Journal of Public Hygiene >Junking Good Science: Undoing Daubert v Merrill Dow Through Cross-Examination and Argument
【2h】

Junking Good Science: Undoing Daubert v Merrill Dow Through Cross-Examination and Argument

机译:垃圾科学:通过盘问和争论来撤销道伯特v默里尔道

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

For more than 40 years, the tobacco industry prevailed in lawsuits brought by injured smokers, despite overwhelming epidemiological evidence that smoking caused lung cancer. Tobacco lawyers were able to create doubt about causation. They sought to persuade jurors that “everybody knew” smoking was harmful but “nobody knows” what causes cancer by recreating in court the scientific debate resolved by the 1964 Surgeon General’s Report.The particularistic structure of jury trials combined with the law’s mechanistic view of causation enables a defendant to contest virtually any claim concerning disease causation. Despite judicial efforts to eliminate “junk science” from lawsuits, a well-financed defendant may succeed in persuading jurors of the epidemiological equivalent of the proposition that the earth is flat.
机译:尽管有大量流行病学证据表明吸烟导致肺癌,但40多年来,烟草业盛行于受伤吸烟者提起的诉讼。烟草律师能够对因果关系产生怀疑。他们试图说服陪审员说,“每个人都知道”吸烟是有害的,但“没人知道”是什么导致癌症,他们通过在法庭上重现1964年美国外科医生的报告解决的科学辩论。陪审团审判的特殊结构与法律对因果关系的看法使被告几乎可以就有关疾病因果关系的任何主张提出异议。尽管司法部门努力从诉讼中消除“垃圾科学”,但经费充裕的被告可能会成功说服陪审员,使他们认为流行病学等同于地球是平坦的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号