相似文献
1
False claims in tobacco litigation junk science article.
Am J Public Health. 2006 May;96(5):767; author reply 767. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2005.084749. Epub 2006 Mar 29.
2
How tobacco-friendly science escapes scrutiny in the courtroom.
Am J Public Health. 2005;95 Suppl 1:S16-20. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2004.046227.
3
Legislating "sound science": the role of the tobacco industry.
Am J Public Health. 2005;95 Suppl 1:S20-7. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2004.050963.
4
Mass tort litigation and inquisitorial justice.
Georgetown Law J. 1999 Jun;87(6):1983-2024.
5
Junk science v. American competitiveness.
J Biomater Appl. 1993 Jul;8(1):3-19.
6
The medical expert, junk reasoning, and junk science in personal injury litigation.
Tort Trial Insur Pract Law J. 2005 Summer;40(4):1101-43.
7
Privacy. Court orders Stanford expert to surrender manuscript.
Science. 2009 Nov 6;326(5954):780-1. doi: 10.1126/science.326_780b.
8
Junking good science: undoing Daubert v Merrill Dow through cross-examination and argument.
Am J Public Health. 2006 Jan;96(1):33-7. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2005.063917. Epub 2005 Nov 29.
9
Bearing witness for tobacco.
J Public Health Policy. 2000;21(3):296-302.
10
Attorney abuses of Daubert hearings: junk science, junk law, or just plain obstruction?
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2005;33(2):150-2.
本文引用的文献
1
How tobacco-friendly science escapes scrutiny in the courtroom.
Am J Public Health. 2005;95 Suppl 1:S16-20. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2004.046227.
Zotero 插件