Comments on: Stick to what you know http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2005/04/stick-to-what-you-know.html medical blog Sun, 22 Nov 2009 19:59:44 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Anonymous http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2005/04/stick-to-what-you-know.html/comment-page-1#comment-52442 Anonymous Thu, 14 Apr 2005 12:26:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2005/04/stick-to-what-you-know.html#comment-52442 Yes, judges and even jurists are asked for decisions on cases ranging from liver failure to rocket science. In many cases, they are almost clueless but deliver verdicts that transfer millions of dollars. And lawyers always get their share. It’s the system we have. Yes, judges and even jurists are asked for decisions on cases ranging from liver failure to rocket science. In many cases, they are almost clueless but deliver verdicts that transfer millions of dollars. And lawyers always get their share. It’s the system we have.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2005/04/stick-to-what-you-know.html/comment-page-1#comment-52435 Anonymous Thu, 14 Apr 2005 00:38:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2005/04/stick-to-what-you-know.html#comment-52435 Sorry, doc, it is about your preening, absurd arrogance. Courts must find facts about virtually everything in society--including highly technical, difficult areas in which professionals disagree--from mechanical engineering and pharmacology in product liability cases to statistics in employment discrimination cases and corporate finance in securities fraud. We don't require experts to assist judges in these highly technical matters--why are doctors different?<br/><br/>Ah, yes, back to their extraordinary, preening arrogance. Sorry, doc, it is about your preening, absurd arrogance. Courts must find facts about virtually everything in society–including highly technical, difficult areas in which professionals disagree–from mechanical engineering and pharmacology in product liability cases to statistics in employment discrimination cases and corporate finance in securities fraud. We don’t require experts to assist judges in these highly technical matters–why are doctors different?

Ah, yes, back to their extraordinary, preening arrogance.

]]>