Papers by Clifford Miller
Are unproven unscientific theories accepted in court? Published December 2012 – The Law Society A... more Are unproven unscientific theories accepted in court? Published December 2012 – The Law Society Advocacy Section Newsletter Clifford Miller, a solicitor and a former university lecturer, considers some family cases where testimony from since-discredited scientific experts has led to injustices, and looks at how the legal system should manage expert scientific evidence. In our courts, the innocent are sometimes convicted and children removed from parents on the basis of what are presented as scientific theories. Parents may be accused of Munchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy (MSbP), now renamed Fabricated or Induced Illness (FII) (alleged abuse by inventing illnesses in their children), or murder (due to Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS) or when more than one child dies from Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS)). What the average family practitioner may not know is the details of the science behind these allegations. SIDS In some cases of SIDS, a parent, often the last person alone with their still...
Published March 2013 for The Law Society Advocacy Section Newsletter under the headline " Po... more Published March 2013 for The Law Society Advocacy Section Newsletter under the headline " Pointing the finger " Clifford G. Miller, a solicitor and a former university lecturer, considers recent developments questioning the infallibility of fingerprint forensic evidence For nearly 100 years, internationally and in the UK, 16 ridge characteristics of partial latent fingerprints found at crime scenes have been used as the standard by fingerprint examiners to compare against inked prints taken from suspects (see R v Castleton (Thomas Herbert) (1910) 3 Cr App R 74). These identifications have, in all but rare cases, been treated unquestioningly as an exact means of linking a suspect to a crime scene print. The standard of taking 16 ridge characteristics was based on a 1912 paper published in France by M. Alphonse Bertillon ( Les empreintes digitales, Archives d’anthropologie criminelle , pages 36-52). In a 1999 Court of Appeal judgment, the then vice president of the court, Lo...
In Reply: Dr. Grosch is a clever logician whose cunningly crafted sham peer review has our admira... more In Reply: Dr. Grosch is a clever logician whose cunningly crafted sham peer review has our admiration and close scrutiny. His main point claims we make a distinction without a difference between scientific and legal evidence and reasoning, stating legal standards of proof entail value judgments which are inaccessible to objective verification The main point fails, however, as our focus is medical, not scientific evidence. Nevertheless, we highlight that sciences methodological biases and consensus opinions ensure that science is not as objectively verifiable as commonly thought. ........ [continues ...]
This book is a "must-read" for all AAPS members: practitioners, researchers, administra... more This book is a "must-read" for all AAPS members: practitioners, researchers, administrators, and managers: an essential textbook of at least first reference and more. It is impressive and an intellectual joy in just over 300 pages. The author is a consultant physician and gastroenterologist in a National Health Service district general hospital in the north of England, with a background in the pharmaceutical industry and clinical research. He displays a deep understanding of the many subjects that come together in this thoroughly researched, comprehensive, intellectually stimulating, and—most bizarrely for a book on statistics— enjoyable text. The author explains complex subject matter absent the jargon and opaque flowery language that academics sometimes use to disguise their inability to explain their own subject. And the typeface is comfortable also. This is not merely a book on medical statistics. It has a breadth and depth of coverage of a multiplicity of subjects tha...
Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
Abstract Most modern knowledge is not science. The physical sciences have successfully validated ... more Abstract Most modern knowledge is not science. The physical sciences have successfully validated theories to infer they can be used universally to predict in previously unexperienced circumstances. According to the conventional conception of science such inferences are falsified by a single irregular outcome. And verification is by the scientific method which requires strict regularity of outcome and establishes cause and effect. Medicine, medical research and many “soft” sciences are concerned with individual people in complex heterogeneous populations. These populations cannot be tested to demonstrate strict regularity of outcome in every individual. Neither randomised controlled trials nor observational studies in medicine are science in the conventional conception. Establishing and using medical and other “soft science” theories cannot be scientific. It requires conceptually different means: requiring expert judgement applying all available evidence in the relevant available fac...
Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, Jun 21, 2014
"Abstract
Rationale, aims and objectives
Irregularity limits human ability to know, underst... more "Abstract
Rationale, aims and objectives
Irregularity limits human ability to know, understand and predict. A better understanding of irregularity may improve the reliability of knowledge.
Method
Irregularity and its consequences for knowledge are considered.
Results
Reliable predictive empirical knowledge of the physical world has always been obtained by observation of regularities, without needing science or theory. Prediction from observational knowledge can remain reliable despite some theories based on it proving false. A naïve theory of irregularity is outlined. Reducing irregularity and/or increasing regularity can increase the reliability of knowledge. Beyond long experience and specialization, improvements include implementing supporting knowledge systems of libraries of appropriately classified prior cases and clinical histories and education about expertise, intuition and professional judgement.
Conclusions
A consequence of irregularity and complexity is that classical reductionist science cannot provide reliable predictions of the behaviour of complex systems found in nature, including of the human body. Expertise, expert judgement and their exercise appear overarching. Diagnosis involves predicting the past will recur in the current patient applying expertise and intuition from knowledge and experience of previous cases and probabilistic medical theory. Treatment decisions are an educated guess about the future (prognosis). Benefits of the improvements suggested here are likely in fields where paucity of feedback for practitioners limits development of reliable expert diagnostic intuition. Further analysis, definition and classification of irregularity is appropriate. Observing and recording irregularities are initial steps in developing irregularity theory to improve the reliability and extent of knowledge, albeit some forms of irregularity present inherent difficulties."
The International Journal of Person Centered Medicine, Dec 1, 2011
International Journal of Person Centered Medicine, 2011
As a way to make medical decisions, Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) has failed. EBM's failure arise... more As a way to make medical decisions, Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) has failed. EBM's failure arises from not being founded on real-world decision-making. EBM aspires to a scientific standard for the best way to treat a disease and determine its cause, but it fails to recognise that the scientific method is inapplicable to medical and other real-world decision-making. EBM also wrongly assumes that evidence can be marshaled and applied according to an hierarchy that is determined in an argument by authority to the method by which it has been obtained. If EBM had valid theoretical, practical or empirical foundations, there would be no hierarchy of evidence. In all real-world decision-making, evidence stands or falls on its inherent reliability. This has to be and can only be assessed on a case-by-case basis applying understanding and wisdom against the background of all available facts-the "factual matrix." EBM's failure is structural and was inevitable from its inception. EBM confuses the inherent reliability and probative value of evidence with the means by which it is obtained.
The International Journal of Person Centred Medicine, Sep 1, 2011
Journal Israeli Medical Association, Nov 16, 2010
The Computer Lawyer, May 1, 1992
Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, Dec 1, 2006
The Oxford University-based Cochrane Collaboration had previously been dependent on British gover... more The Oxford University-based Cochrane Collaboration had previously been dependent on British government funding. A change in funding completed by 2004 appears to leave Cochrane now more vulnerable to undue influence from commercial and government funding sources. Cochrane's 2005 published policies on commercial conflicts of interest do not address and appear ineffective to prevent conflicts over government funding and undue political interference.
Computer Law & Pradtice, Jan 1, 1992
The Computer Lawyer, Aug 1, 1992
Applied Computer and Communications Law, Aug 1, 1992
Computer Law & Practice, Sep 1, 1992
Computer Law & Practice, Mar 1, 1992
Uploads
Papers by Clifford Miller
Rationale, aims and objectives
Irregularity limits human ability to know, understand and predict. A better understanding of irregularity may improve the reliability of knowledge.
Method
Irregularity and its consequences for knowledge are considered.
Results
Reliable predictive empirical knowledge of the physical world has always been obtained by observation of regularities, without needing science or theory. Prediction from observational knowledge can remain reliable despite some theories based on it proving false. A naïve theory of irregularity is outlined. Reducing irregularity and/or increasing regularity can increase the reliability of knowledge. Beyond long experience and specialization, improvements include implementing supporting knowledge systems of libraries of appropriately classified prior cases and clinical histories and education about expertise, intuition and professional judgement.
Conclusions
A consequence of irregularity and complexity is that classical reductionist science cannot provide reliable predictions of the behaviour of complex systems found in nature, including of the human body. Expertise, expert judgement and their exercise appear overarching. Diagnosis involves predicting the past will recur in the current patient applying expertise and intuition from knowledge and experience of previous cases and probabilistic medical theory. Treatment decisions are an educated guess about the future (prognosis). Benefits of the improvements suggested here are likely in fields where paucity of feedback for practitioners limits development of reliable expert diagnostic intuition. Further analysis, definition and classification of irregularity is appropriate. Observing and recording irregularities are initial steps in developing irregularity theory to improve the reliability and extent of knowledge, albeit some forms of irregularity present inherent difficulties."
Rationale, aims and objectives
Irregularity limits human ability to know, understand and predict. A better understanding of irregularity may improve the reliability of knowledge.
Method
Irregularity and its consequences for knowledge are considered.
Results
Reliable predictive empirical knowledge of the physical world has always been obtained by observation of regularities, without needing science or theory. Prediction from observational knowledge can remain reliable despite some theories based on it proving false. A naïve theory of irregularity is outlined. Reducing irregularity and/or increasing regularity can increase the reliability of knowledge. Beyond long experience and specialization, improvements include implementing supporting knowledge systems of libraries of appropriately classified prior cases and clinical histories and education about expertise, intuition and professional judgement.
Conclusions
A consequence of irregularity and complexity is that classical reductionist science cannot provide reliable predictions of the behaviour of complex systems found in nature, including of the human body. Expertise, expert judgement and their exercise appear overarching. Diagnosis involves predicting the past will recur in the current patient applying expertise and intuition from knowledge and experience of previous cases and probabilistic medical theory. Treatment decisions are an educated guess about the future (prognosis). Benefits of the improvements suggested here are likely in fields where paucity of feedback for practitioners limits development of reliable expert diagnostic intuition. Further analysis, definition and classification of irregularity is appropriate. Observing and recording irregularities are initial steps in developing irregularity theory to improve the reliability and extent of knowledge, albeit some forms of irregularity present inherent difficulties."