The nation’s largest organization for medical examiners has issued a warning about a controversial, centuries-old forensic test that has contributed to cases in which pregnant women have been charged with murder.
The premise behind the lung float test is simple: If a baby was born alive and then died, air from its first breaths would cause its lungs to float in a jar with water. If the baby was stillborn, the lack of air in the lungs would cause them to sink.
But the many critics of the test have long labeled it junk science and drawn parallels between the test and witch trials, where women were deemed witches based on whether they floated or sank.
Definitely sounds like something out of the early stages of modern medicine; not something still used today.
Sounds a bit like bite mark analysis - make up the result you want, then make the data (or test) fit.
That’s what bad science does, regardless of what’s being done.
And hair analysis. And fibers. All popularized in US to get more convictions but rejected in Europe as junk science.
I don’t see how those are junk science, but I also don’t know how they are being used. Many things can be used in improper ways.
Even DNA tests can be junk if used incorrectly.
They were looking at a hair and saying that they are sure it belongs to the suspect. It was before DNA. It was later discovered that the FBI lab that did this “analysis” would simply say that “yes, it’s a match”. No science behind it. Many people ended in jail because of it, some were executed and later exonerated by DNA tests. There was a big scandal about it couple of years ago.
Well, that’s just bad science regardless of what was actually being tested.