Statistical association alone can never establish biological causation in a legal case

Evidence

It had not addressed the biological causes of leukemia. It did not prove that the contaminated well water had caused the leukemias. It showed only that those children who drank water from Wells G and H were more likely to get leukemia than those who did not. Schlichtmann knew that he and Roisman would need more than this study to prove that TCE had caused leukemia in Jimmy Anderson and the other children. — , Harr Jonathan - A Civil Action, 642

Categorization

• DEEPTHINKING: The gap between correlation and causation isn’t a slogan here but a concrete litigation problem: a 153-page study that shows only ‘more likely’ still can’t prove a solvent caused a specific child’s cancer.
• ADDENDUM: Directly supports the ‘On Sacrifice’ strand’s interest in how institutions demand proof of harm — here the law’s evidentiary standard outruns epidemiology’s capacity.
• XREF: connects to: Sequence alone never establishes causation as a matter of law — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1134; Chronological sequence alone never proves causation — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1130

Broader Connections

• Sequence alone never establishes causation as a matter of law #corroborates (0.95) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1134
• Chronological sequence alone never proves causation #corroborates (0.90) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1130