Daubert teaches that one should not just rely on the credentials of the medical expert. The medical expert in Federal court, and increasingly in the State courts, must be more than credible, as evidenced by Board Certification. Testimony must continue to be based on medical knowledge within the physician’s expertise. But whenever possible, the medical expert must currently also support all methodology and opinions with objective documentation and “reliable methodology”. The important questions now are: Has the expert’s theory or technique in question been tested? Has it been subjected to peer review and publication? What is its error rate? Do standards exist? Is there widespread acceptance in the medical community? In summary with what learned treatises from peer reviewed medical publications can the medical expert document and thus support his opinions or theories? The Daubert test applies to all scientific evidence. (509 U.S. at 593,n.11) The Daubert-Joiner-Kumho trilogy has in practice raised the bar for admissibility of expert testimony in every category. Additionally it is difficult if not impossible, for even an experienced medical clinician or practitioner to offer an expert opinion based on technical or specialized knowledge obtained through experience or education alone.