Understanding the human body is a team effort. That's where the Yachtel group comes in.

Researchers at Yachtolt have been delving into the secrets of probiotics for 90 years.

Yacold also partners with nature portfolio to advance gut microbiome science through the global grants for gut health, an investigator-led research program.

To learn more about Yachtolt, visit yawcult.co.

.j.p. That's Y-A-K-U-L-T.C-O.J-P. When it comes to a guide for your gut, count on Yacult.

This is Scientific Americans' 60-second science. I'm Steve Merski. Got a minute?

We have increasing doubts about this evidence, but we don't feel yet that we have the scientific

knowledge and basis to exclude it altogether. Jed Rakoff, United States District Judge for the Southern

District of New York. He spoke about forensic evidence and the need for it to actually be based in

science at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Boston

on February 18th. In 2009, the National Academy of Sciences issued a report critical of a lot of the forensic evidence in the courtroom.

Most fundamentally, the report said that what was really lacking was testing and research.

And thus, they questioned whether any of this could be called science,

and they also questioned whether it was really that accurate. But forensic evidence is still

widely admitted, even when the science behind it may be lacking. I think courts continue,

despite their doubts, to admit this evidence.

And that is still the feeling that it's still better than nothing.

It's still useful evidence.

It has some degree of objectivity that's not present in much lay testimony,

and therefore it is useful.

The problem, of course, is it comes heralded as science,

and that gives it a weight that is probably disproportionate. I had a case, this was before the National Academy report, but it's sort of illustrative of what I'm talking about,

...