and “not based on scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge within the scope of Rule 702.” Fed. R. Evid. 701(a), (c). Grabin sought to testify that her thalassemia caused her to have a weakened immune system, which in turn caused her to be come ill in the fall of 2010 with E. coli and' tonsillitis. This is not an opinion that is rationally based on Grabin’s own perception and is instead based on scientific knowledge. Grabin was accordingly properly precluded from offering this testimony. Additionally, to the extent that Grabin sought to testify that doctors informed her that her fall 2010 illnesses were a result of her thalassemia, this would be inadmissible hearsay not subject to any exception. See Field v. Trigg Cty. Hosp., Inc., 386 F.3d 729, 735-36 (6th Cir. 2004) (<HOLDING>); Bombard v. Fort Wayne Newspapers, Inc., 92
holding that federal rule of evidence 8034 the hearsay exception for statements made for medical diagnosis or treatment does not apply to statements made by doctors holding statements inadmissible under colo r evid 8034  which was identical to the federal rule  because there was no evidence that the fiveyearold child was capable of recognizing at the time the challenged statements were made the need to provide accurate information for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment within the meaning of fedrevid 8034 holding that the term medical as used in the hearsay exception regarding statements made for the purpose of medical diagnosis or treatment includes emotional and mental health as well as physical health holding that statements in medical records given for the primary purpose of medical diagnosis and treatment are nontestimonial holding that statements made by a doctor to a patient are not admissible under fedrevid 8034 because the rule does not except statements by the person providing medical care