of the premises on which the proffered expert witness based his or her analysis; (2) by authoritative scientific and legal writings indicating that the scientific community accepts the premises underlying the proffered testimony; and (3) by judicial opinions that indicate the expert’s premises have gained general acceptance. [Kelly, supra, 97 N.J. at 210, 478 A.2d 364 (citing State v. Cavallo, 88 N.J. 508, 521, 443 (admitting hypnotically refreshed testimony when subjected to strict safeguards ensuring reliability of hypnotic procedure); State v. King, 215 N.J.Super. 504, 518-20, 522 A.2d 455 (App.Div.1987) (finding isoenzyme test, which detects presence in blood of six distinct enzyme systems, held scientifically reliable); Williams, supra, 252 N.J.Super. at 378-83, 599 A.2d 960 (<HOLDING>). 3. General Acceptance Proof of general
holding that dq alpha and polymarker testing are sufficiently reliable under daubert and have achieved general acceptance within relevant scientific community holding that blood tests do not infringe significant privacy interests holding that the best interest of the child was the proper standard to apply in determining whether blood tests should be conducted holding blood test taken for independent medical purpose is not same as blood test taken pursuant to section 3755a holding pcrdq alpha test and gmkm blood tests sufficiently reliable to be admitted at trial