testimony is necessary to prove the cause of asthma. Praytor v. Ford Motor Co., 97 S.W.3d 237, 241 (TexApp.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2002, no pet.); Hernandez v. Tex. Employers Ins. Assoc., 783 S.W.2d 250, 253 (TexApp.-Corpus Christi 1989, no writ). It is also required to prove that employment aggravated a pre-existing disease, such as asth ma. See Hernandez, 783 S.W.2d at 253 ; Houston Gen. Ins. Co. v. Pegues, 514 S.W.2d 492, 495 (Tex.Civ.App.-Texarkana 1974, writ ref d n.r.e.). Nonphysicians may qualify as medical experts by virtue of special experience. E.g., Ponder v. Texarkana Mem’l Hosp., Inc., 840 S.W.2d 476, 478 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1991, writ denied); see also Harris County Hosp. Dist. v. Estrada, 872 S.W.2d 759, 762 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1993, writ denied) (<HOLDING>). However, in her response to the motion for
holding expert testimony not required to defeat summary judgment in medical malpractice suit because defendant doctors admissions were sufficient to establish the standard of care recognizing that a plaintiff must produce a medical expert to testify as to causation in all but the most selfevident medical malpractice actions holding that a doctor was qualified under daubert to give an expert opinion on standard of medical care based on thirty years of experience as a practicing boardcertified cardiologist and his review of the medical records holding that nurse who is familiar with the standard of care at another similar hospital can qualify by experience to testify as a medical expert in a medical malpractice action holding expert report requirement fulfilled in claim against nurse by providing expert report of nurse as to standard of care and expert report of medical doctor as to causation