In Parker v. Mobil Oil Corp., 7 NY3d 434 [2006], rearg denied 8 N.Y.3d 828 [2007] the Court of Appeals clarified the applicability of the Frye standard to an expert's opinion on whether a toxin is capable of causing a particular disease (there, whether exposure to benzene in gasoline caused the plaintiff to develop a form of leukemia). Plaintiff offered the opinions of epidemiologists and toxicologists on causation. The Parker Court found that the question was "whether the methodologies employed by [plaintiff's] experts lead to a reliable result," and that "[t]here is no particular novel methodology at issue for which the Court needs to determine whether there is general acceptance. Thus, the inquiry here is more akin to whether there is an appropriate foundation for the experts' opinions, rather than whether the opinions are admissible under Frye." (7 NY3d at 447.) The Court also expressly noted that where the issue before the trial court is the reliability of the experts' methodology, federal cases evaluating reliability under Daubert are "instructive." (Id. at 448 n 4.)