# data[].attributes.body
Valorie Cochrane working          individually

# data[].attributes.headline
POST #2 Red Flag- Appeal to Authority (Picture)

# data[].attributes.subject
POST #2 Red Flag- Appeal to Authority (Picture)

# data[].attributes.body
Definition:
Typically for this red flag, a celebrity endorsement is used to promote a product and to increase its creditability

Connection:
The picture below shows a strong connection to the Appeal to Authority red flag because it features a famous and beautiful actress supposedly wearing the product. It gives the impression that this product will make you look good but it does not talk about how photographs are photoshopped to enhance the look of the models. It is very deceiving to the public.

# data[].attributes.headline
POST #3- Red Flag- All Natural (Article)

# data[].attributes.subject
POST #3- Red Flag- All Natural (Article)

# data[].attributes.body
Definition:
This red flag can be when an individual, company etc., claims that their product is all natural and a healthier alternative to other medications or products

Connection:
This article connects to the All Natural red flag because it discusses that sometimes, the natural form of an ingredient may be healthier or better than the synthetic version, but that is not always true. Some all natural ingredients can be harmful such as some essential oils as the article discusses. Companies know that today, most people are trying more interested in healthy alternatives, and all natural products. When something is labelled as all natural whether it is a product or food item, all natural might not be the best.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Marketing claims about the source, safety and effectiveness of personal care products and their ingredients often aren't worth the labels they're printed on.

Lax federal regulations mean that claims like "natural," "nontoxic," "plant-based" and "free of" have no legal basis in the personal care industry. With so many different claims on packages, consumers are often left confused, or even misled, about what's really in their products.

Here is what you should know about the most common claims.
Natural
Despite widespread use of the term "natural" on personal care products, the Food and Drug Administration has never legally defined the term and has no regulations on its use. What you expect in a natural product may not always match the manufacturers' use of the term.

Because of increasing consumer demand, the market for natural personal care products is growing. According to the 2017 Green Beauty Barometer survey results, 74 percent of women with children at home, and 60 percent of women without kids at home, claim that purchasing green or natural beauty products was important to them.

A common assumption is that natural products or ingredients are safer than synthetic ones. This is not always the case.

Sometimes natural ingredients are safer and better than synthetic alternatives. But there are many naturally occurring substances that are not safe, and some of them are used as ingredients in personal care products. Most consumers would balk if they saw poison ivy as one of the ingredients in a skin care product, but there is no denying that poison ivy is natural. Other natural ingredients, such as clays, may be contaminated with toxic heavy metals, and some essential oils are potent sensitizing allergens.

In other cases, products that claim to be natural may fall short of that mark - by any definition. A 2008 study by the Organic Consumers Association found an undisclosed carcinogenic petrochemical ingredient in more than 40 percent of products tested that claimed to be natural. In 2016, the Federal Trade Commission filed complaints against four companies that marketed their personal care products as "all natural" or "100% natural" when the products contained a number of synthetic ingredients.
Organic
Organic rules for personal care products are not as straightforward as those for food. The FDA regulates personal care products, but the agency does not regulate the term "organic" for personal care products. Organic claims on cosmetics are regulated by The U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the term only applies to the agricultural ingredients used in personal care products.

Personal care products that are certified to be at least 95 percent organic will bear an official USDA Organic seal. The agency allows two categories of certification to display the USDA Organic seal:

"100 percent organic," which indicates that a product only contains organically produced ingredients.

"Organic," which signifies that at least 95 percent of a product's ingredients are organically produced and the remaining 5 percent of ingredients are on an approved list of substances.

In addition to ingredient specifications, products bearing the USDA Organic seal must comply with handling and manufacturing specifications, and the use of genetically modified organisms is prohibited.

Another organic certification found on personal care products is the "NSF contains organic ingredients" seal. This certification is issued by third-party certifiers such as Oregon Tilth and QAI, an organic certification company that is part of NSF International. Products can bear the seal if they meet the NSF/ANSI 305 standard: They must contain at least 70 percent organic content, no genetically modified derived ingredients and no petrochemicals, and they must follow ingredient labeling and manufacturing requirements.

Products that claim to be organic but do not carry an official seal may not meet USDA organic standards. If organic is important to you, don't rely on the claims - always look for a USDA Organic seal.
Free of synthetics
In the world of cosmetics, synthetics have a negative reputation and many companies now tout that their products are free of these chemicals. But not all synthetically derived ingredients or products are harmful.

In some cases, the damning characterization may be warranted. A number of synthetic chemicals have been linked to cancer, endocrine disruption, developmental disorders and other harmful health impacts. But there are many synthetic chemicals that have not been associated with health harms and that play an important role in personal care products.
Nontoxic, hypoallergenic, gentle
Scientifically speaking, nothing is nontoxic. Even water, in large doses, can be harmful. However, many companies use this claim to suggest that a product is safe. The term is often used alongside claims of a product being nonirritating, hypoallergenic, gentle or all natural.

"There are no Federal standards or definitions that govern the use of the term 'hypoallergenic,'" according to the FDA. "The term means whatever a particular company wants it to mean. Manufacturers of cosmetics labeled as hypoallergenic are not required to submit substantiation of their claims to FDA."
How to choose healthier options?
Ultimately, it is up to shoppers to gauge the merit of marketing claims. The best way to know what's in your products is by reading the list of ingredients. For most people, that can be a daunting task given the complicated chemical names found in many ingredient panels.

But help is available: EWG's Skin Deep® database identifies less-hazardous products. Skin Deep® rates more than 70,000 products based on the hazards associated with their ingredients.

You can also look for the EWG VERIFIED™ seal, which identifies products that do not contain any ingredients on our unacceptable or restricted lists, fully disclose all ingredients and follow good manufacturing practices. The mark helps consumers easily find products that meet EWG's most stringent health standards at the point of sale. Click here to see all products that meet the EWG VERIFIED™ standard.

The only long-term solution to properly verify labeling claims is for the FDA to establish labeling definitions and standards for personal care products. Until then, think twice about the words you read in the personal care aisle.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'Natural' or 'Organic' Cosmetics? Don't Trust Marketing Claims.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Marketing claims about the source, safety and effectiveness of personal care products and their ingredients often aren't worth the labels they're printed on. Lax federal regulations mean that claims like "natural," "nontoxic," "plant-based" and "free of" have no legal basis in the personal care industry.

# data[].attributes.headline
POST #4- Red Flag- Mystical Energy (Picture)

# data[].attributes.subject
POST #4- Red Flag- Mystical Energy (Picture)

# data[].attributes.body
Definition:
This red flag represents mystical energies that can not be explained or seen such as negative energy

Connection:
This picture describes various colours of the Feng Shui belief and it connects to the Mystical Energy red flag because it is an energy that can not be seen. It is a popular belief amongst the Asian Culture and it claims that harmonize people to their surroundings using energy. This can not be proven or disproven because it can not be tested.

# data[].attributes.body
Definition:
Ancient wisdom can be defined as using techniques, rituals or products from ancient civilizations

Connection:
This article connects to the Ancient Wisdom red flag by making claims that holistic methods have been around for centuries and are more effective than modern day medicine. It also claims that everything can be healed using holistic medicines. This is very deceiving to people because there is so much scientific data to prove that holistic medicine does not cure everything. Claims like this may convince someone who is sick, not to seek medical attention, but to use holistic medicine and methods in an attempt heal themselves.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Holistic Medicine has been a part of humanity for thousands of years. Modern medicine, based in corporate greed, was very successful in convincing society that holistic practices such as Ayurveda, Acupuncture and Breath Work were not "real" forms of medicine since they couldn't provide any "evidence".

Now we know that scientific proof can be very easily fabricated and much of this mainstream "evidence" has actually been funded by corporate Pharma. For example, a giant company that creates synthetic marijuana supplements was one of the biggest funders for the opposition of cannabis legalization in the United States. Talk about hypocrisy.

In this article we will discuss:

1) The basic wisdom behind Holistic Medicine.
2) Where to find the CURE
3) How to heal anything naturally
4) The steps to awaken Self Healing and Natural Supplements to super charge the process
5) How immortality could actually be possible and why this is important to you
6) The best Holistic Coaching available today to accelerate your healing

Holistic Medicine

Modern medicine believes that "Health" is the absence of disease. Ancient Indian medicine believes that a "healthy individual" is a person exited to go to work and is also exited for compassion.

Holistic Methods such as Ayurveda understands and accepts that living organisms such as virus, germs and bacteria are actually living inside all of us all the time. And that's totally ok. As long as you wake up happy and exited about your day, you're healthy.

Nowadays there are so many stories of people healing conditions that modern medicine thought were incurable that Holistic Medicine cannot longer be ignored.

Modern Science Explains Holistic Medicine

For some decades now, passionate scientists dedicated to seeking the truth have been finding real "evidence" of things that ancient wisdom has claimed for thousands of years.
So much that they are even considering the idea of "imortality" as actually plausible.

I will explain to you, in this article, fully backed by science, how immortality could actually be possible. And more important, how you can use this knowledge to heal yourself.

Holistic Medicine is based around the idea that the body knows exactly how to heal itself. Well, anyone who has healed "incurable" conditions such as Ulcerative Colitis or even Cancer will tell you a similar story.

They paid attention to their diet and changed their attitude towards their health. In some cases natural supplements are a great ally, however it all starts with the mind.

The Cure Is In Knowing The Patient

Modern medicine says that if you have a head ache, you should take a pill.

Holistic Medicine however will look at the patient's life to find the source of the head ache.
Instead of prescribing a pill, by knowing the patient, it could be very clear that the person with the head ache just had a fight with their spouse. They should simply take a nap, find an agreement with their partner and the head ache will go away.

Most diseases can be treated by simply looking at the patient's lifestyle.

For example, those that suffer from chronic fatigue might wonder "why am I so tired if I slept for so long". Well, it's been found that many factors can affect a person's deep sleep, which is where the regeneration of the body happens, like too much Fats in diet, not enough physical activity, nicotine and caffeine, too much sugar...all of these elements can have an effect in a person's energy state.

You might think you're depressed, but maybe you're just eating too much sugar. You might be anxious all the time, but maybe you're just breathing wrong.

The answer can be really simple. If you're eating healthy and balanced meals, drinking lots of water and have a happy life, your immune system is very likely to be strong and can protect you from most things.

How To Heal Anything

My mom survived cancer. Her story has all the elements that survivors of chronic diseases have in common.

She says that when she was diagnosed with cancer, immediately she took care of her diet. Then, throughout all of her treatments, every pill she took, every conversation she had, etc etc, she kept telling herself "this is healing me...this is healing me". She tells me that every single day she would keep herself happy, positive, joyful and constantly, consciously held on to the idea that everything she did was healing her.

This is an example of convincing yourself of something as though is real. Which is the number one rule of manifesting and also the number one rule of healing.

Realize That Your Situation Is Only Temporary

The Renegade Pharmacist, Niraj Naik, is another amazing example of self healing. Not only was he diagnosed with an incurable condition, Ulcerative Colitis, but he was a community pharmacist. His job was to help people feel better, yet science couldn't help him. He was faced with the decision to have his colon removed. Read his story here.

With time, he was able to heal himself through Holistic Medicine. He says that music and meditation played a huge role in his recovery which makes sense because by simply relaxing and listening to music we enjoy, we are entering a state of extreme relaxation.

What Happens During Extreme Relaxation

When you simply allow your body to relax, and by feeding it good, healthy food, you're giving your body the space and time it needs to enter Self Healing more.

Actually... Self Healing is your body's natural state.

In our modern world, we are constantly stressed out. It's somehow normal. This on going stress expresses itself in illness. By looking at the patient's life, we can identify the source of stress and thus figure out a plan to manage the condition, and get the person back to waking up exited to start the day.

How To Trigger Self Healing?

The Heart Math institute has been doing research for many years on this topic and they have concluded that to trigger self healing, the best way to go about it is by entering a state called Heart Coherence.

Heart Coherence

It's been proven that the heart produces a much stronger electromagnetic field than the brain. Actually, they found that there's more information going from the heart to the brain than the opposite. They also identified neurones in the heart and even concluded that the heart is also a brain capable of storing memory.

In other words, the heart is what drives your whole body, so when it's beating in a coherent way, your whole physiology and mind are working at the best of their capacities. This is where Self Healing happens.

How To Reach Heart Coherence

Previously believed impossible by science, yogis have known how to consciously influence their heart for thousands of years. It all stars with Breathwork.

If the Heart drives the body, breathing influences the heart. In other words, through conscious breathing you can influence your heart, make sure it beats in Coherence and thus consciously tell your own body to enter Self Healing.

The technique to reach heart coherence is very easy, but don't be fooled by its simplicity. A lot of research has gone into this topic and this is science verified. Also, the ancient discipline of Pranayama favours this technique as a a form of reaching self healing, so the technique you're about to learn is both backed by modern science and ancient wisdom.
Steps:

1. Get confortable.

2. Breathe in long inhales through the belly (not the chest, the belly)

3. Exhale for the same amount of time as the inhale

4. Repeat

Here's a song designed specifically for this purpose. As you listen to it, you will hear someone breathing. Try to match it and notice how fast you will feel more relaxed. Enjoy the visuals too if you want. This is a Hypno Fractal designed to take your brain to really high states of vibration.

If you're following the steps (breathing from the belly and doing long inhales and exhales) then you might feel very relaxed and alert. A few minutes of that will trigger Self Healing.

Simple.
***Note: The Renegade Pharmacist has put together a webinar that you can attend for free. This will make sure you're doing this breathing properly. Although simple, there's a bit of technique behind so make sure you're doing it right.
An added boost to Self Healing

This breathing is a good start. However, you might need to tackle a more urgent matter. Here's the secret element that helped The Renegade Pharmacist heal super fast, along with the meditation and the breathwork. It's called Colostrum. You can learn all about it here , it might be the answer you need.

How Immortality Could Actually Be Plausible

So after heart coherence and Colostrum, there's a technique that will super charge you.
Holistic Medicine taken to the next level.

This technique is so powerful that it should be approached with care and proper training. It comes from the ancient wisdom of Pranayama and it has a ton of amazing benefits that have been studied scientifically for decades.

The original name of the technique is "Kumbhaka" which literally means the "pause between inhale and exhale".

Through this breathing technique, we can reach a state of Intermittent Hypoxia. Check out this article on Intermittent Hypoxic Training to learn more in detail how it works and the benefits.

Now, here's how immortality could actually be explained:

Intermittent Hypoxia is reached by lowering the Oxygen levels in our body. When you hold your breath in a specific way, the oxygen level drops for a brief period of time. You can learn all about how to do it here.

Free The Stem Cells Hide In Your Bone Marrow

Stem cells are blank cells that have the capacity to transform themselves into any cell the body might need. These cells can only exist in an environment of LOW oxygen, which is why they hide in our bone marrow, surrounded by other cells that dilute the concentration of O2.

All our bones have dormant Stem Cells, which means our bodies are filled with them.
When we lower our oxygen levels enough, this encourages the stem cells to come out of hiding and then they can enter the blood stream. Since the blood takes about 1 minute to do a full body cycle, the stem cells have enough time to go wherever they are needed.

This is how immortality could be explained.

So What About My Illness

The steps are simple. Whatever your condition, here's how to self heal:

1. Take care of your diet

2. Add Colostrum to it

3. Take the time to relax and listen to music you love, as much as possible

4. Breathe Heart Coherence

5. Learn Intermittent Hypoxic Training

6. Imagine yourself already being fully healthy

Who Can Help Me

This is easier said than done, but with proper guidance, you won't believe how much faster you can heal. It will take all of your will power to be positive and truly feel relaxed, peaceful and joyful in a challenging moment, but with proper training and discipline, it can definitely be done.

Many have cured chronic and psychological conditions previously believed to be incurable. Many others have simply stoped taking their medication and thanks to Holistic Medicine were able to manage their symptoms and conditions naturally.

Learn The Art Of Self Healing From the Best

After Niraj Naik cured himself with Colostrum and Breathing Meditation Techniques, he created a system to help others. Almost a decade later, after having heal thousands of people around the world he has now made the system available to anyone. It's called SOMA Breath.

Join this webinar . It's free and it will make sure you're doing the breathing techniques properly. These are the same breathing techniques for Heart Coherence (Self Healing) and Intermittent Hypoxic Training (Natural Stem Cell Therapy). Done the right way will accelerate your healing tremendously.

By the way, if you would like to interact with others that have gone through the SOMA courses, you can join the public facebook group. Ask any questions and receive answers from many different perspectives, plus you will get to read all the amazing testimonials.

Much Love!

Orlando - SOMA Team

Comments

comments

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Holistic Medicine - How To Heal ANYTHING

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Holistic Medicine has been a part of humanity for thousands of years. Modern medicine, based in corporate greed, was very successful in convincing society that holistic practices such as Ayurveda, Acupuncture and Breath Work were not "real" forms of medicine since they couldn't provide any "evidence".

# data[].attributes.body
Definition:
Ideological Support is typically when someone claims something to be real, ethical or moral and do not have the scientific proof to support their claims

Connection:
This picture depicts the Ideological Support red flag and the celebrity in the picture is Jenny McCarthy. This celebrity is well know for her anti-vaccine beliefs and how she claims to know that vaccines can cause autism. Some people will believe claims with or without scientific evidence. The seriousness of the anti-vaccine claims is that the health of children is being compromised because people are believing these claims without the scientific proof. Sometimes, people can be stuck in their beliefs even when the scientific facts prove something to be wrong.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post #7- Reasons for Belief - Patternicity (Picture)

# data[].attributes.subject
Post #7- Reasons for Belief - Patternicity (Picture)

# data[].attributes.body
Definition:
Patternicity is to make connections between unrelated things. It is human nature to see patterns in objects and try to connect them to something

Connection:
This picture relates to the Patternicity Belief because at first glance, perhaps you see the face of a ghost. After looking at it for a minute, you realize that it is just a leaf with holes. Instinctively many people automatically will see a pattern in something or try to find a pattern.

# data[].attributes.headline
POST #8- Reasons for Belief- Emotional Connections (Article)

# data[].attributes.subject
POST #8- Reasons for Belief- Emotional Connections (Article)

# data[].attributes.body
Definition:
Emotional connections are when someone chooses to believe something based on their emotions even if the belief has not been proven

Connection:
This article connects to the Reasons for Belief of emotional connections because some people need to believe in something. Someone may speak with a "psychic" because they are extremely distraught after losing a loved one. Perhaps they can obtain a sense of comfort from thinking their loved one is trying to reach them from beyond. The reality is though that psychic abilities have not been scientifically proven, and unfortunately, there are a lot of people out there who pose as psychics and con others or give them a false sense of hope.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Illusionist Derren Brown faked a séance

Speaking with a long-departed loved one may be the result of fear or suggestion rather than genuine spirit contact, research suggests.
UK psychologist Professor Richard Wiseman looked at controlled "séance" experiments.

He found many ways that people strive to interpret a medium's comments to apply to themselves, whether the facts are accurate or not.

Mediums may also tailor readings by picking up on subtle clues like what we wear, he said.

He will recreate a Victorian séance at the Dana Centre in London on Thursday.

We want to believe that the statement is true, that it applies to us. So we tend to buy into it.

Professor Wiseman said there were several strategies that might underlie an "apparently" accurate reading by a medium.
He said people tended to believe very general, sweeping statements applied to themselves directly when they wanted to.

"I think the mediums are fairly sincere, but the person is reading a lot into what are fairly ambiguous comments," he said.

He said often people who went to mediums were seeking reassurance or help for a stressful period of change in their lives such as a recent bereavement.

"We want to believe that the statement is true, that it applies to us. So we tend to buy into it."

Seeking answers

An example is if the medium said "The spirits are talking about the younger woman who has passed away", this could refer to a young child, a teenager or even someone who had died in their forties.

The degree to which a client thinks through these alternative interpretations would then influence whether they believe the statement applies accurately to them.

He said people tended to remember the "hits" - the things said by the medium which matched their own needs - and ignore the "misses".

It is not only the person going for the reading who influences the outcomes.

He said mediums might be able to unconsciously gain and react to information from things like how the client is dressed and how they respond to the medium's questions.

Professor Wiseman set up a controlled séance with five subjects and mediums and found no evidence of genuine psychic ability.

Faking it

He presented this research, which has been submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal, at a convention of the Parapsychological Association in Vienna in August.

In a hoax earlier this year on live TV, Illusionist Derren Brown convinced people he was contacting the deceased using a ouija board.

Brown said he wanted to encourage people to question séances.

Professor Wiseman said he did not think most mediums were tricksters, but he said because people did seek their help for bereavement issues this could be good or bad.

A spokeswoman from Cruse Bereavement Care said: "When people are bereaved they feel very isolated, very lonely and very questioning, and they will make their way towards areas where they think they might find answers.

"That's a perfectly understandable thing to do, but amongst those people who appear to provide help and support or answers there will be people who are perhaps not so benign in their intentions.

"Therefore, it's important for bereaved people to be very cautious and very careful where they seek support."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BBC NEWS | Health | Why we want to believe psychics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Illusionist Derren Brown faked a séance Speaking with a long-departed loved one may be the result of fear or suggestion rather than genuine spirit contact, research suggests. UK psychologist Professor Richard Wiseman looked at controlled "séance" experiments. He found many ways that people strive to interpret a medium's comments to apply to themselves, whether the facts are accurate or not.

# data[].attributes.headline
POST #9- Reasons for Belief - Perception and Observation

# data[].attributes.subject
POST #9- Reasons for Belief - Perception and Observation

# data[].attributes.body
Definition:
Perception and Observation can be defined as thinking we saw something, being sure that we saw something and turns out, we were mistaken. Many mistakes can be seen in the recollections of eye witnesses.

Connection:
This article connects to the Reason for Belief of perception and observation because it shows that even if someone is very sure of something, or that they saw something, their account of the event could be wrong. There have been numerous wrong convictions of people because of mistaken witnesses. It is not always the case that a witness intentionally makes a mistake, but our minds can alter the images without us knowing. As more time passes, the memory may change even more and that is why sometimes, eye witness testimonies are not accurate or accepted at a trial. If the witness is a victim of a crime, their emotional connection may alter their recollection of events.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
One night in 1984, a stranger broke into Jennifer Thompson-Cannino's apartment and raped her. After the assault, Thompson-Cannino, then a 22-year-old college student, helped police sketch artists create a composite picture of her attacker. Later, in a photo lineup, she identified Ronald Cotton - a 22-year-old man who looked strikingly like her sketch and had previous run-ins with the law. Then, she picked Cotton from a live lineup. Cotton was convicted of rape and sentenced to life in prison.

A decade later, DNA testing revealed that Cotton was not a match to semen samples from Thompson-Cannino's assailant. But the samples did match the DNA of another convict, Bobby Poole - who, it turned out, had told a fellow inmate he had committed the crime.

In the years since Cotton was exonerated, he and Thompson-Cannino co-authored the 2010 bestselling book "Picking Cotton" about their experience, and have campaigned together to reform eyewitness identification procedures.

Their story has become another classic example of the fragile nature of eyewitness testimony. Beginning in the 1990s, forensic DNA testing has revealed hundreds of cases of wrongful convictions. In fact, eyewitness misidentification has played a role in more than 70 percent of wrongfully convicted individuals, according to the Innocence Project, an organization that works to exonerate wrongfully convicted people.

Following that flurry of DNA-fueled exonerations, law enforcement agencies started paying closer attention to the science of memory and identification, says Gary Wells, PhD, a psychologist at Iowa State University who has studied eyewitness identification since the 1970s. Police departments across the country began making changes to lineup procedures, such as presenting possible suspects one at a time rather than all at once. In 2011, the New Jersey Supreme Court issued a landmark decision requiring judges to instruct jurors on the limits of eyewitness identification. Other states are discussing similar instructions, Wells says.

"I honestly believe there's no area of experimental psychology that has had a bigger effect on the legal system," Wells says.

Now, however, some psychologists say some of those changes may have been premature. "What has been described as a success story of psychological research is not looking like it's quite so simple anymore," says Steven E. Clark, PhD, a psychologist at the University of California, Riverside. "Eyewitness identification may be more reliable than we think."

Lineups on trial

Much of the recent debate involves lineups - or, more commonly, photo arrays. In a traditional lineup, a witness views six to nine potential suspects (or their photographs) simultaneously. But in the 1980s, Wells started testing a new method: sequential lineups, in which possible suspects are viewed one at a time rather than all at once. He found that sequential lineups resulted in a significant decrease in the false identification rate, with only a small drop in the correct identification rate.

In the years since, numerous studies have supported that finding. A 2011 meta-analysis of 72 studies by Wells and colleagues found that eyewitnesses made fewer mistaken identifications when suspects were presented in sequential, rather than simultaneous, lineups (Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 2011). In light of such evidence, the Innocence Project endorsed the method, and many police departments changed their lineup procedures.

By some estimates, around a third of law enforcement agencies in the United States now use the sequential format, says John Wixted, PhD, a psychologist at the University of California, San Diego. But, he says, that switch might have been a mistake.

Wixted is one of several scientists, along with Clark and Scott Gronlund, PhD, a psychologist at the University of Oklahoma, who have championed a statistical method called receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, a method widely used in other fields to measure the accuracy of diagnostic systems.

Using that analysis, sequential lineups don't appear to be beneficial - and might lead to slightly more misidentifications than simultaneous lineups, Gronlund and Wixted have reported (Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2014). The problem, they say, is that previous analytical methods confounded accuracy with a witness's willingness to choose a suspect. In other words, sequential lineups seem to make people less likely to make a choice at all. But when they do pick a suspect, they might be at greater risk of making the wrong choice. "It turns out sequential lineups are inferior," says Wixted.

Unlike previous analytical methods, ROC analysis takes into account how confident a witness is at the time he or she picks a suspect from a lineup. And confidence, it turns out, is worth paying attention to.

For many years, researchers didn't think an eyewitness's confidence revealed much about his or her accuracy in identifying a suspect, says Wixted. A confident eyewitness could be just as likely to get the ID right - or wrong - as a less confident witness. But in the last two decades, numerous analyses have converged on the fact that eyewitness confidence is actually a strong indicator of accuracy.

"On issues of both confidence and lineup format, the field for years was making a mistake in how they analyzed the data, and in both cases arrived at the wrong conclusion," Wixted says. "And in both cases the incorrect conclusion was transmitted worldwide, including through police departments all across the nation - and that's where we stand today."

Wells remains skeptical of the ROC method. "It works in certain contexts, but not in a lineup," he says. However, having advocated for sequential lineups in years past, he now says he suspects that in the end, the two lineup methods won't differ much in their rates of false identifications. Of all the variables that influence the accuracy of eyewitness identifications, he says, the sequential-versus-simultaneous factor is one of the least important (Law and Human Behavior, 2015).

Much more critical, Wells says, is the choice of "fillers," the nonsuspect individuals in a lineup. Fillers should generally fit the witness's physical account of the suspect. "If you use poor fillers, an innocent suspect who does fit the description is at high risk of being identified," he says.

Wells says one of the riskiest situations for mistaken identifications occurs when the real suspect isn't present. "People have incredible difficulty recognizing the absence of the perpetrator," he says. "If he's there, they can do a fair job of picking him. But if he's not there, they tend to pick somebody else."

Yet law enforcement officers can include anyone in a lineup. To minimize that risk, Wells recommends creating administrative rules that require some reasonable suspicion before presenting someone's face to the witness. "Any time you put an innocent person in a lineup, there is inherent risk that they might be identified. But it turns out there are no rules for detectives to go by."

A confident witness

When Thompson-Cannino identified Cotton in court, she was certain she was pointing to the man who raped her. And yet she was wrong.

As the Innocence Project statistics make clear, many eyewitnesses are mistaken, even confident ones. So how is it that confidence can predict an accurate identification?

The problem, experts say, is in considering what witnesses say on the stand. "We shouldn't even ask witnesses to make an ID in the courtroom because that's really kind of worthless," Gronlund says. "What did they say two months ago when they first saw the guy?"

When Thompson-Cannino was first shown photos of possible suspects, she spent several minutes deliberating between two candidates. When she finally chose Cotton, she said, "I think that's him." But over time, her certainty grew.

Many people think of memory as a kind of mental YouTube; when you want to recall an event, just find the right link and hit play. In reality, memories aren't merely played back but are freshly reassembled every time they're recalled. That makes them extremely susceptible to modification.

Imagine a witness who hesitates when identifying a suspect from a lineup. The police officer smiles and says "good job," and the witness's confidence grows. Later, the witness sees the suspect's photograph in the newspaper. A lawyer asks, "Do you remember if the suspect had pierced ears?"

What emerges is an inaccurate memory that is rich with details that feel very real, says Elizabeth Loftus, PhD, a psychologist at the University of California, Irvine, well-known for her work on human memory. "The original memory is fading, you're reconstructing the event with new information available to you, or new sources of suggestion. You imagine something, and it feels like a memory."

For that reason, the only eyewitness identification that really matters is the first one, Wixted says. "You don't get to go back six months later and examine a crime scene again because it's been contaminated by then. Memory works the same way," he says. "You get one memory test, and one test only."

Wells agrees it's crucial for law enforcement officers to pay attention to initial confidence. In a recent meta-analysis of studies from around the globe, he and his colleagues found that confirming feedback (such as "Good, you picked the suspect") strongly inflated an eyewitness's confidence in his or her judgments (Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 2014).

"You have to treat eyewitness evidence as a form of trace evidence," Wells says, not unlike the fibers and hairs and gunpowder residue that investigators collect from a crime scene. "It's easily contaminated, and it can fade with time."

National Academy recommendations

In 2014, a committee of the National Academy of Sciences issued a report recommending best practices for eyewitness identification procedures. The committee's report underscored the importance of cluing into a witness's initial confidence.

Among the committee's findings was a recommendation that law enforcement officers videotape the initial witness-identification process and document the witness's confidence judgment at the time he or she first identifies a suspect.

The committee also recommended that lineups and photo arrays be double-blind, so that any officer administering the test doesn't know who the true suspect is. Such a move would go a long way toward preventing officers from influencing eyewitness identifications - inadvertently or otherwise - and inflating witness confidence, says Loftus.

One area the National Academy committee did not take sides on was the debate over sequential versus simultaneous lineups. The report's authors concluded that previous analytical methods conflated accuracy with willingness to make an identification. However, despite concluding that ROC analysis has advantages over previous methods, the authors also noted some concerns that ROC could be influenced by certain measurement errors and biases.

Ultimately, the committee called for using a broader array of statistical tools to tackle the question, and recommended that law enforcement agencies stick with their existing protocols until the science is clear.

Wixted agrees with the academy's recommendation for more research. "I think it's essential that the larger community of basic experimental psychologists turns its attention to these matters," he says.

A healthy science

Although there are lingering disagreements among eyewitness identification researchers, those in the field generally agree with the National Academy recommendations, and they welcome the focus that eyewitness research is being given.

"Despite the fact that there are a few issues and controversies, we still have a whole lot of things we agree on," Loftus says. "In recent times we've seen some great successes, in terms of the legal system waking up and paying attention to the body of scientific work. As scientists continue to refine their methods, I hope these points of controversy won't take away from the rest of the story."

In Clark's view, debates in the field are a good thing. "A science is really healthy when we take stock of what we don't know, and ask new questions or ask old questions in different ways," he says. "The science is going to be much better as a result."

Still, Clark cautions that it may not be possible to significantly reduce the number of mistaken IDs without letting more criminals go free. "One of the claims that the eyewitness field has made for years is that we can implement new procedures that will substantially reduce the false identification rate with little or no loss of correct identifications," he says. "If you look at the literature, this is just not true."

To be sure, there's a widely accepted view in the law that it's better to let the guilty go free than to punish an innocent person. But to make the most informed decisions about eyewitness procedures, Clark says, law enforcement officers and policymakers need to be aware of the trade-offs.

Wells, however, is hopeful that science will continue to chip away at the problem, finding new and better methods to reduce mistaken IDs without reducing accurate ones. "The legal system wouldn't be able to function without eyewitness identification," he says. "We have to find ways to make it better."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
One night in 1984, a stranger broke into Jennifer Thompson-Cannino's apartment and raped her. After the assault, Thompson-Cannino, then a 22-year-old college student, helped police sketch artists create a composite picture of her attacker. Later, in a photo lineup, she identified Ronald Cotton - a 22-year-old man who looked strikingly like her sketch and had previous run-ins with the law.

# data[].attributes.body
I chose to apply the critical thinking process the Ideology Support belief as described in Post #6 using this an article called Vaccines Cause Autism by Cathy Jameson and it is found on the Age of Autism Daily Web Newspaper of the Autism Epidemic

Define Problem:
An extravagant claim that vaccines cause autism in children.

Gather Information:
There are many articles on the internet written by people who claim that vaccines gave their children autism. Arguments for this claim include that the contents of vaccines are harmful and that the governments has decided to mislead the public as to the health hazards of vaccines. Arguments against these claims include scientific studies that do not show any correlation between autism and vaccines.

Evaluate Evidence:
I do not feel that this article is a creditable source as it does not contain any scientific information support their claims. The article does not discuss any scientific information that proves their claim. No scientific method has been followed and there are no experiments described that can be reproduced. It sounds as though the paper is completely opinion based.

Recognize Assumptions, Emotions and Biases
It sounds as though it is written by someone who may have an autistic child and they are looking for a reason as to why their child has this special need. They may very confused and upset that they need to believe in something. When celebrities endorse these claims, that also can influence people as well. I believe the author of this article is very bias as they do not include any proof in their article to substantiate their claims.

Synthesize Evidence, Identify Alternatives
The alternate solution could be that maybe vaccines do have harmful side effects and maybe not enough time has passed to see the true effects of vaccines, Another alternative solution to the claim is that it is simply false. There is scientific data that shows vaccines in fact do not cause autism.

Select Best Alternative
Based on reading numerous articles, and not seeing any scientific proof or testing that confirms this claim, I believe that vaccines do not cause autism.