Science And Society - Best - E Public Feed

Create a Post

  Prenatal Diagnosis

Posted by Timothy Best in Science And Society - Best - E on
​

The science behind prenatal diagnosis

Prenatal diagnosis is the screening or testing for genetic diseases or other conditions before a child is born. Although there are many different techniques and tests, I will focus on a few:

  • Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD): During an IVF cycle, cells from the developing embryo can be genetically analyzed for chromosomal abnormalities - usually trisomy 21 (Down Syndrome), trisomy 13 and trisomy 18. The parents can then determine which embryos, if any, to transfer into the uterus. It is also possible to determine the sex of the embryo.

  • Ultrasound: An ultrasound uses sound waves to “look” at a fetus as it develops in the uterus. Since sound waves reflect off of tissues differently depending on the density of the tissue, the sonographer can create images of the fetus’ external and internal anatomy. Ultrasound can be used to measure an embryo or fetus in order to predict the due date, detect twins, diagnose heart and other growth defects, measure heart rate, look for signs associated with Down Syndrome, and determine the sex of the fetus.

  • Chorionic villus sampling: The chorionic villi are a part of the placenta that arises directly from the embryo (as opposed to the mother). They are, therefore, genetically identical to the developing embryo. Chorionic villi can be removed from the placenta and genetically analyzed to detect Down Syndrome and other genetic disorders. CVS has a slight risk (.5-1%) of miscarriage, and can also lead to amniotic fluid leakage and/or infection.

  • Amniocentesis: A fetus develops in the amniotic sac, which is full of amniotic fluid. The amniotic fluid contains fetal cells that have naturally sloughed off. The doctor, using an ultrasound image as a guide, inserts a needle through the mother’s skin, abdominal wall, uterine wall, and into the amniotic sac, away from the fetus. Amniotic fluid is then collected, and the fetal cells contained in the fluid can be analyzed for genetic conditions such as Down Syndrome. Amniocentesis has similar risks as CVS, although CVS can be done earlier.

  • Maternal Blood Testing: A relatively recently developed technique can detect fetal DNA in the mother’s blood stream. Thus, with a simple blood draw, the fetus’ sex can be determined, and it can be screened for a variety of genetic disorders.


Societal Impacts

While the above techniques may sound like wonderful advances in medicine, they also have their downsides. First, there’s a difference between screening and testing. A prenatal genetic screen - like maternal blood testing - only gives the level of risk of a condition, but it can not with 100% certainty diagnose a condition. Prenatal genetic tests - like amniocentesis and CVS - are more diagnostic, but also have higher risks for the pregnancy. And if a non-invasive screen detects a high risk for Down Syndrome, for example, the parents are then faced with the decision of whether or not to do a more invasive, high risk test in order to more accurately determine whether Down Syndrome is present. If the results of a CVS or amniocentesis indicate a genetic disorder, then the couple could be faced with the decision to terminate the pregnancy. At the very least, these weeks of testing and waiting for results can be draining and extremely stressful. Pregnancy can already be a stressful time, and these prenatal screens and test can add to that anxiety.


On the other hand, some parents feel that they’d like to know the risks, regardless of the outcome of a test. If a screening test comes back positive for a genetic disorder, then the parents at least won’t be surprised at the birth. They’ll have time to prepare, educate themselves, and possibly arrange for special care that might be needed for their newborn.


Some people opt out of the screens and tests altogether. They might argue that what’s meant to be is meant to be, and they’d rather spare themselves the stress and anxiety surrounding these tests and their results.


And finally, with PGD it is possible to choose the sex of your child. This is illegal in some countries, including Canada - but not the US. Given that IVF and PGD could cost $15000-$20000, the opportunity to screen embryos for genetic conditions and possibly select the sex would not be affordable for everyone. Is this fair? Should people be allowed to choose the sex of their children?


Personal opinions

As someone who loves science, I’m fascinated by these medical advances, and support further research into tests and screens like these. It’s exciting when new, improved tests come out that can help people get answers to their pregnancy concerns, and hopefully allay some of their fears. However, it’s easy for me to support these tests in a general, abstract way. It becomes more complicated when we’re talking about real pregnancies in my personal life. I’ve gone through some of these discussions and decisions, and sometimes there is no easy answer. I can see why people would be in the “no testing” camp - the screenings and testing definitely can raise anxiety and stress levels during pregnancy, which can already be pretty stressful. Still, I’m glad the tests are available, and I think they should continue to be offered to pregnant women. Key to this though, is that they need to be able to make informed decisions. Through discussions with their doctor and a knowledgeable genetic counselor, the parents-to-be can weigh the pros and cons for themselves, and then decide how they want to handle the conundrum of prenatal genetic diagnosis.



References:

Nierneberg, C. (2014). Prenatal Genetic Screening Tests: Benefits & Risks. Retrieved February 24, 2016, from http://www.livescience.com/45949-prenatal-genetic-testing.html


Sidhu, J. (n.d.). Women Are Paying Huge Sums To Have a Daughter Rather Than a Son. Retrieved February 24, 2016, from http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2012/09/sex_selection_in_babies_through_pgd_americans_are_paying_to_have_daughters_rather_than_sons_.html


I wish I hadn't known: The ups and downs of prenatal testing. (n.d.). Retrieved February 24, 2016, from http://www.pregnancyandbaby.com/pregnancy/articles/944203/i-wish-i-hadnt-known-the-ups-and-downs-of-prenatal-testing


Lie Detection

Posted by Amelia Stuart in Science And Society - Best - E on

The use of fMRIs in a court of law as evidence, replacing the polygraph machine. They would be used to “prove” if a defendant is lying or telling the truth. Though scientists may understand the advanced technology of an fMRI, jurors certainly don’t, and the major worry is that the science will completely replace the law. With jurors basing their decisions based entirely off of the science, when it can be easily manipulated.

Polygraph testimony should excluded from court cases because it is unreliable, the technology is no better than the polygraph machine; it is one more subjective piece of information that informs decision making. Neuroscientists are worried about over-reliance on this technology, when you’re anxious there is all sorts of brain activity from the situation you are in. If you are innocent and you're being asked about the thing you're suspected of, you're going to be just as anxious as you are if you’re guilty of it.

Law is not going to disappear because of neuroscience. Getting a better handle on what brain machinery causes certain behaviors will change the criminal justice system, but it will not disappear. Neuroscience evidence of mental state may ultimately be admitted in trials, but it will not restrict the roles of judges and juries to reading brain scans.

When imaging is used to demonstrate damage to a victim's nervous system, a judge can expect that most evidence will be based on conventional clinical procedures. In cases involving victims, conventional CT scanning has dominated as the preferred diagnostic method. Less frequently, conventional X-rays, diagnostic MRI scans, electroencephalography and SPECT scanning of brain blood perfusion are used

The real question is how can neuroscientists present fMRI evidence in a court of law accurately and clearly enough that it can’t be interpreted in any other way. It requires a deeper understand of the neurology, one we don’t necessarily have.


Adolescents, Crime and Brain Development

Posted by Angelica Owens in Science And Society - Best - E on

For the people who believe that adolescents should be punished when committed a crime,


  My name is Charlotte and I am a teenager who robbed and brutally beat an old lady with my friend Emily. I know you think that I should go to prison for this crime but I am here to tell you all of the many reasons why I should not go to jail. For one, our brains have weak breaks. If we see something that intrigues us enough than we go after it. Our reward system is very aroused hehe. Very aroused I said. The braking system to make sure we don’t follow the leader with our negative decisions is turned off at that time. Also, we are more likely to take more risks with our friends. There was a study done at Temple Hospital where when people played games without their friends, they don’t play it differently than any other adult. A student mentioned that by even knowing their friend is watching them, it doubles the number of risks we take but if we look at adults, playing with friends has no impact on their behavior. Let’s not forgot that the behavior-governing prefrontal cortex is morphing. This part of my brain isn’t even developed yet. It is still in the stages of developing correctly so that I make the right decisions and not do idiotic things….just like this situation. Another important factor is adults. Adults guidance makes a huge difference so that we don’t follow the wrong crowd. My mother wasn’t active in my life at all. I barely knew her so I didn’t have the skills to think good enough so that I wouldn’t make negative decisions. By having a parent in your life, you are more willing to do positive things instead of doing risky behaviors. In a case called Atkins v. Virginia, it banned the execution of mentally retarded people so if that was an option, that’s now illegal. What about our hormonal changes?? Being an adolescent, we undergo many emotional and hormonal changes. One of the hormones that has the most effect on our body is testosterone. Emotionally, an adolescent is part child and part adult. Not only that but my father was also abusive which is why I committed this crime. All I know is violence. Research studies shows that abusive childhood experiences can cause violent behaviors. Some situations that can trigger it is being a witness to domestic violence or substance abuse with the family, and also being the victim of physical or sexual assault. This is the reason why I committed the crime that I did. Myself was not only physically abused by my father but I was also bullied in school. I would do one thing wrong, like forget to do the dishes one time and the next thing I knew, my face was being slapped or I got pushed down to the floor. When I was at school, people would call me words like ugly, worthless and fat albert. This is my case as to why I should not receive jail time and walk a free woman.


Sincerely,

Charlotte






Sources;


http://www.mprnews.org/story/2012/11/15/daily-circuit-juvenile-offenders-brain-development


http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publishing/criminal_justice_section_newsletter/crimjust_juvjus_Adolescence.authcheckdam.pdf


The Biological Factors In Criminality

Posted by Malwina Dymek in Science And Society - Best - E on


Biological factors in criminality is a “deterministic approach” when a criminal behaviour has a psychological origin, meaning there can be inherited characteristics of person’s behaviour. There is a genotype which also has a low level of the enzyme that can cause violence in people. This gene and being exposed to abuse as a child connects together causing the violence to be present in person’s behaviour. A damage to the prefrontal cortex connects to antisocial behaviour. The damage usually happens because of the head injury.

An Italian army doctor, Cesare Lombroso collected the features and traits, which showed that the criminals were born with these features. According to Keith E Rice, The Biological Factors in Crime article states that “Based on the physical measurements he collected from Italian prisoners and non-criminal military personnel, Lombroso held that many criminals had been born with ‘atavistic’ features. Criminals had definite biological failings that prevented them from developing to a fully human level. They showed certain ape-like characteristics or sometimes just ‘savage’ features. Such physical anomalies included large jaws, high cheek bones, large ears, long arms, thick skulls and extra nipples, toes and fingers.” People with these features are seen as criminals in the society because these traits made them look like criminals in people’s minds. These features made people look bad and some people are judged because of it. It is not right to judge people based on how they look like.

William Sheldon argued that the person’s body shape describes what kind of person they are. People with mesomorph body shape are most likely to get involved with a crime. Mesomorph body shape is an aggressive and muscular frame so the question is why do people think that people with an aggressive body shape are criminals?


Sources:

http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/abs/10.1176/appi.ajp.2009.09111601

http://www.integratedsociopsychology.net/crime-biological_factors.html

http://www.justice.govt.nz/justice-sector/drivers-of-crime/publications-and-background-information/documents/spb-biological-risk-factors

http://euc.sagepub.com/content/2/3/287.abstract



Lie Detectors (fMRI)

Posted by Rafi Hares in Science And Society - Best - E on

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxYG76szxTEpTmhnOHN6MkNRT0E/view?usp=sharing - Link to infographic

  1. What background info does the audience need in order to understand what’s going on? fMRI brain scanning can be used to do a lie detector test. This is much more efficient than the original polygraph test which dealt which heart palpitations and other signs of nervousness in the brain. You can stay calm and lie but your brain will still reveal if you are lying. Furthermore this science isn’t perfected yet and it still needs work.

  2. What is one viewpoint? What are some arguments/statements/facts that support this view? Some people argue that lie detectors take out the middleman in court cases. Lawyers in a court case can manipulate the case and make it so that a person who is guilty actually walks free and vice versa. However with lie detectors we don’t face this issue because you can’t lie to a lie detector which works through fMRI.

  3. What is another viewpoint? What are some arguments/statements/facts that support this view? Other people will argue that lie detectors can’t tell you the entire story and that evidence and court cases are the best way to reach a logical conclusion in the courtroom because it analyzes all sides of the story.

  4. What are some real-life examples/case studies on this topic? fMRI lie detectors haven’t been allowed in court yet but there are many studies which have been performed showing that we can in fact see if someone is lying by doing an fMRI scan on their brain to measure a change in brain activity.

  5. What are some thought questions and/or deep final thoughts that you can use to conclude your presentation, and leave your audience wanting to learn more? fMRI’s are not a perfect science. We shouldn’t treat fMRI’s as the be all end all in court, we should seen more like another piece of evidence we weigh in the courtroom.

Sources:

​The Biology of Criminology

Posted by Anna Sugrue in Science And Society - Best - E on

Adrian Raine, Professor of Criminology & Psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania, was the first psychologist to study the brains of murderers. After doing PET scans on the brains of 41 murderers and 41 control test subjects at a lab at UC Irvine, Raine found significant results. Compared to the 41 control subjects, brain functioning in the very front of the prefrontal cortex in the 41 murders was very poor. The prefrontal cortex is the part of the brain responsible for our highest order tasks - decision making, impulse control, and emotional regulation. As you would imagine, if your brain has a harder time making decisions, controlling impulses and regulating emotions, you might be more likely to have angry turn to rage, and rage turns into homicide.


Criminologists and geneticists around the country are looking to the genetics of criminology. While they know there is no “crime gene,” markers for aggression and antisocial behavior could play a role in a criminal's activity. For example, Terrie E. Moffitt, a behavioral scientist at Duke University discovered a gene linked to violence that alters the production and regulation of serotonin in the brain. They also found that the gene is most often triggered to “turn on” by stress.


Both Raine and Moffit’s findings about criminal nature are incomplete without the measure of nurture. As the New York Times reports, “genes are ruled by the environment, which can either mute or aggravate violent impulses. Many people with the same genetic tendency for aggressiveness will never throw a punch, while others without it could be career criminals.”

Nurture could start as early as in the womb. Mothers that smoke or drink while pregnant double or triple the odds of a baby becoming a violent offender later. In childhood, poor nutrition nearly triples the rate of antisocial personality disorder in adults.


This raises the question that Adrian Raine puts well in his interview on Fresh Air, "if bad brains do cause bad behavior, if brain dysfunction raises the odds that somebody will become a criminal offender — a violent offender — and if the causes of the brain dysfunction come relatively early in life ... should we fully hold that adult individual responsible?"


What does the biology of criminology mean for the law?

There are several theories about what the biology of criminology means for the practice of law. The first is genetic consideration. Genetic consideration asserts that not all criminals are created equal biologically, so not all criminal offenders should receive the same punishment for the same crime. People who commit crimes that are proven to be under the influence of brain dysfunction and genetic make-up out of their control should be sentenced using less harsh tactics.


The opposite is deterrence theory. Deterrence theory disregards genetic consideration altogether, by arguing that the fear of punishment should deter people from committing crimes, regardless of their biology. Criminologist Amanda R. Evansburg argues “while evidence of a genetic predisposition to violent behavior may potentially be significant, it would be imprudent, as well as politically infeasible, to allow genetic determinism to substitute for the assumptions of free will in the criminal law.”


What do you think? What should be the future of genetics and the law?



http://www.npr.org/2013/05/01/180096559/criminologist-believes-violent-behavior-is-biological

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/20/arts/genetics-and-crime-at-institute-of-justice-conference.html

http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/03/health/biology-crime-violence/  

http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/articles/593/debating-genetics-as-a-predictor-of-criminal-offending-and-sentencing


Insanity Defense by Jesse and Allison

Posted by Jesse Shuter in Science And Society - Best - E on

​

The Insanity Defense

By Allison Kelly & Jesse Shuter


The following information provides complete knowledge of what the insanity defense is, main and interesting arguments for and against the plea, and also includes a lot of famous in which the insanity defense was either successfully used or rejected in court cases. 


SCRIPT FOR PODCAST:

A criminal defendant who is found to have been legally insane when he or she committed a crime may be found not guilty by reason of insanity. In a lot of cases, the defendant is then sentenced to mental help instead of a punishment. In other cases, the defendant may be found guilty but sentenced to a less severe punishment due to a mental impairment. In states that allow the insanity defense, defendants must prove to the court that they did not understand what they were doing; failed to know right from wrong; acted on an uncontrollable impulse or some variety of these factors.

Those in favor of the insanity defense feel the need for its existence in order to distinguish between those defendants charged with a crime who are and those who are not responsible for their acts. Those with a mental disability fall into the category of those who are not responsible for a crime committed due to the fact that their actions were based upon uncontrollable actions. The insanity defense is not present in order to state that what the defendant did wasn’t wrong, but just that the punishment they would face for their crime would not be effective. Those with a mental illness will not understand or learn any lessons by being placed in prison or a punishment as such. They need mental help to understand why what they did was wrong, something that they will not receive just by being locked up.

One very interesting argument against the insanity defense is that it is known as the “a rich person's defense”. This is because being able to prove that someone is mentally ill enough to threaten someone’s free will can only be done by high-priced psychiatric experts, who can only be afforded by wealthy defendants. Persons represented by public defenders are usually afforded a psychiatric examination for the defense, but they may not get the same quality of exam, nor are they typically able to hire more than one examiner. This splits a criminal justice system into the rich against the poor which is why it should be abolished.

One very notorious example of a case where the insanity defense was used was the Jeffrey Dahmer case. Dahmer was a serial killer who murdered quite few people and even committed some other gruesome acts and crimes like cannibalism and necrophilia. He committed over 15 murders in his life. He’d even keep trophies of his murders, he’d keep the victims skulls or genitalia. He plead not guilty by reason of insanity, which it is quite clear that he has a screw loose, but the judge rejected his plea and he was given 15 life sentences. Many viewed it is as the end of the insanity plea because if someone as blatantly insane as Dahmer couldn’t get the plea, no one would be able to. Another famous example is John Hinckley. Hinckley was known for being obsessed with the movie Taxi driver starring Robert De Niro and Jodie Foster. In the movie De Niro plans to assassinate a presidential candidate. After watching the movie many times, Hinckley became infatuated with Foster and wanted her attention. At first he was going to commit suicide in front of her to gain her attention, but then he decided to assassinate President Ronald Reagan, similar to the plot of the movie. He failed in his attempt, however, upon being tried with attempted murder he plead the insanity defense and it was granted to him.

Insane or not, murder and crimes as such are obviously wrong. There is no going around it. But, the point of imprisonment and punishments as such is so that the defendant learns a lesson and accepts that what they did was wrong. The insanity defense is not present in order to get someone off the hook for wrongdoing, but just to give them an effective punishment. Someone mentally ill enough to have their free will threatened is too sick to learn any sort of lesson by being locked up in a prison, so what’s the point? A more sufficient “punishment” would actually be to get them some mental help in order for them to be forced to understand that what they did was wrong. But, it is true to say that to be able to sufficiently claim insane would cause for the defendant to have a little bit of money does put a split in the justice system. There should be a fair system of evaluation for the insane within the justice system to keep things fair.




Insanity Defense

Posted by Jacklyn Middleswarth in Science And Society - Best - E on


What it is: A defense for criminals in trials arguing that their state of mind is not sane, and their actions reflect that. Due to mental illness, they should not be held accountable to the same standards as regular sane beings.

Viewpoints: One) The criminal should not be held accountable for their actions. Reasons for this include that they might not be fully aware of their actions, and if they are aware, they might not know that it is a “bad” thing, or the neurological synapses in their brain do not function like they should causing them to be excessive in behavior. Some people refer to the criminal as lacking the appreciation to what they did.

       Two) This is not a thing/there are variants of mental illness. Reasons these two viewpoints exist are because the victim believes even though the person might be mentally ill, they are still guilty. Some believe that people use this excuse too excessively. And some people think that the person did it, they should receive punishment for their actions.

Real life example: There were two men. William Freeman and Jack Furman. Jack Furman had stole a horse but blamed Freeman. Through a long court case of back and forth, Freeman was finally sentenced to five years in prison. Freeman spent his time, but got beat. He even got hit on the head by a guard. People said when he got out, he was slow, not his normal self, and had an eerie constant smile.

Shortly after he got out he murdered a family, and was taken to jail again. The argument for Freeman’s case was that he was not in the same mind as he was before incarceration the first time. There was a lot of deliberation, but the jury thought Freeman’s slow behavior and unemotional state was due to him being African American. In the end, Freeman died, and died from brain deterioration.

Questions: I wonder, how much research is there on mental illness?

Why can any defendant use this type of defense? It makes me question it because in a study less than one percent of cases using this plea are successful, what would happen if this argument was only used when the defendant was proven insane?

The Insanity Defense and the Law

Posted by Kara Rosenberg in Science And Society - Best - E on

​A man named William Freeman, the son of a former slave and Native American woman, was wrongfully arrested for the theft of a horse. He was treated horribly in prison for five years, including getting beaten over the head by a guard with a piece of lumber. Once he was released from prison, he seemed to suffer from brain injuries, affecting his speech, hearing, actions, and decision making. He was always speaking of seeking revenge on people. Shortly after Freeman’s release from jail, a wealthy white family was murdered, which Freeman was then arrested for. Attorney William Seward defended Freeman, pleading insanity. Freeman was found guilty anyway. Freeman died in his jail cell a year later. An autopsy showed that he suffered from severe brain deterioration.
One viewpoint of this case is that William Freeman was not insane, and that he purposely committed the murders of the Nest family. The biggest argument for this viewpoint was that William Freeman’s stupidity and slow speech could be blamed on the fact that he was the son of a slave and Native American. Most people were extremely racist during this time period, and they didn’t want him to be proven innocent no matter what. Another viewpoint of this case is that William Freeman was insane, and did not know what he was doing. The argument for this case was that he was beaten over the head by a guard, and since the beating, his ability to function deteriorated.
Other than this case, there are many incidents of criminals pleading insanity. In one case, a schoolteacher was caught making sexual advances towards his female coworkers, and also towards his young step-daughter. Doctors found that the man had a large tumor in his brain. When that tumor was removed, his pedophilia symptoms went away. He was not charged for his actions because they could be blamed on his tumor.
Another example is a man who suffered from epilepsy who had the part of his brain removed which was causing his seizures. He didn’t know that during surgery his brain had been injured, which caused him to become addicted to sex and become interested in child pornography. He was arrested, and sentenced to five years in jail and five years on house arrest, instead of ten years in jail. The judge gave him this better sentence because she recognized that his actions were due to his injury, however at work he showed no signs of pedophilia, which meant he could’ve asked for help in those times of control.
These cases raise many questions. How much blame should a criminal have for their actions? How do you prove whether or not a person is insane? How do we ensure that no one is taking advantage of the system by claiming insanity, while still ensuring that those who are truly insane receive fair sentencing?

Lie Detection MINI PROJECT

Posted by Brittany Atkinson in Science And Society - Best - E on

Lie detection is already a sketchy subject when it comes to the law. It is often seen as unreliable considering it only measures heartbeat and how badly someone is sweating, but what if there was a type of lie detection that could test the witness’s brain activity while they are being asked a question? Well, have you ever heard of an fMRI brain scan? An fMRI is a brain scan that detects changes in the brain by following the blood flow unlike an MRI where radio waves and magnetic fields create images of the organs. An fMRI unlike other lie detection methods, tracks the brain's activity instead of the signs of anxiety. This scan could allow cases to have a different set of evidence, but is it too good to be true? Dr. Nita Farahany, a professor at Duke University, participated in an experiment to help give an example of how an fMRI can work and how effective it could be in a courtroom. In the experiment, Dr. Farahany went into an fMRI after seeing a series of faces. For the first scan, she was tested on her ability to recognize any of the faces she had seen earlier. After seeing if Dr. Farahany recognized the faces the first time around, they task her with trying to conceal her memories of the faces from the fMRI. The results ended with a 50/50 chance of the fMRI picking up if Dr. Farahany was “lying” or being truthful. This can prove that the fMRI scans can be just as unreliable as other lie detection methods. This is not the only problem with fMRI lie detection. Say you are an innocent suspect, there is no possible way you committed a crime but are still strictly interrogated as if you had. Would you feel as anxious as someone who was guilty? If there was to be a brain scan of your interrogation then you might be wrongly accused just based on that, especially by a jury. Bringing fMRI lie detection results into a courtroom without any other evidence can cause the jury to name you guilty. This causes judges to be more careful about viewing these results and if you have to be so careful about them, then why even view them? This also counts when it comes to pleading the fifth, your brain can not plead the fifth just because your mouth tells it too. You could possibly self incriminate yourself. For example there was a case in Tennessee where lawyers brought in  fMRI lie detection and it was unfit for the courtroom because of it’s unpredictable results. This only means that the fMRI is not ready for courtroom, it will take time for neuroscientist to get it exactly right. Will it end up being an unreliable and unused tactic or become something that is used in all courtrooms if it improves its accuracy? Right now, it is leaning towards unused because of it's many issues, but it might also be able to turn around with many more studies on the ability to pick out concealment. We'll soon find out.

SCISOC-1

Term
2015-16.S2

Other Websites

Launch Canvas

Blog Tags

Teachers