Opinion ID: 222841
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: standard of review

Text: `We review de novo the District Court's determination of whether substantial evidence on the record as a whole supports the ALJ's decision.' Medhaug v. Astrue, 578 F.3d 805, 813 (8th Cir.2009) (quoting Gonzales v. Barnhart, 465 F.3d 890, 894 (8th Cir.2006)). `We will affirm the ALJ's findings if supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole.' Id. (quoting Kelley v. Callahan, 133 F.3d 583, 587 (8th Cir.1998)). Substantial evidence is relevant evidence that a reasonable mind would accept as adequate to support the Commissioner's conclusion. Id. (quoting Goff v. Barnhart, 421 F.3d 785, 789 (8th Cir.2005)). We must consider evidence that both supports and detracts from the ALJ's decision, but we will not reverse an administrative decision `simply because some evidence may support the opposite conclusion.' Id. (quoting Goff, 421 F.3d at 789). `If, after reviewing the record, the court finds it is possible to draw two inconsistent positions from the evidence and one of those positions represents the ALJ's findings, the court must affirm the ALJ's decision.' Id. (quoting Goff, 421 F.3d at 789).