favor of Dr. Patton’s contradictory opinion that he can lift up to 10 pounds frequently. Contradiction with the medical record is a sufficient basis for rejecting the claimant’s subjective testimony. Johnson v. Shalala, 60 F.3d 1428, 1434 (9th Cir.1995). Thus, we conclude that both of these reasons relied on by the ALJ are supported by substantial evidence in the record. 3 The ALJ also gave less weight to Car-mickle’s testimony because he received unemployment benefits during the time he alleges disability and because he took only Ibuprofen to treat his pain. First, while receipt of unemployment benefits can un dermine a claimant’s alleged inability to work fulltime, see Copeland v. Bowen, 861 F.2d 536, 542 (9th Cir.1988); accord Schmidt v. Barnhart, 395 F.3d 737, 745-46 (7th Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>), the record here does not establish whether
holding that the consideration of the fact that claimant collected unemployment benefits while he was allegedly disabled was not a ground for reversal where there was other medical and vocational evidence supporting denial of benefits and claimants receipt of unemployment benefits was not decisive factor in denial of benefits holding that disability pension benefits could be offset against both temporary and total permanent disability compensation benefits recognizing receipt of unemployment benefits could impact a claimants disability claim holding that claimant may simultaneously receive unemployment benefits and workers compensation for temporary partial disability where statute only precludes receipt of workers compensation for temporary total or permanent total disability if claimant is receiving unemployment benefits holding  1001 prosecution for false statements in unemployment benefits not precluded by unemployment benefits statute specifically addressing topic