April 2013 noted Plaintiffs diarrhea. PagelD 1418. Thus, the ALJ’s determination — that Plaintiffs “allegations of frequent use of the bathroom have not been verified by others in the record” — is inaccurate. See PagelD 706, Based on all of the foregoing, the undersigned finds that the ALJ erred by.failing to find that Plaintiffs abdominal impairment was severe. Such error can be harmless where an ALJ finds that Plaintiff suffers from at least one severe impairment at Step Two — the ALJ here found Plaintiffs aortic valve, COPD, disc disease, and aneurysm repair were severe impairments — and considers the limiting effects all of impairments, severe or not, when determining the claimant’s RFC at Steps Four and Five. See White v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 312 Fed.Appx. 779, 787 (6th Cir.2009) (<HOLDING>); see also Johnson v. Colvin, No. 3:13cv301,
holding that harm must be sufficiently severe and rise above mere harassment holding that only the severity requirements of the crossreferenced mental impairments must be met while all of the requirements for the crossreferenced physical impairments must be met to prove alcoholism disabling at step three holding emotional distress suffered must be severe and not trivial holding that once one severe impairment is found the combined effect of all impairments must be considered even if other impairments would not be severe holding condition was not severe impairment where it improved from treatment