determining whether this listing is equalled, it is irrelevant whether Lester’s symptoms resulted solely from his mental impairments or from a combination of his mental and physical impairments. There is no dispute that Lester had significant mental and physical impairments, each of which resulted in some restrictions on his ability to function in the areas specified by paragraph B. Indeed, the medical experts appear to agree that the part of his limitations arising from his physical impairment — acute pain— cannot easily be segregated from the part arising from his mental impairments. Lester’s condition, which the medical advisor referred to as “chronic pain syndrome,” has both a physical and psychological component. See Bunnell v. Sullivan, 947 F.2d 341, 347 (9th Cir.1991) (en banc) (<HOLDING>). Pain merges into and becomes a part of the
holding threshold not met by subjective complaints of transitory pain unsupported by objective evidence recognizing as separate from pain and suffering recognizing as an element of pain and suffering recognizing that pain is a completely subjective phenomenon and that secretary must consider all available evidence in assessing complaints of pain holding that alj should have included complaints of pain in hypothetical question