Desk Reference describes as an analgesia for treatment of mild to moderate pain, prescribed for relief from acute flairs of rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis. The ALJ observed that stronger medications could have been prescribed.”). Third, in allowing the conservative nature of one’s treatment as one of the factors a court may consider in determining a claimant’s credibility, we are in accord with several other courts of appeals that have held the same. See, e.g., Smith v. Colvin, 756 F.3d 621, 626 (8th Cir.2014) (noting with approval that the ALJ’s credibility determination was based, in part, on finding that the plaintiffs treatment was “essentially routine and/or conservative in nature”) (internal quotation marks omitted); Wall v. Astrue, 561 F.3d 1048, 1068-69 (10th Cir.2009) (<HOLDING>); Parra v. Astrue, 481 F.3d 742, 751 (9th
holding that a physicians conservative medical treatment for a particular condition tends to negate a claim of disability holding that opting for conservative treatment instead of surgery is not substantial evidence that the claimant was not disabled holding that allegations of several instances of flawed medical treatment state a claim under eighth amendment holding that a history of conservative medical treatment undermines allegations of disabling symptoms holding that a tortfeasor is required to pay the expenses of over treatment or unnecessary medical treatment unless such treatment was incurred by the victim in bad faith 