L5-5 and S 1 dermatones. Dr. Naum prescribed plaintiff medications, such as OxyContin and a Duragesic patch. All of this comports with what Dr. Heban, the state agency’s physician, reported, a report to which the ALJ gave great weight in determining that plaintiff lacked credibility. Dr. Naum never asserted that plaintiffs observed quality of movement was to be expected nor asserted that use of double-braced canes was necessary given the conditions that all the doctors agree plaintiff has. Observations about plaintiffs gait and ambulation, then, are more like statements made by plaintiff about his conditions, statements that the ALJ here found not entirely credible when compared to objective medical evidence. See Young v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 925 F.2d 146, 151 (6th Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 (2006); see also Smith
holding that a patients settlement of a prior action brought against him by doctors for payment of a bill did not bar medical malpractice action against doctors holding that a doctors report that merely repeats a patients assertions about her level of pain and ability to sleep stand and walk is not objective medical evidence holding that an insurance company could not deny a claim for longterm disability benefits based on a lack of objective medical evidence when the original policy did not refer to the objective medical evidence standard and never defined that term holding that alj properly evaluated credibility where he cited specific instances where claimants complaints about pain and other subjective symptoms were inconsistent with the objective medical evidence of record holding that doctors do not have to accept patients