day he was not able to do much except lie on a couch. This testimony was inconsistent with the medi cal evidence showing that his stenosis was mild or moderate, his pain could be partially controlled with medication, and he could perform such activities as carrying objects that weighed less than ten pounds, simple grasping, pushing, or pulling, and could do occasional walking and standing while at work. After giving specific reasons for rejecting the contradictory medical evidence, the ALJ accepted the opinions of the treating neurosurgeon, Dr. Balis, and the treating orthopedist, Dr. Capanioni, who both found that Eckert had only mild or moderate degeneration of his spine and should be able to return to work. See Oldham v. Schweiker, 660 F.2d 1078, 1084 (Former 5th Cir. Nov. 1981) (<HOLDING>). Thus, the credible medical evidence, as found
holding that the alj erred by failing to mention the contrary opinion of a treating physician holding that the alj is free to reject the opinion of any physician when the evidence supports a contrary conclusion holding in the absence of alj findings supported by specific weighing of the evidence we cannot assess whether relevant evidence adequately supports the aljs conclusion holding that where a treating physicians opinion is contradicted by a consulting physician the alj must explain on the record the reasons for rejecting the opinion of the treating physician holding that the alj must make findings setting forth specific and legitimate reasons that are supported by substantial evidence in order to reject the contradicted opinion of a treating physician