subjective. See Sar-chet, 78 F.3d at 307. Those symptoms include “ ‘pain all over,’ fatigue, disturbed sleep, stiffness, and — the only symptom that discriminates between it and other diseases of a rheumatic character — multiple tender spots, more precisely eighteen fixed locations on the body (and the rule of thumb is that the patient must have at least eleven of them to be diagnosed as having fibromyalgia) that when pressed firmly cause the patient to flinch.” Id. at 306. Given the nature of the condition, the lack of lack of x-rays, MRI studies, CT scans, laboratory findings or objective medical evidence was not probative of whether the record supported Dr. Misra’s opinion about plaintiffs limitations. See also Dominguese v. Massanari, 172 F.Supp.2d 1087, 1100-01 (E.D.Wis.2001) (<HOLDING>). Thus, the ALJ’s explanation did not supply a
holding that where the alj had already  obtained and considered reports from treating physicians the alj had before him a complete medical history and the evidence received from the treating physicians was adequate for him to make a determination as to disability holding that the lack of hard evidence did not supply a good reason for rejecting a treating source physicians assessment where the disability was fibromyalgia holding that remand was not required and that the aljs failure to mention treating physicians opinion was harmless error because the alj adopted the treating physicians recommendations 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 because fibromyalgia is a disease that eludes objective measurement alj improperly discredited treating physicians disability determination based upon lack of objective evidence