evidence of record, or it is inconsistent with the physician’s own medical records. Phillips, 357 F.3d at 1240-41; Edwards v. Sullivan, 937 F.2d 580, 583-84 (11th Cir.1991) (concluding that good cause existed not to rely on a treating physician’s findings when, inter alia, his treatment notes contained unexplained inconsistencies). The ALJ may reject the opinion of any physician when the evidence supports a contrary conclusion. Sryock v. Heckler, 764 F.2d 834, 835 (11th Cir.1985). Further, when a treating physician makes merely conclusory statements, the ALJ may afford them such weight as is supported by the clinical or laboratory findings and other consistent evidence of the claimant’s impairments. Wheeler v. Heckler, 784 F.2d 1073, 1075 (11th Cir. 1986); see Vega, 265 F.3d at 1220 (<HOLDING>). When a treating physician’s opinion does not
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 alj erred in failing to give the findings and assessments of the treating physicians any weight when the medical evidence and claimants testimony supported a diagnosis of cfs holding that the alj failed to analyze the effect of cfs on a claimants ability to do work meaningfully when he rejected cfs as a diagnosis for want of a definite test or specific laboratory findings to support the diagnosis holding that the alj properly relied on the assessments of a nonexamining physician and not claimants treating physicians in determining the rfc at step four holding that a treating physicians diagnosis could be rejected for specific and legitimate reasons that are supported by substantial evidence in the record