standing walking lifting and caring this independent basis for finding support for a subset in terry r f c and also for reading of the listings one point on to a in we see in the judge's decision on page twenty one notes asked for the opinion evidence in determining the way to be given the assessments the other side is required to consider the understanding that an acceptable medical source has of our disability disability cases basing the weight and the reliance the just gave on this the persuasiveness of having this kind of experience it is reasonable that doctor well over the pinion would have been found to be supportive and consistent but they say it was harmless because all she was doing was basing her opinion on the wall over and under son who the guilty already discounted can you address why you think it was prejudicial yester yes correct the both clear contracts these people to do that i mean this is this is common place this is the practice of free disability hearings and the reasons asserted by the able j which is the only thing we can turn to do not address the issues raised by dr polaski and as they ha opinions and actually viewed and gave an opinion after the title hip replacement surgery and this was only the errors only further shown by the fact that dr fauci ended up being correct and all these things we see the last tre opinion he's a non examining doctor which under this president means you're already starting at the lowest rung on the ladder furthermore in this court case thomas versus independent evidence in the rocks and what that is typically man is evidence that is independent of the evidence underlying the other medical opinion that's not true at all i mean my understanding in fact they do it the difference is is when medical source was not examining it relies on evidence that the older you based on the evidence underlying another medical ok what i general he's not examining people because they're not examining all they're doing is reading records they don't have any independent evidence ever well let's let's take the example of a very small case where there was only one medical opinion and one t it seems like something of a problem that he didn't say anything about it one way or the other so there is that this gets back to the question i asked your friend about how could we say that it was harmless the not to consider  complete activities and if they're using a hand held device that has to restrict the use of the person's hand and in this case the claimant would not prescribe any sort of assisted device until after surgery in this case doctor i think it's undisputed the dr polaski only relied on the reports of dr goli ver and dr henderson i think under the can establish circuit preceden unsaid first of all i think it's important dr polaski didn't give in and rationale you just say based on his chronic health conditions and his history of all surgeries that three months is not sufficient that twelve months was a more appropriate opinion that is an opinion based on some of the the judge thought he was camping for fun recreation range repairs on his home when in fact biggest medical condition he became homeless through the motorhome in just repair with his sick wife nobody living in the back of his can trailer in his truck they had no other options to do and he was moving his cancer every two weeks that avoid having to pay camping fees very different and you can see how that growth means understanding of the record every bit of the entire decision so for these reasons i asked that initial anastase