20 C.F.R. § 404.1529

Section 404.1529(c)(1)-(3) permits an ALJ to consider whether objective medical evidence is consistent with a claimant’s symptom testimony.

Brown · filed 2026-03-16(c)(1)-(3)

It was permissible and reasonable for the ALJ to consider plaintiff’s normal behavior, intact memory, intact attention, intact concentration, intact thought content, and average intellectual functioning to undermine her allegations of completely disabling symptoms.

Section 404.1529 does not make pain and blackout complaints irrelevant merely because they are symptoms; symptoms may be evidence of an impairment or describe an impairment.

Crawford v. Bowen · filed 1988-05-31

The distinction that the Secretary attempts to draw, however, is at most one of semantics, as symptoms may also be “evidence of an impairment or a description of an impairment.”

Under Section 404.1529, diarrhea and abdominal pain are symptoms that may be caused by a medically determinable impairment, not medically determinable impairments themselves.

Herrera v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-08-11

First, diarrhea and abdominal pain are not MDIs; they are symptoms that could be caused by an MDI. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529, 416.929.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) allows the type and dosage of medication to be considered when evaluating a claimant’s complaints.

Windus v. Barnhart · filed 2004-11-15(c)(3)(iv)

While the type and dosage of medication a claimant takes is a factor in evaluating the credibility of a claimant’s complaints, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv); see also SSR 96-7p, the ALJ must still build a bridge from such evidence to his conclusion.

Section 404.1529 treats subjective symptoms as including nervousness caused by a mental impairment, not just pain caused by a physical impairment.

Billy BLANKENSHIP, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Otis R. BOWEN, M.D., Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services · filed 1989-05-17

This subjective symptomology is not limited to complaints of pain resulting from physiological impairments, but includes symptoms such as nervousness resulting from a mental impairment. 20 C.F.R. Sec. 404.1529.

Section 404.1529 requires a medically determinable condition that could reasonably be expected to produce the claimant’s symptoms before disability can be found based on those symptoms, including pain.

James WINN, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. Margaret HECKLER, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant, Appellee · filed 1985-05-23

By the time the claimant stopped work in December of 1979, the medical reports do not reveal a “medically determinable” cause for the claimant’s pain, 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(1)(A), nor was there “a medical condition that could be reasonably expected to produce those symptoms,” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529.

Section 404.1529(a) requires subjective pain and other symptom manifestations to be considered only to the extent consistent with objective medical evidence and other relevant evidence.

Orr v. Sullivan · filed 1992-06-29(a)

However, under 20 C.F.R. § 404.-1529(a), the determination of disability includes the consideration of subjective manifestations of pain only to the extent to which they are consistent with the objective medical evidence and other evidence, such as medical signs, laboratory findings, reports of treating or examining physicians and others about the medical history, diagnosis, prescribed treatment, daily activities, efforts to work, and any other evidence showing how the impairments and any related symptoms affect the ability to work.

Section 404.1529(a) requires considering a claimant’s statements about symptoms and descriptions of their effects, but those statements alone cannot establish disability without medical signs and laboratory findings showing a medically determinable impairment that could reasonably produce the alleged symptoms.

Williams v. Chater · filed 1996-01-31(a)

Under the Social Security regulations, the Commissioner is required to consider all of the claimant’s statements about symptoms, together with any description the claimant, her physician(s), her psychologists), or other persons may provide about how the symptoms affect the claimant’s activities of daily living and her ability to work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a) (1995). However, the claimant’s statements about her own symptoms cannot by themselves establish disability; there must be medical signs and laboratory findings which show that the claimant has a medical impairments) which could reasonably be expected to produce the symptoms alleged, and which, when considered with all of the other evidence of record, would lead to a conclusion that the claimant is disabled pursuant to the Act.

Section 404.1529 permits an ALJ to disbelieve a claimant’s symptom testimony after making specific findings that the testimony is inconsistent with the objective evidence.

Abken v. Shirley S. Chater, Shhs · filed 1996-02-23

The ALJ properly evaluated the lay testimony. She disbelieved the testimony of Abken and his mother only after making findings that specific portions of their testimony did not comport with the objective evidence. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529; 20 C.F.R. § 416.929; Dodrill v. Shalala, 12 F.3d 915, 918-919 (9th Cir.1993).

Section 404.1529 requires the Commissioner to consider a claimant's subjective symptoms, such as pain and fatigue, when determining the severity of an impairment.

Smolen v. Chater · filed 1996-03-29(d)(2)

In deciding whether to accept a claimant's subjective symptom testimony, an ALJ must perform two stages of analysis: the Cotton analysis and an analysis of the credibility of the claimant's testimony regarding the severity of her symptoms. ... If the claimant produces evidence to meet the Cotton test and there is no evidence of malingering, the ALJ can reject the claimant's testimony about the severity of her symptoms only by offering specific, clear and convincing reasons for doing so. ... Also, he is required to consider the claimant's subjective symptoms, such as pain or fatigue, in determining severity. SSR 88-13; 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(d)(2)(effective 11/14/91) (adopting SSR 88-13).

Section 404.1529 bars finding disability based on symptoms, including pain alone, unless medical signs or findings establish a medical condition reasonably expected to produce those symptoms.

Wood v. Callahan · filed 1997-09-03

Pain is treated by the regulations as a symptom of disability. Title 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 provides in part that the Commissioner will not find disability based on symptoms, including pain alone, “... unless medical signs or findings show that there is a medical condition that could be reasonably expected to produce these symptoms.”

Section 404.1529 permits an ALJ to consider a claimant’s subjective symptoms when evaluating disability.

Moss v. Apfel · filed 1999-02-17

Moss has failed to prove that CFS disabled her before the date she was last insured, and thus the ALJ did not err in considering her subjective symptoms under 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529.

Section 404.1529(a) makes a claimant’s subjective allegations relevant to the effects of an impairment, but they cannot alone establish disability; medical evidence must show an impairment reasonably expected to produce the alleged symptoms.

Marrero v. Apfel · filed 2000-03-16(a)

Second, although a claimant’s subjective allegations are relevant in considering the extent to which an impairment causes pain or affects daily activities, such statements alone cannot establish the existence of a disability. ... Rather, to demonstrate a disability, there must be medical evidence showing that the claimant has a medical impairment that could reasonably be expected to produce the pain or other symptoms alleged.

Section 404.1529 requires consideration of a claimant’s subjective symptoms, but the symptoms alone do not establish disability; there must be a medical condition that could reasonably produce them.

Belanger v. Apfel · filed 2000-09-20

Under 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529, the claimant’s subjective allegation of symptoms is not itself evidence of a disability, but there must be a medical condition that would reasonably produce the alleged symptoms, leading to the conclusion that the claimant is disabled.

Section 404.1529 requires objective evidence of an underlying condition that could reasonably be expected to cause the alleged pain, but does not require separate objective proof of the pain itself.

Moody v. Barnhart · filed 2003-12-05

While both the regulations and the Hand standard require objective medical evidence of a condition that could reasonably be expected to cause the pain alleged, neither requires objective proof of the pain itself. Thus under both the regulations and the first (objectively identifiable condition) and third (reasonably expected to cause pain alleged) parts of the Hand standard a claimant who can show that his condition could reasonably be expected to give rise to the pain he alleges has established a claim of disability and is not required to produce additional, objective proof of the pain itself. See 20 CFR §§ 404.1529 and 416.929; Hale at 1011.

Section 404.1529 requires objective evidence of a medical condition that could reasonably be expected to cause the alleged pain, but does not require separate objective proof of the pain itself.

Carr v. McMahon · filed 2007-02-12

While both the regulations and the Hand standard require objective medical evidence of a condition that could reasonably be expected to cause the pain alleged, neither requires objective proof of the pain itself Thus under both the regulations and the first (objectively identifiable condition) and third (reasonably expected to cause pain alleged) parts of the Hand standard a claimant who can show that his condition could reasonably be expected to give rise to the pain he alleges has established a claim of disability and is not required to produce additional, objective proof of the pain itself See 20 CFR §§ 404.1529 and 416.929; Hale at 1011.

Section 404.1529 provides that an individual's own statements about pain and symptoms are not determinative of disability status.

Dominguez v. Astrue · filed 2008-07-18

Finally, the ALJ considered Dominguez’s testimony about the location, duration, frequency, and intensity of his symptoms, but an individual’s own statements regarding pain and symptoms are not determinative of disability status. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529.

Section 404.1529(b) requires a claimant alleging subjective pain to show either objective medical evidence confirming the pain's severity or an objectively established medical condition severe enough to reasonably be expected to cause it.

Hibbard v. Astrue · filed 2008-02-04(b)

However, with regards to these subjective pain complaints, the Plaintiff must show that objective medical evidence confirms the severity of the alleged pain, or that the objectively determined medical condition is of such severity that it can reasonably be expected to give rise to the alleged pain.

Section 404.1529 requires objective medical evidence of a condition that could reasonably be expected to cause the alleged pain, but does not require objective proof of the pain itself.

Cross v. Astrue · filed 2009-06-25

While both the regulations and the Hand standard require objective medical evidence of a condition that could reasonably be expected to cause the pain alleged, ... a claimant who can show that his condition could reasonably be expected to give rise to the pain he alleges has established a claim of disability and is not required to produce additional, objective proof of the pain itself. See 20 CFR §§ 404.1529 and 416.929; Hale at 1011.

Section 404.1529(c)(2) does not permit an ALJ to discredit testimony about the intensity or persistence of pain and fatigue solely because objective medical evidence does not support it.

Manzo vs Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2011-01-07(c)(2)

The ALJ must articulate explicit and adequate reasons for discrediting testimony concerning subjective complaints, Dyer v. Barnhart, 395 F.3d 1206, 1210 (11th Cir. 2005), and cannot discredit testimony as to the intensity or persistence of pain and fatigue solely based on the lack of objective medical evidence. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(2), 416.929(c)(2); see also Todd v. Heckler, 736 F.2d 641, 642 (11th Cir. 1984) (explaining that pain alone may be disabling and that it is improper for an ALJ to require objective medical evidence to support a claim of disabling pain). ... The ALJ properly stated the specific reasons for discrediting Manzo’s testimony that she suffered from headaches and vision problems. ... We conclude that substantial evidence supported the ALJ’s finding that the testimony that Manzo suffered from headaches and vision problems was not credible to the extent that it was inconsistent with the contrary evidence underlying the RFC assessment.

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ to consider all impairments, including subjective symptoms such as pain, when evaluating a claimant's residual functional capacity.

Bear v. Astrue · filed 2011-09-21

In evaluating a plaintiffs RFC, the ALJ must consider all of a plaintiffs impairments, including subjective symptoms such as pain. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529.

Section 404.1529(c) requires an ALJ to consider subjective reports of pain as a factor in the analysis.

Holley v. Colvin · filed 2013-09-30(c)

The Regulations state that subjective reports of pain must be considered as a factor in the ALJ’s analysis. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c).

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ to evaluate a claimant’s alleged symptoms, including pain, against objective medical and other evidence and consider inconsistencies before deciding their limiting effects.

Lindsey v. Colvin · filed 2016-09-22(c)(4)

Regulation 96-7p and 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(4) and 416.929(c)(4) require the ALJ to consider the consistency of subjective complaints.

Section 404.1529 requires considering treatment other than medication and measures used to relieve pain or symptoms, but this court will not require those additional factors under Eighth Circuit precedent.

Williams v. Social Security Administration Commissioner · filed 2018-12-19

Social Security Regulations 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 and 20 C.F.R. § 416.929 require the analysis of two additional factors: (1) “treatment, other than medication, you receive or have received for relief of your pain or other symptoms” and (2) “any measures you use or have used to relieve your pain or symptoms (e.g., lying flat on your back, standing for 15 to 20 minutes every hour, sleeping on a board, etc.).” However, under Polaski and its progeny, the Eighth Circuit has not yet required the analysis of these additional factors. See Shultz v. Astrue, 479 F.3d 979, 983 (2007). Thus, this Court will not require the analysis of these additional factors in this case.

Section 404.1529 requires an ALJ evaluating subjective symptoms to consider factors including daily activities, pain characteristics, medication effects, aggravating factors, and functional restrictions, and to acknowledge and consider them before discounting the complaints.

Adamczyk v. Berryhill · filed 2019-02-12(c)

An ALJ is required to consider the following factors when considering a claimant’s subjective complaints of pain: (1) the claimant’s daily activities; (2) the duration, frequency, and intensity of the pain; (3) the dosage, effectiveness and side effects of medication; (4) precipitating and aggravating factors; and (5) any functional restrictions. McDade v. Astrue, 720 F.3d 994, 998 (8th Cir. 2013) (citing Polaski v. Heckler, 739 F.2d 1320, 1322 (8th Cir. 1984); see also 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529, 416.929 (listing these factors and more). An ALJ is not required to methodically discuss each factor but must acknowledge and consider them before discounting the claimant’s subjective complaints. McDade, 720 F.3d at 998.

Section 404.1529(c)(4) requires an ALJ to evaluate a claimant’s statements about symptom intensity, persistence, and limiting effects in relation to the objective medical and other evidence when deciding whether the claimant is disabled.

Johnson v. Commissioner, SSA · filed 2019-03-01(c)(4)

Under 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(4), an ALJ considers the claimant’s “statements about the intensity, persistence, and limiting effects of [his] symptoms, and . . . will evaluate [his] statements in relation to the objective medical evidence and other evidence in reaching a conclusion as to whether [he is] disabled.”

Section 404.1529(c)(1) requires an ALJ to evaluate the intensity and persistence of a claimant’s symptoms to determine how they limit the claimant’s capacity for work when a medically determinable impairment could reasonably be expected to produce them.

Robinson v. Acting Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-03-12(c)(1)

If the record shows that the claimant has a medically determinable impairment that could reasonably be expected to produce her symptoms, the ALJ must evaluate the intensity and persistence of the symptoms to determine how they limit the claimant’s capacity for work.

Section 404.1529(b)–(c) requires an ALJ to first determine whether an impairment could reasonably be expected to produce the reported symptoms and then evaluate their intensity and persistence in light of other relevant evidence.

Taylor v. Berryhill · filed 2019-06-11(b), (c)

To assess a claimant's self-described symptoms, an ALJ must undertake a two-step process. ... First, the ALJ must consider whether an underlying impairment "could reasonably be expected to produce" the individual's reported symptoms. ... Second, the ALJ evaluates the intensity and persistence of those symptoms in consideration of other relevant evidence in the record.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires an ALJ evaluating a claimant’s subjective symptoms to consider all the evidence in the record, including the listed factors.

Gandy v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-07-15(c)(3)

In addressing Plaintiff’s subjective symptoms, the ALJ must consider all the evidence in the record. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3).

Section 404.1529(a) requires the ALJ to consider a claimant’s statements about symptoms and how those symptoms affect daily life and the ability to work.

Sult v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-09-10(a)

When determining a claimant’s subjective symptoms, the ALJ must consider a claimant’s statements about her symptoms, such as pain, and how the symptoms affect her daily life and ability to work.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires consideration of daily activities, symptom duration, intensity and frequency, precipitating and aggravating factors, medication, functional restrictions, work history, and objective medical evidence when evaluating symptoms.

Dzafic v. Berryhill · filed 2019-09-16(c)(3)

In examining the record, the Commissioner must consider several factors, including the claimant’s daily activities; the duration, intensity, and frequency of the symptoms; the precipitating and aggravating factors; the dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of medication; any functional restrictions; the claimant’s work history; and the objective medical evidence. See Moore v. Astrue, 572 F.3d 520, 524 (8th Cir. 2009) (citing Finch v. Astrue, 547 F.3d 933, 935 (8th Cir. 2008), and Polaski v. Heckler, 739 F.2d 1320, 1322 (8th Cir. 1984)). See also SSR 16-3p, 2017 WL 5180304, at *7-*8 (describing several of the above factors, as well as evidence of treatment other than medication that an individual receives); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3) (same).

Section 404.1529(a) requires consideration of all evidence about the intensity, persistence, and functionally limiting effects of pain or other symptoms, in addition to medical signs and laboratory findings, when deciding disability.

Thieme-Knight v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-09-26(a)

Once a claimant establishes that his pain is disabling through objective medical evidence from an acceptable medical source that shows a medical impairment that could reasonably be expected to produce the pain or other symptoms, pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a), “all evidence about the intensity, persistence, and functionally limiting effects of pain or other symptoms must be considered in addition to the medical signs and laboratory findings in deciding the issue of disability,” Foote, 67 F.3d at 1561.

Section 404.1529 requires the ALJ to reassess a claimant's subjective symptom allegations using the applicable symptom-evaluation evidence and factors.

Washington v. Saul · filed 2019-10-21

On remand, the ALJ should reassess all of Claimant’s subjective symptom allegations in accordance with SSR 16-3p and 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529.

Section 404.1529(a) provides that a claimant’s statements about pain or other symptoms alone do not establish disability.

Rivera v. Berryhill · filed 2019-12-30(a)

Furthermore, the ALJ was not required to credit plaintiff’s testimony about the severity of her pain and the functional limitations it caused. “Statements about your pain and other symptoms will not alone establish you are disabled.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a).

Section 404.1529 substantially mirrors the Eleventh Circuit’s pain standard: a claimant must show an underlying medical condition and either objective evidence confirming the alleged pain’s severity or that the condition could reasonably cause the pain.

Johnson v. Acting Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-03-03

A claimant attempting to establish disability through her own testimony of subjective symptoms must show: “(1) evidence of an underlying medical condition; and (2) either (a) objective medical evidence confirming the severity of the alleged pain; or (b) that the objectively determined medical condition can reasonably be expected to give rise to the claimed pain.” Wilson, 284 F.3d at 1225; see also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 (containing substantially similar language). ... In sum, substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s assessment that Johnson’s statements on the intensity, persistence, and limiting effects of her symptoms were inconsistent with the evidence of record.

Subsection 404.1529(c)(2) bars discounting subjective depression symptoms merely because objective evidence does not substantiate them, a rule especially important because major depression lacks a sufficiently sensitive and specific diagnostic laboratory test.

Sterling · filed 2026-03-19(c)(2)

At the second step, generally, the plaintiff is not required to produce objective evidence of the pain itself or its intensity. See Walker v. Bowen, 889 F.2d 47, 49 (4th Cir. 1989). The Fourth Circuit has held that this evidentiary rule is particularly forceful in cases where depression impacts plaintiffs. ... Accordingly, an ALJ commits legal error by discounting a claimant’s symptoms based on objective evidence. Id. at 360-61; see also 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(2), 416.929(c)(2) (“[W]e will not reject your statements about the intensity and persistence of your pain . . . solely because the objective medical evidence does not substantiate your statements.”). ... The ALJ impermissibly relied on objective evidence to disregard Plaintiff’s symptoms of depression.

Under subsection 404.1529(c)(2), a claimant may rely exclusively on subjective evidence at step two, and an ALJ may not use normal objective findings—even as one factor—to discount symptoms of chronic depression, which does not consistently produce such findings.

Goodman · filed 2026-03-20(c)(2)

Second, if the ALJ finds a medically determinable impairment, the ALJ assesses the plaintiff’s symptoms to determine how the symptoms’ intensity and persistence affect the plaintiff’s ability to work. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c), 416.929(c). At the second step, “there need not be objective evidence of the pain [or symptoms] itself or its intensity.” Arakas, 983 F.3d at 95 (quoting Walker v. Bowen, 889 F.2d 47, 49 (4th Cir. 1989)). ... Thus, an ALJ may not rely on objective medical evidence, or the lack thereof, as even one factor among many, to discount a claimant’s subjective complaints regarding symptoms of chronic depression. ... Therefore, remand is appropriate.

Section 404.1529 requires symptoms such as fatigue to be considered when determining whether an impairment is severe.

Bivins v. O'Malley · filed 2023-11-20(d)(1)

A finding by the ALJ related to these daily activities would need to account for Plaintiff’s fatigue issues. See 20 ... C.F.R. § 404.1529(d)(1) (a claimant’s “symptoms, such as pain, fatigue, shortness of breath, weakness, or nervousness, are considered in making a determination as to whether [the claimant’s] ... impairment or combination of impairment(s) is severe.”).

Section 404.1529(a) requires an ALJ assessing residual functional capacity to consider the claimant’s subjective allegations.

Stewart v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-01-25(a)

Thus, in making the RFC finding the Administrative Law Judge must necessarily evaluate the persuasiveness of the medical source statements in the record and assess the claimant’s subjective allegations. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520c, 404.1529(a).

A claimant’s statements about pain or other symptoms alone cannot establish disability.

Wilson v. Social Security Administration · filed 2022-03-23(a)

A claimant’s subjective complaints of pain or other symptoms, alone, cannot establish disability. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a).

Section 404.1529 requires objective medical evidence to support allegations of pain and other subjective symptoms.

Garrett v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2008-04-17

Additionally, allegations of pain and other subjective symptoms must be supported by objective medical evidence.

Section 404.1529 permits disabling pain to support a disability claim even when the pain has a psychological origin.

Carradine, Patty v. Barnhart, Jo Anne B. · filed 2004-03-12

If pain is disabling, the fact that its source is purely psychological does not disentitle the applicant to benefits.

Section 404.1529 requires medical signs or findings showing a medical condition that could reasonably be expected to produce the claimant’s symptoms when disability is based on pain.

Miyoshi v. Bowen · filed 1988-09-14

To establish a disability based on pain the Secretary’s regulations require “medical signs or findings ... that there is a medical condition that could be reasonably expected to produce those symptoms.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529; Sparks v. Bowen, 807 F.2d 616, 618 (7th Cir.1986).

Section 404.1529(a) provides that a claimant’s subjective reports alone do not establish a medically determinable impairment.

Ferrante v. Astrue · filed 2010-11-29(a)

In addition, a plaintiffs subjective reports are insufficient to establish the existence of an impairment.

Section 404.1529(b) requires medical signs or laboratory findings establishing a medically determinable impairment before a claimant’s symptoms can be found to affect the ability to perform basic work activities.

RICHMOND JR. v. SAUL · filed 2019-08-12(b)

A claimant’s symptoms, such as pain, fatigue, shortness of breath, weakness, or nervousness, will not be found to affect his ability to do basic work activities unless medical signs or laboratory findings show that a medically determinable impairment is present. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b).

Sections 404.1529(a)–(b) require evidence of an underlying condition and either objective confirmation of symptom severity or a condition that could reasonably be expected to produce the alleged symptoms.

Hallman v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2022-03-22(a), (b)

The claimant must show evidence of an underlying medical condition and either (1) objective medical evidence that confirms the severity of the alleged symptoms arising from the condition, or (2) that the objectively determined medical condition is of such severity that it can reasonably be expected to give rise to the alleged symptoms.

Section 404.1529(a) requires symptom limitations to be reasonably consistent with medical signs, laboratory findings, and other evidence.

Hudak v. Saul · filed 2022-04-25(a)

The Administration cannot do so without any medical signs, laboratory findings or other evidence. Plaintiff also fails to provide a single legal citation to support his argument that poor hygiene is an impairment that could render someone disabled.

Sections 404.1529(a) and (c)(2) require acceptable-source objective medical evidence, obtained through medically acceptable clinical or laboratory techniques, showing an impairment reasonably capable of producing alleged symptoms.

Thomas-Joseph v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-06-01(a), (c)(2)

According to Social Security Administration regulations, when an ALJ evaluates claims of disability, there must be “objective medical evidence from an acceptable medical source” that shows that the applicant has a medical impairment “which could reasonably be expected to produce the pain or other symptoms alleged.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a). “Objective medical evidence is evidence obtained from the application of medically acceptable clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques.” § 404.1529(c)(2).

Symptoms cannot affect basic work activities unless medical signs or laboratory findings establish a medically determinable impairment.

Delbo v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2022-07-07(b)

“[U]nder no circumstances may the existence of an impairment be established on the basis of symptoms alone.” Id. Thus, “regardless of how many symptoms an individual alleges, or how genuine the individual’s complaints may appear to be, the existence of a medically determinable physical or mental impairment cannot be established in the absence of objective medical abnormalities; i.e., medical signs and laboratory findings.” SSR 96–4p (footnote omitted). See also 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(b), 416.929(b) (“Your symptoms . . . will not be found to affect your ability to do basic work activities unless medical signs or laboratory findings show that a medically determinable impairment(s) is present.”).

An ALJ may not find disability from alleged symptoms alone and must look to objective medical evidence establishing the impairment.

Piazza v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-07-21

Thus, the ALJ appropriately found that the objective medical evidence did not support plaintiff’s allegations of disability. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529; SSR 16-3p, 2017 WL 5180304 (stating “[w]e will not find an individual disabled based on alleged symptoms alone” and must look to objective medical evidence). The burden was on plaintiff to present such evidence of disability, and she did not do so.

Section 404.1529(b) requires objective medical signs or laboratory findings from an acceptable medical source to establish an impairment reasonably expected to produce the alleged symptoms.

MCHENRY v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2022-08-08(b)

The regulations state that for a condition to be considered a medically determinable impairment, “[m]edical signs and laboratory findings, established by medically acceptable clinical or laboratory diagnostic techniques, must show the existence of a medical impairment(s) which results from anatomical, physiological, or psychological abnormalities and which could reasonably be expected to produce the pain or other symptoms alleged.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b); see Mays v. Barnhart, 78 F. App'x 808, 812 (3d Cir. 2003) (discussing the standard). This medical evidence must be “objective” and come from an “acceptable medical source.”

Section 404.1529(a) requires a disability claimant to produce medical evidence because allegations of pain or other symptoms alone do not establish disability.

Adams v. O'Malley · filed 2024-09-18(a)

The second is the fact that the plaintiff bears the burden to prove she is disabled by producing medical evidence. 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(5)(A)(“An individual's statement as to pain or other symptoms shall not alone be conclusive evidence of disability....”); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(a); 416.929(a); Gedatus, 994 F.3d at 905 (7th Cir. 2021); Karr, 989 F.3d at 513 (7th Cir. 2021)(plaintiff must “identify[ ] ... objective evidence in the record” that she is disabled); Castile v. Astrue, 617 F.3d 923, 927 (7th Cir. 2010).

Section 404.1529(b) requires medical signs or laboratory findings showing an impairment that could reasonably produce the alleged symptoms before those symptoms can be considered to limit work.

Rutkowski · filed 2026-04-02(b)

Symptoms such as pain or fatigue will be considered to affect a claimant’s ability to perform work activities only if medical signs or laboratory findings establish the presence of a medically determinable impairment that could reasonably be expected to produce the alleged symptoms.

Section 404.1529 requires medical signs or findings showing a condition reasonably expected to produce alleged symptoms before those symptoms can support a disability finding.

Urban v. Sullivan · filed 1992-07-08

The Regulations provide that “[w]e will never find that you are disabled based on your symptoms, including pain, unless medical signs or findings show that there is a medical condition that could be reasonably expected to produce those symptoms,” and although no longer strictly applicable, this standard has been specifically endorsed by Congress.

Section 404.1529(b) requires medical signs or laboratory findings showing a medically determinable impairment before symptoms can be found to affect a claimant’s ability to work.

Martin v. Colvin · filed 2016-02-18(b)

A claimant’s symptoms, such as pain, fatigue, or nervousness, will not be found to affect her ability to do basic work activities “unless medical signs or laboratory findings show that [an MDI] is present.”

Section 404.1529(b) requires medical signs or laboratory findings showing a medically determinable impairment before pain or other symptoms can be found to affect basic work activities.

Martinez v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-01-27(b)

Pain or other symptoms will not be found to affect the ability to perform basic work activities unless medical signs or laboratory findings show the presence of a medically determinable impairment. ... Under these circumstances, the ALJ did not err in finding that the medical record failed to establish the existence of fibromyalgia applying either set of diagnostic criteria set forth in SSR 12-2p.

Section 404.1529(b) requires medical or laboratory findings showing an impairment that could reasonably be expected to produce the claimant’s symptoms.

Halbrook v. Chater · filed 1996-04-26(b)

Under Social Security regulations, a finding of disability must be predicated on a “medically determinable impairment,” shown through medical or laboratory findings, that “could reasonably be expected to produce” the claimant’s disabling symptoms. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b).

Section 404.1529(b) requires medical evidence of an impairment that could reasonably produce the alleged symptoms; symptoms alone cannot establish disability.

Conlee v. Colvin · filed 2014-03-31(b)

A claimant must present medical evidence or findings that the existence of an underlying condition could reasonably be expected to produce the sympto-matology alleged. ... The ALJ determined that Plaintiffs medically determinable impairments could reasonably be expected to cause the alleged symptoms, but found his statements concerning the intensity, persistence, and limiting effects of the symptoms not fully credible. (T at 26). This Court finds that substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s assessment.

Section 404.1529 requires a claimant’s pain to be linked to an underlying medical condition.

Robert J. ANDERSON Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Louis W. SULLIVAN, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defenda · filed 1989-11-07

First, pain must be linked to some underlying medical condition. See 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(5)(A) and 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529.

Section 404.1529 requires a claimant to show a medically determinable condition that could reasonably be expected to produce the alleged symptoms causing the inability to work.

Williams v. Louis W. Sullivan, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services · filed 1992-08-13

He must show that he has a condition which reasonably could be expected to produce the alleged symptoms that are the cause of his inability to work.

Section 404.1529(b) requires symptoms considered at step four to be connected to a medically determinable impairment supported by medical signs or laboratory findings.

McCulley v. Colvin · filed 2019-03-20(b)

The Commissioner’s argument that the ALJ’s discussion of McCulley’s hand pain is not connected to a medically determinable impairment at step four would instead appear to be cause for further remand, as under that interpretation, the ALJ either improperly considered McCulley’s testimony on this point, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b), or did not properly articulate the connection, preventing meaningful review, Kastner, 697 F.3d at 646 (remand required where decision is poorly articulated so as to “prevent meaningful review.”). Alternatively, accepting that McCulley’s hand pain was caused by one of the medically determinable impairments identified by the ALJ, see Jelinek v. Astrue, 662 F.3d 805, 812 (7th Cir. 2011) (“[W]hat matters are the reasons articulated by the ALJ.”), the Court will proceed to consider whether the ALJ failed to properly assess McCulley’s testimony concerning her hand limitations at step four.

Section 404.1529(a) requires objective medical evidence from an acceptable medical source showing that an impairment could reasonably be expected to produce the alleged pain or other symptoms, considered with other evidence, sufficient to support disability.

Shatney v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2019-10-10(a)

An impairment must be established by: objective medical evidence from an acceptable medical source that shows [the claimant] ha[s] a medical impairment(s) which could reasonably be expected to produce the pain or other symptoms alleged and that, when considered with all of the other evidence (including statements about the intensity and persistence of [the claimant’s] pain or other symptoms which may reasonably be accepted as consistent with the medical signs and laboratory findings), would lead to a conclusion that [the claimant] [is] disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a).

Section 404.1529(b) requires a medically determinable impairment to be established by objective medical signs and laboratory findings from medically acceptable clinical or laboratory diagnostic techniques.

Fryrear v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2019-10-24(b)

A medically determinable impairment must be shown by objective medical signs and laboratory findings established by medically acceptable clinical or laboratory diagnostic techniques. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b). ... None of these doctors conducted any objective tests or other recognized techniques to confirm this diagnosis. Dr. DeVere opined that a biopsy was necessary to establish whether Fryrear had small-fiber neuropathy, a necessary element of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. Based on these records, the ALJ had substantial evidence to find that Fryrear did not establish at Step 2 that she had a medically determinable impairment of small fiber neuropathy.

Section 404.1529(b) requires an ALJ evaluating subjective symptoms first to determine whether a medically determinable impairment could reasonably be expected to cause the claimant’s symptoms.

Ramirez-Gaines v. Saul · filed 2021-03-12(b)

The determination of whether or not to accept a claimant’s testimony regarding subjective symptoms requires a two-step analysis. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529, 416.929; Smolen, 80 F.3d at 1281 (citations omitted). First, the ALJ must determine whether or not there is a medically determinable impairment that reasonably could be expected to cause the claimant’s symptoms. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(b), 416.929(b); Smolen, 80 F.3d at 1281-82. ... The ALJ found that Plaintiff’s medically determinable impairments could reasonably be expected to cause her alleged symptoms, but then discounted Plaintiff’s subjective testimony because he found that her statements concerning the intensity, persistence and limiting effects of those symptoms were not entirely consistent with the medical evidence and other evidence in the record. A.R. 23. The ALJ did not identify any affirmative evidence of malingering. See A.R. 23. Accordingly, the ALJ was required to provide “specific, clear and convincing” reasons for discounting Plaintiff’s testimony. Vasquez, 572 F.3d at 591. ... Accordingly, the court finds that the ALJ did not err in discounting Plaintiff’s subjective testimony.

Section 404.1529(b) requires objective medical evidence from an acceptable medical source to establish a medically determinable impairment; a claimant’s symptom reports alone cannot do so.

Price v. Saul · filed 2021-03-30(b)

While Plaintiff may have reported symptoms of somatoform disorder, his statements about those symptoms could not be considered by the ALJ. Id.; see also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 (“There must be objective medical evidence from an acceptable medical source that shows you have a medical impairment . . . .”). Based on the foregoing, the Court finds the ALJ did not err in finding Plaintiff did not suffer from the severe impairment of somatoform disorder. The Court also concludes the ALJ’s finding that Plaintiff’s severe impairments did not include somatoform disorder is supported by substantial evidence in the record.

Section 404.1529(b) treats fatigue as a symptom rather than a stand-alone medically determinable impairment, allowing it to be evaluated as a symptom of an established impairment such as fibromyalgia.

REMALEY v. SAUL · filed 2021-03-31(b)

Additionally, with respect to “fatigue,” I agree with Defendant that Plaintiff is conflating a medically determinable impairment with a symptom thereof. [ECF No. 19, at 12-13 (citing S.S.R. 96-4p, 1996 WL 374187, at *1); see also 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529, 416.929]. In any event, the ALJ considered Plaintiff’s fatigue as a symptom of his fibromyalgia. [ECF No. 10-2, at 43-44].

Sections 404.1529(b) and (c)(1) require an alleged symptom to be linked first to an objectively documented medically determinable impairment before the ALJ must evaluate its intensity, persistence, and effect on work capacity.

Houston v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2021-06-25(b), (c)(1)

First, the ALJ must determine if there is an underlying medically determinable physical or mental impairment that could reasonably be expected to produce a claimant’s symptoms. Second, the ALJ “must evaluate the intensity and persistence of [the claimant’s] symptoms so that [the ALJ] can determine how [those] symptoms limit [the claimant’s] capacity for work.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(1). ... Further, while the Sixth Circuit “has previously held that subjective complaints of pain may support a claim for disability,” it also made clear that “[t]o support such a claim, however, there must be objective medical evidence of an underlying medical condition in the record.” Wyatt v. Sec'y of Health & Hum. Servs., 974 F.2d 680, 686 (6th Cir. 1992), citing Duncan v. Secretary of Health & Human Servs., 801 F.2d 847, 852 (6th Cir. 1986). Here, Houston seeks remand because the ALJ failed to find disability based on pain that Houston himself asserts was unrelated to any medical condition that was objectively documented in his treatment records. This fails to satisfy the initial requirement of the two-step analysis set forth in SSR 16-3p, and therefore the ALJ properly did not further consider knee pain that both the medical records and Houston identify as unrelated to any documented underlying medically determinable physical impairment. Therefore, this assignment of error is without merit.

Section 404.1529(b) requires a medically determinable impairment to be established by objective medical evidence from an acceptable medical source rather than by the claimant’s statement of symptoms alone.

FRIDAY v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2021-08-31(b)

“A medically determinable physical or mental impairment must result from anatomical, physiological, or psychological abnormalities which can be shown by medically acceptable clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques. The impairment must be established by objective medical evidence (signs, laboratory findings, or both) from an acceptable medical source, not on an individual’s statement of symptoms.”

Section 404.1529(a) first requires objective evidence of an impairment capable of producing alleged symptoms, after which the ALJ evaluates their intensity, persistence, and work limitations.

Warrior v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-02-04(a)

First, the record must show “objective medical evidence from an acceptable medical source that shows [Warrior has] a medical impairment which could reasonably be expected to produce the pain or other symptoms alleged.” See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a).

A symptom cannot be found to affect basic work activities unless a medically determinable impairment could reasonably produce it.

Swinson v. Saul · filed 2022-09-09(b)

If there is no medically determinable impairment that could reasonably produce the symptom alleged, the symptom cannot be found to affect the claimant’s ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b); 20 C.F.R. § 416.929(b); SSR 16-3p, 2016 WL 1119029.

Symptoms do not affect basic work activities unless medical signs or laboratory findings establish a medically determinable impairment.

Rivera v. Saul · filed 2022-09-27(b)

A claimant’s symptoms, such as pain, fatigue, shortness of breath, weakness, or nervousness, will not be found to affect a claimant’s ability to do basic work activities unless medical signs or laboratory findings show that a medically determinable impairment is present. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b); 20 C.F.R. § 416.929(b).

Section 404.1529 first asks whether a medically determinable impairment could reasonably produce the claimant’s symptoms.

Cannon v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2023-02-22

First, the ALJ must decide whether there is an underlying medically determinable physical or mental impairment that could reasonably be expected to produce the claimant’s symptoms.

An impairment is medically determinable only if medically acceptable clinical or diagnostic techniques substantiate it.

Dace v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-09-21(b)

An impairment (physical or mental) is medically determinable if medically acceptable clinical or diagnostic techniques can substantiate it. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(b); 416.929(b).

Section 404.1529(b) does not permit alleged symptoms to affect basic work activities unless medical signs or laboratory findings establish a medically determinable impairment.

Crow v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2023-10-25(b)

Thus, the ALJ committed no error in failing to credit her symptom testimony regarding her seizures. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b) (“Your symptoms, such as pain, fatigue, shortness of breath, weakness, or nervousness, will not be found to affect your ability to do basic work activities unless medical signs or laboratory findings show that a medically determinable impairment(s) is present.”).

Section 404.1529(b) treats pain or fatigue as affecting work ability only when medical signs or laboratory findings establish an impairment reasonably capable of producing those symptoms.

Scicchitano v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-11-28(b)

Symptoms such as pain or fatigue will be considered to affect a claimant’s ability to perform work activities only if medical signs or laboratory findings establish the presence of a medically determinable impairment that could reasonably be expected to produce the alleged symptoms. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(b), 416.929(b); SSR 16–3p.

Section 404.1529 requires an impairment reasonably capable of producing symptoms because subjective assertions alone cannot establish disability.

Monsegur v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-03-29(a)-(b)

At the first step, the ALJ must decide whether the claimant suffers from a medically determinable impairment that could reasonably be expected to produce the symptoms alleged. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b). That requirement stems from the fact that subjective assertions of pain alone cannot ground a finding of disability. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a).

Section 404.1529(b) requires a medically determinable impairment reasonably capable of producing alleged symptoms; symptoms alone cannot establish disability.

Dressing v. Kijakazi · filed 2024-03-29(b)

First, the ALJ must determine whether there is a medically determinable impairment that could reasonably be expected to produce the symptoms alleged. ... 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b). A claimant cannot be found to be “disabled based on alleged symptoms alone.”

Section 404.1529(b) requires medical signs or laboratory findings establishing an impairment before symptoms can affect basic work activities.

Houlihan v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-04-29(b)

Symptoms alone “will not be found to affect [a claimant's] ability to do basic work activities unless medical signs or laboratory findings show that a medically determinable impairment is present.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b).

Section 404.1529(b) does not permit symptoms to affect basic work activities unless medical signs or laboratory findings establish a medically determinable impairment.

Cordero-Rivera v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-05-29(b)

An ALJ can only consider limitations that are attributable to a “medically determinable” impairment. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b) (“Your symptoms … will not be found to affect your ability to do basic work activities unless medical signs or laboratory findings show that a medically determinable impairment(s) is present.”).

Section 404.1529 requires a medically determinable impairment capable of producing alleged symptoms because subjective pain alone cannot establish disability.

McGlone v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-08-13(a)-(b)

At the first step, the ALJ must decide whether the claimant suffers from a medically determinable impairment that could reasonably be expected to produce the symptoms alleged. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b). That requirement stems from the fact that subjective assertions of pain alone cannot ground a finding of disability. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a).

Section 404.1529(b) permits symptoms to affect the assessment of basic work activities only when medical signs or laboratory findings establish a medically determinable impairment.

Mix v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration · filed 2024-11-20(b)

The ALJ only gave weight to Plaintiff’s subjective “statements about the intensity, persistence, or functionally limiting effects of pain or other symptoms” to the extent they were “substantiated by objective medical evidence.” R. 22; see also 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b) (“[A claimant’s] symptoms, such as pain, fatigue, shortness of breath, weakness, or nervousness, will not be found to affect your ability to do basic work activities unless medical signs or laboratory findings show that a medically determinable impairment(s) is present.”). Prior to this, the ALJ determined that Plaintiff’s fibromyalgia was not medically determinable. R. 20 – 21. It necessarily follows that the RFC determination—which was predicated upon the finding that Plaintiff’s statements about the intensity and severity of her symptoms were inconsistent “with the medical evidence,” R. 23—was skewed by the ALJ’s inability to consider whether Plaintiff’s fibromyalgia provided an objective basis for Plaintiff’s statements about the severity of her symptoms.

Section 404.1529(b) bars symptoms such as pain from affecting basic work activities unless medical signs or laboratory findings establish a medically determinable impairment that could reasonably produce them.

CRAMER v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2025-04-03(b)

Under the Social Security regulations, “Your symptoms, such as pain … will not be found to affect your ability to do basic work activities unless medical signs or laboratory findings show that a medically determinable impairment(s) is present”). 20 C.F.R. §404.1529(b) Thus, a claimant will never be found disabled based on symptoms, including pain, unless medical findings show that there is a medical condition that could be reasonably expected to produce those symptoms. ... Given this, the ALJ’s finding at stage 2 that Joseph C. had not shown the existence of a severe impairment regarding his orthopedic claims is well-supported by the medical record, seen in the light of the relevant agency regulations.

A claimant’s symptoms alone cannot establish a medically determinable impairment; medical signs or laboratory findings must show an impairment reasonably expected to produce those symptoms.

Burnside v. Social Security · filed 2025-05-01(b)

Only “medical determinable impairments” are considered when determining whether a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b). A claimant’s complaint of a symptom or combination of symptoms is not medically determinable, and thus cannot be the basis for finding a disability, unless “[m]edical signs or laboratory findings . . . show the existence of a medical impairment(s) which results from anatomical, physiological, or psychological abnormalities and which could reasonably be expected to produce the pain or other symptoms alleged.” Id. ... As the regulations make clear, in the absence of medical evidence supporting the existence of an impairment, a claimant’s allegations of symptoms such as pain are insufficient to establish a medically determinable impairment.

Section 404.1529(b) requires a medically determinable impairment that could reasonably produce alleged symptoms; unexplained episodic symptoms cannot be considered in assessing work ability without such an impairment.

Perez v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration · filed 2024-03-25(b)

Without a medical finding that could reasonably be expected to cause Plaintiff’s spasms, they present no “medically determinable impairment” for the ALJ to consider. Zagorianakos, 81 F. Supp. 3d at 1042; ... cf. Tr. 34 (“[D]espite observation of an episode, thorough laboratory and diagnostic workup, and multiple specialist evaluations, the record does not establish a medically determinable impairment to account for the claimant’s episodes. As such, the undersigned cannot consider them in assessing the claimant’s ability to engage in substantial gainful activity.”).

Section 404.1529(b) makes the first step in evaluating subjective symptoms whether a medically determinable impairment could reasonably be expected to cause them.

Cordova · filed 2025-12-09(b)

First, the ALJ must determine whether or not there is a medically determinable impairment that reasonably could be expected to cause the claimant’s symptoms. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b); Smolen, 80 F.3d at 1281–82.

Subsection 404.1529(b) prevents alleged symptoms from affecting the work-ability assessment unless medical signs or laboratory findings establish a medically determinable impairment capable of causing them.

Jackson v. Bisignano · filed 2026-03-31(b)

Without evidence in the record that endometriosis was a medically determinable impairment, the ALJ would not find that symptoms allegedly caused by endometriosis affected her ability to work. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b) (stating a Plaintiff’s symptoms “will not be found to affect [the Plaintiff’s] ability to do basic work activities unless medical signs or laboratory findings show that a medically determinable impairment(s) is present”). ... Thus, the ALJ’s failure to mention a symptom allegedly caused by a condition for which the Plaintiff provided no medical records to show it was a medically determinable impairment was at worse harmless error.

Under section 404.1529(a), if no medically determinable impairment could reasonably produce the alleged symptoms, the ALJ need not proceed to assess their intensity, persistence, and limiting effects.

Benya · filed 2026-04-03(a)

In other words, because the ALJ found there were no medically determinable impairments that could reasonably be expected to produce Plaintiff’s symptoms, he was not required to consider the intensity, persistence, and limiting effects of those symptoms.

Section 404.1529(a) requires the ALJ to determine whether a medically determinable impairment could reasonably produce the claimant’s alleged symptoms.

Trosper v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-05-10(a)

First, the ALJ determines whether the claimant has a medically determinable impairment that “could reasonably be expected to produce the pain or other symptoms alleged.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(a).

Section 404.1529(b) requires the ALJ first to determine whether a medically determinable impairment could reasonably be expected to cause the claimant’s symptoms.

Thompson v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-05-11(b)

First, the ALJ must determine whether or not there is a medically determinable impairment that reasonably could be expected to cause the claimant’s symptoms. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(b), 416.929(b); Smolen, 80 F.3d at 1281-82. ... The ALJ found that Plaintiff’s medically determinable impairments could reasonably be expected to cause her alleged symptoms, but then discounted Plaintiff’s subjective testimony because he found that her statements concerning the intensity, persistence and limiting effects of those symptoms were not entirely consistent with the medical evidence and other evidence in the record.

Section 404.1529(b) requires medical signs or laboratory findings establishing a medically determinable impairment before symptoms can be found to affect basic work activities.

Warren v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-02-24(b)

See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(b) (“Your symptoms . . . will not be found to affect your ability to do basic work activities unless medical signs or laboratory findings show that a medically determinable impairment(s) is present.”). ... What is missing from plaintiff’s argument, however, is a citation to evidence showing that fibromyalgia is, in fact, the cause of plaintiff’s gastrointestinal problems. Absent such evidence, the ALJ did not err in failing to consider whether these problems are caused by fibromyalgia.

Section 404.1529(b) requires an ALJ to determine whether a medically determinable impairment could reasonably produce the claimant’s alleged symptoms.

Walker v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-03-08(b)

First, the ALJ must assess the objective medical evidence and determine whether the plaintiff has a medically determinable impairment that could reasonably be expected to produce the pain or symptoms alleged. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(b), 416.929(b); SSR 16-3p, 2016 WL 1119029, at *4 (S.S.A. Mar. 16, 2016).

Section 404.1529(b) requires medical evidence of an impairment that could reasonably be expected to produce the alleged symptoms.

Sorrell v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2023-08-21(b)

Furthermore, the evidence must “show the existence of a medical impairment(s) . . . which could reasonably be expected to produce the pain or other symptoms alleged.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(b), 416.929(b). ... Furthermore, the evidence cited above is inconsistent with the ALJ’s finding that plaintiff’s thoracic spine injury did not rise to the level of a medically determinable impairment.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires consideration of the effectiveness and side effects of medication taken to alleviate pain or other symptoms when evaluating a claimant's subjective symptoms.

Morin v. Secretary of Health & Human Services · filed 1992-04-10(c)(3)(iv)

Furthermore, the amended regulation, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv), is more broadly written to require consideration of the “effectiveness, and side effects of any medication you take or have taken to alleviate your pain or other symptoms.” Additionally, the court reads the regulation as containing a list of relevant factors to consider, only one of which involves medication.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires the Commissioner to consider the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of medication taken to alleviate pain or other symptoms.

Crowley v. Apfel · filed 1999-12-10(c)(3)(iv)

Under the regulations, the Commissioner is required to consider the “type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication [the claimant] take[s] or ha[s] taken to alleviate [ ] pain or other symptoms.” We find and hold that the Commissioner’s conclusion that Crowley suffered from no adverse side effects due to prescribed medications was in error.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires the Commissioner to consider the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of medication taken to alleviate pain or other symptoms.

Francois v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2001-03-29(c)(3)(iv)

Under the regulations, the Commissioner is required to consider the “type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication [the claimant] take[s] or ha[s] taken to alleviate [] pain or other symptoms”.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires an adjudicator to consider a claimant’s medications and any side effects when determining the claimant’s ability to work.

Duren v. Astrue · filed 2009-06-01(c)(3)

Under the social security regulations and rulings, an administrative law judge must consider a claimant’s use of medications and any side effects in determining whether she retains the ability to work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3); Soc. Sec. Ruling 96-7p.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires an ALJ to consider medication side effects when evaluating a claimant's symptoms and limitations.

Davidson v. Astrue · filed 2008-09-29(c)(3)(iv)

When an ALJ evaluates a claimant’s limitations, he must consider evidence regarding the side effects of medications. ... The ALJ is required to consider those side effects in evaluating plaintiffs disability claim, and his failure to do so constitutes error.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) identifies the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of medication taken to treat pain or other symptoms as factors the ALJ should consider in determining disability.

Short v. Astrue · filed 2009-08-14(c)(3)(iv)

The “type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects” of medication taken by a claimant to treat pain or other symptoms are factors relevant to a disability determination and should be considered by the ALJ.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires an ALJ to consider the side effects of medication taken to alleviate pain or other symptoms when evaluating those symptoms.

Acosta v. Astrue · filed 2012-03-02(c)(3)(iv)

The limitations arising from the medication side effects are a factor to be considered.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires an ALJ to consider the side effects of any medications a claimant takes when determining whether the claimant is disabled.

Leah Heck v. Carolyn Colvin, Acting Cmsnr · filed 2017-01-09(c)(3)(iv)

In determining whether a claimant has a disability, the ALJ is required to consider all of the evidence presented, including “side effects of any medications” the claimant takes. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv).

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires consideration of medication effectiveness and side effects when evaluating a claimant's residual functional capacity.

Martina Sorter v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2019-05-16(c)(3)(iv)

In evaluating a claimant’s residual functional capacity, the ALJ appropriately considers all of the available evidence, including the effectiveness and side effects of any medication. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3)(iv), 416.929(c)(3)(iv). ... But in any event, the ALJ adequately developed the record and considered the side effects of Sorter’s pain medication in assessing her residual functional capacity because he contemplated the medical evidence and Sorter’s testimony and assessed a residual functional capacity that took the side effects of her medication into account.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) permits medication side effects to be considered when evaluating a claimant’s complaints of pain.

Simpler v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2019-06-18(c)(3)(iv)

Social Security regulations provide that medication side effects are a permissible consideration in evaluating a claimant’s complaints of pain. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3)(iv), 416.929(c)(3)(iv). Without any mention of claimant’s side effects, there is no way to know whether the ALJ merely overlooked them, discredited them, or acknowledged them but determined they did not have a material effect on claimant’s ability to work.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) permits an ALJ evaluating symptoms to consider evidence about medication or treatment side effects, including evidence that alleged side effects are absent or improved.

Tucakovic v. Berryhill · filed 2019-09-18(c)(3)(iv)

The ALJ also considered plaintiff’s allegations of long-term side effects. (Tr. 27, 43.) Plaintiff’s physicians indicated that her chemotherapy-related neuropathy improved and was managed with medication. (Tr. 1544, 1561, 1583, 1612, 1629.) The ALJ also observed that plaintiff indicated her fatigue improved significantly once she stopped chemotherapy and that she stopped reporting it as a symptom. (Tr. 25, 1485, 1543, 1558, 1581, 1610, 1627, 1642.) The ALJ lawfully considered the evidence showing a lack of side effects contrary to plaintiff’s testimony. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) and 416.929(c)(3)(iv); SSR 16-3p.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires an ALJ evaluating a claimant's reported symptoms to consider the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of medication used to alleviate those symptoms.

Reeves v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2019-09-18(c)(3)(iv)

Additionally, when evaluating a claimant’s reported symptoms, an ALJ must consider the following factors: (i) [the claimant’s] daily activities; (ii) [t]he location, duration, frequency, and intensity of [the claimant’s] pain or other symptoms; (iii) [p]recipitating and aggravating factors; (iv) [t]he type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication [the claimant] take[s] or ha[s] taken to alleviate . . . pain or other symptoms; (v) [t]reatment, other than medication, [the claimant] receive[s] or ha[s] received for relief of . . . pain or other symptoms; (vi) [a]ny measures [the claimant] use[s] or ha[s] used to relieve . . . pain or other symptoms (e.g., lying flat on your back, standing for 15 to 20 minutes every hour, sleeping on a board, etc.); and (vii) [o]ther factors concerning the claimant’s functional limitations and restrictions due to pain or other symptoms.

Section 404.1529(c) permits an ALJ evaluating a claimant’s subjective statements to consider the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of medication.

(SS) Stevens v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2020-03-20(c)

When evaluating a claimant’s subjective statements, the ALJ may consider “the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c), 416.929(c).

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires an ALJ evaluating a claimant’s symptoms to consider side effects of medications the claimant takes or has taken to treat those symptoms.

Brimer v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2020-08-28(c)(3)(iv)

The ALJ must consider the “side effects of any medication the claimant takes or has taken” to treat her symptoms. 20 C.F.R. § 404. 1529(c)(3)(iv). ... Because the ALJ did not mention frequent urination at all in her opinion, frequent urination is a logical side effect of talking a diuretic, and the claimant consistently testified concerning her limitations caused by frequent urination, this court finds that the ALJ did not adequately consider the limitations on the claimant’s ability to work caused by her side effect of frequent urination.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires consideration of the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of medication when evaluating the intensity, persistence, and limiting effects of a claimant's symptoms.

Peltier v. Social Security Administration · filed 2020-09-16(c)(3)(iv)

Limitations caused by side effects must be taken into consideration when determining whether a claimant is disabled. ... The ALJ stated that, in addition to the medical evidence of record, he considered the factors set forth in Social Security regulations and rulings in evaluating the intensity, persistence, and limited effects of the claimant’s symptoms. at 35 (citing 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3) and 416.929(c)(3); SSR 16-3). ... The ALJ found that, overall, the adverse side effects of medications supported the finding of sedentary work but did not suggest an inability to sustain a full eight-hour workday.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires medication effects on a claimant's ability to work to be considered when they can reasonably be accepted as consistent with the objective medical evidence.

ESBENSEN v. BURWELL · filed 2020-10-14(c)(3)

She does not point to a single medical record to provide evidence of any side effects. Schmidt v. Comm’r Soc. Sec., 465 F. App’x 193, 198 (3d Cir. 2012) (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3) (“The effect of medication on a claimant's ability to work will be considered if it ‘can reasonably be accepted as consistent with the objective medical evidence.’”).

Section 404.1529(c) requires consideration of medication side effects only insofar as the evidence shows that they limit the claimant’s capacity for work.

Arnold v. Saul · filed 2021-03-11(c)

An ALJ considers side effects from medication in- sofar as they “limit [a claimant’s] capacity for work.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c). On this record, any conclusion about how any of Arnold’s side effects impacted her ability to work would be pure speculation. Thus, the ALJ did not have to make specific findings about side effects. See Schaaf, 602 F.3d at 876; Nelson v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 770 F.2d 682, 685 (7th Cir. 1985) (per curiam).

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires consideration of medication type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects when a claimant’s report can reasonably be accepted as consistent with objective and other evidence, but an ALJ need not address conclusory side-effect allegations unsupported by the record.

MCADAMS v. BURWELL · filed 2021-04-19(c)(3)(iv)

An ALJ will consider the effect of medication on a claimant’s ability to work, including the “type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects” of that medication, if it “can reasonably be accepted as consistent with the objective medical evidence and other ... evidence.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3); see also Burns v. Barnhart, 312 F.3d 113, 129 (3d Cir. 2002) (an ALJ is required to afford a claimant’s subjective complaints of pain “serious consideration.” (quoting Mason v. Shalala, 994 F.2d 1058, 1067 (3d Cir. 1993))). ... But, “[d]rowsiness often accompanies the taking of medication, and it should not be viewed as disabling unless the record references serious functional limitations.” ... And, an ALJ’s “failure to consider side effects is not error where the only probative evidence is the claimant's own conclusory statements” and those statements are not consistent with the medical evidence. ... While the ALJ did not discuss Mr. McAdams’ self-reported Percocet side effects, I find that this was not an error due to the absence of any record evidence supporting the allegations of severe drowsiness. ... Therefore, the ALJ’s failure to consider the side effects of Percocet was not error, and I will deny relief on this claim. See Schmidt, 465 F. App’x at 199.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires an ALJ to consider the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of medication when evaluating a claimant's symptoms and to explain the treatment of record evidence concerning those side effects.

Provow v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-08-02(c)(3)(iv)

While Plaintiff’s failure to report side effects to her treaters would have been a factor for the ALJ to consider in evaluating whether Plaintiff’s alleged symptoms are consistent with the record, the ALJ made no attempt to analyze this evidence. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) (requiring the ALJ to consider “[t]he type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication”); see also SSR 16-3p, 2016 WL 1119029. The ALJ also failed to evaluate, or even mention, other evidence in the record that Plaintiff experienced side effects from her medications. ... The ALJ had a duty to develop a fair and complete record regarding the functional impact of Plaintiff’s medications and could not just ignore evidence in the record suggesting that Plaintiff suffered from side effects of her medications without explanation. ... If the ALJ considered the impact of medication side effects and found it unsupported, she should have said as much in her decision instead of omitting any discussion of side effects when considering Dr. Stein’s opinion and Plaintiff’s RFC. Accordingly, a remand is required for the ALJ to properly consider the impact that medication side effects would have on Plaintiff’s RFC.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) permits consideration of medication type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects when evaluating symptoms, and material ambiguity about their work-related effects must be addressed.

Avalos v. Kijakazi · filed 2021-08-18(c)(3)(iv)

Second, despite noting Plaintiff’s statements about the side effects of her medications (R. 15–17), it is unclear how the ALJ evaluated these statements, which, as Plaintiff notes (Pl.’s Mem. Supp. Mot. J. Pldgs. at 18–19), were relevant to her work-related abilities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) (“type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects” of medication may be considered when evaluating a claimant’s symptoms). While the Commissioner notes evidence in the record that runs counter to Plaintiff’s statements (Def.’s Mem. Supp. Mot. J. Pldgs. at 13), there exists a material ambiguity in the evidence the ALJ needed to address. SSR 96–8p, 1996 WL 374184, at *7 (July 2, 1996) (ALJ must “explain how any material inconsistencies or ambiguities in the evidence in the case record were considered and resolved”).

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires consideration of the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of medication, while alleged side effects must be supported by medical evidence.

Barbour v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-21(c)(3)(iv)

A claimant’s allegations of medication side effects must be supported by objective medical evidence. See Essary v. Commissioner of Social Security, 114 Fed. Appx. 662, 665-66 (6th Cir. 2004) (where plaintiff testified that she suffered from dizziness and drowsiness as a result of her medications, the ALJ did not err in finding that she suffered no side effects where her medical records contain no such reported side effects to her physicians).

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) makes medication side effects relevant, but a represented claimant must offer evidence that actual side effects contribute to disability before an ALJ must investigate further or make additional findings.

Ealy v. Kijakazi (CONSENT) · filed 2021-09-28(c)(3)(iv)

“A factor relevant to a claimant’s subjective symptoms that the Commissioner ‘will consider’ includes the ‘type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication . . . taken to alleviate . . . pain or other symptoms.’” Colon ex rel. Colon v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 411 F. App’x 236, 238 (11th Cir. 2011) (quoting 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv)). “Where a represented claimant raises a question as to the side effects of medications, but does not otherwise allege the side effects contribute to the alleged disability, . . . the ALJ does not err in failing ‘to inquire further into possible side effects.’” Burgin v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 420 F. App’x 901, 904 (11th Cir. 2011) (citation omitted). Moreover, “if there is no evidence before the ALJ that a claimant is taking medication that cause side effects, the ALJ is not required to elicit testimony or make findings regarding the medications and their side effects.” Id. ... Plaintiff has not provided any evidence that any side effects from his medications preclude him from working, and has not shown that side effects from his medications caused limitations that the ALJ did not consider in fashioning Plaintiff’s RFC. Therefore, the court concludes that the ALJ’s RFC assessment and assessment regarding the side effects of Plaintiff’s medication under 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) is supported by substantial evidence.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv)-(vi) allows an ALJ to consider whether medication’s type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects are consistent with or alleviate a claimant’s asserted limitations.

(SS) Janet L. Barker v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-09-29(c)(3)(iv)-(vi)

The ALJ may consider whether the “type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication” taken by the claimant is consistent with and/or helps alleviate a claimant’s claimed limitations.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv)-(v) requires considering medication effectiveness and side effects, and permits those factors, together with activities and other evidence, to support discounting alleged symptom severity.

Lynn v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2021-11-19(c)(3)(iv)-(v)

She also noted that Claimant’s symptoms were well controlled on medication and Claimant was not entirely compliant with treatment. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv)-(v) (instructing the ALJ to consider the effectiveness and side effects of any medications); ... As such, the ALJ was free to determine that Claimant’s symptoms are less likely to reduce her capacity to perform work-related activities.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires meaningful consideration of medication type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects rather than a passing mention that medication was prescribed.

Barth v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-01-14(c)(3)

Otherwise, the ALJ did not discuss Plaintiff’s pain medications, dosage, effectiveness, or side effects.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) treats medication effectiveness and medication side effects as distinct factors, so evidence of beneficial effects cannot substitute for analysis of alleged adverse effects.

Johnson v. Social Security Administration · filed 2022-01-25(c)(3)(iv)

As the Lomax Court explained, “the ALJ’s consideration of positive side effects of the medication is not a substitute for side effects analysis” because “[t]he regulations explicitly distinguish between the ‘effectiveness’ and ‘side effects’ of medication.” 2021 WL 3508087, at *7 (quoting 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv)).

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires consideration of medication type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects when evaluating subjective symptoms.

Wood v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2022-01-31(c)(3)

The ALJ also failed to consider the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of her medications as required by the regulations. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3).

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) permits an ALJ to consider the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of medication used to alleviate symptoms.

Hernandez v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-06-21(c)(3)(iv)

In assessing a claimant’s subjective symptoms, an ALJ may properly consider the “type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication” a claimant has taken to alleviate her pain or other symptoms. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv); see also Warre v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 439 F.3d 1001, 1006 (9th Cir. 2006) (“Impairments that can be controlled effectively with medication are not disabling[.]”).

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires an ALJ evaluating symptoms to consider the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of medications, including serious adverse reactions.

GRANT v. SAUL · filed 2022-12-08(c)(3)(iv)

Second, whether a claimant can tolerate a medication is relevant to the limiting effects of a condition. ... On remand, Defendant shall also fully consider Plaintiff’s adverse reaction to rituximab in evaluating the severity and effects of her GPA.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) permits consideration of medication type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects, and supported evidence that medication does not interfere with work may justify discounting symptom testimony.

Mackey v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2023-01-18(c)(3)(iv)

The ALJ reasonably concluded that Plaintiff’s pain would not prevent her from working, and that her medications would not interfere with her ability to work.

Section 404.1529(c) permits consideration of medication effectiveness and other evidence when evaluating subjective symptoms.

Lewis v. Kijakazi(CONSENT) · filed 2023-03-29(c)

The “type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects” of medication taken to alleviate pain or other symptoms may be taken into account when evaluating subjective symptoms.”

An ALJ must consider the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of medication when evaluating symptoms, and may rely on symptom improvement with medication.

Lynch v. Kijakazi · filed 2023-03-31(c)(3)(iv)

The agency’s regulations expressly permit it to consider such improvement with medication in evaluating a claimant’s symptoms. Indeed, the applicable regulations mandate such consideration by the ALJ. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) (“Factors relevant to your symptoms, such as pain, which we will consider include . . . [t]he type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication you take or have taken to alleviate your pain or other symptoms . . . .”).

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires consideration of medication dosage, effectiveness, and side effects, including continuing side effects that may impair the ability to work despite dosage adjustments.

Dillard v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration · filed 2023-05-09(c)(3)(iv)

An ALJ may consider the dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of medication taken for an impairment. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv). ... The ALJ’s failure to address Plaintiff’s continued side effects is particularly concerning where the record reflects that Plaintiff was fired from employment for drowsiness.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires medication effectiveness and side effects to be evaluated as actually documented; partial relief and mild cognitive effects consistent with testimony do not justify discounting that testimony.

Hertel v. Commissioner Social Security Administration · filed 2023-07-05(c)(3)(iv)

Relevant factors for the ALJ to consider when evaluating symptom testimony include “[t]he type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication” the plaintiff takes to alleviate symptoms. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv). ... The record reflects that Plaintiff’s medications were partially effective. This is consistent with Plaintiff’s testimony that he waits for his medications to take effect in the morning and that he can do physical activities with breaks. ... In sum, the ALJ erred in relying on the effects (positive and negative) of Plaintiff’s medication in discounting his symptom testimony.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) permits an ALJ to consider the functional effect of medication, including symptom control and side effects.

DOMINICO v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY · filed 2023-12-08(c)(3)(iv)

As a preliminary matter, an ALJ may consider the functional effect of medication on a claimant’s impairments. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv); Seney v. Comm’r Soc. Sec., 585 F. App’x 805, 808 (3d Cir. 2014) (affirming denial of benefits where the ALJ considered, inter alia, the claimant’s medication and its side effects) (citing, inter alia, 404.1529(c)(3)(iv)); Gross v. Heckler, 785 F.2d 1163, 1166 (3d Cir. 1986) (“If a symptom can reasonably be controlled by medication or treatment, it is not disabling.”) (citations omitted).

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) treats the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of pain medication as relevant to symptom intensity and persistence.

Johnson v. O'Malley · filed 2024-02-01(c)(3)(iv)

The type, dosage, effectiveness and side effects of medication taken to alleviate pain or other symptoms is a relevant factor in evaluating the intensity and persistence of symptoms. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529 (c)(3)(iv)416.929(c)(3)(iv).

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires an ALJ to consider a claimant’s medication effectiveness and side effects, but not to investigate further when a represented claimant merely raises possible side effects without alleging that they contributed to the claimed disability.

Lozano v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-09-12(c)(3)(iv)

In determining whether a claimant’s impairments limit his ability to work, the ALJ considers the claimant’s subjective symptoms, which can include the effectiveness and side effects of any medications taken for those symptoms. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3)(iv), 416.929(c)(3)(iv). But, where a represented claimant raises a question as to the side effects of medications but does not otherwise allege the side effects contributed to the alleged disability, the ALJ does not err in failing “to inquire further into possible side effects.”

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires an ALJ evaluating the intensity and persistence of a claimant’s symptoms to consider the side effects of medication.

Rutledge v. O'Malley (CONSENT) · filed 2024-09-17(c)(3)(iv)

“When evaluating the intensity and persistence of a claimant’s alleged symptoms, the Social Security regulations direct the ALJ to consider the claimant’s alleged medication side effects.” ... Here, substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s decision to not limit Rutledge’s ability to work based on the side effects of her medication. Rutledge offers only self-reported evidence that she experiences fatigue from her medication, which she contends limits her ability to work. However, this evidence does not meet Rutledge’s burden to show that additional restrictions in her RFC were necessary or that her medication rendered her disabled.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) does not require an ALJ to expressly discuss medication side effects when the record does not show that side effects affected the claimant’s ability to work.

Crane v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2024-10-24(c)(3)(iv)

Plaintiff’s contention that the ALJ failed to consider the side effects of pain medications and therefore did not engage in a proper RFC assessment is unavailing. Although the ALJ did not explicitly discuss side effects in determining the Plaintiff’s RFC, “the Court finds no error as the record does not demonstrate that [P]laintiff was suffering from side effects that impacted [her] ability to do full-time work. This is not a circumstance where a plaintiff testified to or there are treatment records reflecting persistent side effects that the ALJ ignored.”

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires consideration of a claimant’s symptom statements for consistency with the objective medical evidence, but does not require an ALJ to explicitly discuss alleged medication side effects that lack medical-record support and do not call for a more restrictive residual functional capacity.

Thomas L v. O'Malley · filed 2024-12-03(c)(3)

The ALJ must consider all of a claimant’s statements about his symptoms, including pain, and determine the extent to which the symptoms can reasonably be accepted as consistent with the objective medical evidence. Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 16-3p, 2017 WL 4790249, at *49462; 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3). ... To support his argument on medication side effects, Plaintiff relies exclusively on his testimony that he tried various medications when he began psychiatric treatment, and some of them caused vomiting or vivid dreams. (Tr. 61). Plaintiff also alleged in one of his Function Reports that Ibuprofen for pain caused “stomach problems.” (Tr. 459). Apart from that, however, there is no indication in the medical record that Plaintiff experienced any side effects from his medications or that such side effects called for a more restrictive RFC. Thus, Plaintiff’s unsupported subjective allegations at the hearing and in one of his function reports did not require the ALJ to explicitly address Plaintiff’s alleged medication side effects in the decision. See De Jesus v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 966 F.2d 1440 *3 (1st Cir. 1992) (unpublished opinion). Plaintiff has shown no error in this regard.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires an ALJ to consider medication side effects when evaluating a claimant’s symptoms and residual functional capacity, but the ALJ does not reversibly err by failing to expressly discuss alleged side effects when the record contains no supporting medical evidence and no ambiguity requiring further development.

Christine L. v. Colvin · filed 2024-12-16(c)(3)(iv)

The applicable Regulations state that the ALJ should consider the “side effects of any medications” among other factors when evaluating the claimant’s symptoms and RFC. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv); SSR 96-8p, 1996 WL 374184, at*5 (July 2, 1996). ... Here, Plaintiff testified as to some tiredness and fatigue, but presently fails to identify any evidence in the medical record that supports her present argument that her drowsiness “can easily contribute” to time off task. (ECF No. 10 at p. 4). This argument is unsupported, as there is no supporting medical evidence of record and no ambiguity requiring further development of the record. See Tr. 85-87, 94-97, 766.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires the agency to consider the effectiveness and side effects of medication when evaluating whether a claimant’s symptoms limit the ability to work.

Varnon v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2024-12-17(c)(3)(iv)

In determining whether a claimant’s impairments limit his ability to work, the ALJ considers the claimant’s subjective symptoms, which include the effectiveness and side effects of any medications taken for those symptoms. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3)(iv), 416.929(c)(3)(iv). ... Moreover, the ALJ addressed medication side effects at the hearing and noted them in his decision. And he stated that he considered all of Varnon’s symptoms and the extent to which those symptoms could reasonably be accepted as consistent with the objective medical evidence and other portions of the record. R. 125 (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 and SSR 16-3p). These findings are sufficient to show that the ALJ properly evaluated the Varnon’s medication side effects.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires an ALJ evaluating subjective symptoms to consider the effectiveness and side effects of medications and treatments.

Malak v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2025-03-18(c)(3)(iv)

A claimant’s subjective symptoms, such as pain, include the effectiveness ... and side effects of any medications or treatment for those symptoms. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv).

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires an ALJ to consider the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of a claimant’s medication when determining residual functional capacity.

Pack v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner · filed 2025-03-31(c)(3)(iv)

Mr. Pack asserts that because the ALJ failed to consider the effectiveness and side effects of his medications, as required by 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv), the court must reverse and remand the ALJ’s decision. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) (The Social Security Administration “will consider . . . [t]he type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication [the claimant] take[s].”). “[T]he ALJ is required to consider the effectiveness and side effects of treatments or medication in crafting a claimant’s [residual functional capacity].” Malak v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., __ F.4th __, 2025 WL 837927, at *15 (11th Cir. Mar. 18, 2025). ... Accordingly, the ALJ’s failure to consider Mr. Pack’s side effects in her decision was error. See Malak, __ F.4th __, 2025 WL 837927, at *15. The court WILL REVERSE AND REMAND on this ground, instructing the ALJ to consider evidence regarding side effects and the effectiveness of Mr. Pack’s medication on remand.

Under subsection (c)(3), an ALJ does not err by declining to find medication side-effect limitations when the only supporting evidence is claimant testimony that the ALJ considered and did not credit.

Bynaker v. Colvin · filed 2025-08-13(c)(3)

The only evidence of side effects is Bynaker’s own testimony, which the ALJ considered and did not find credible. (Tr. 36-37). There is therefore no basis for remand on this issue.

In evaluating alleged medication side effects under subsections (c)(1) and (c)(2), an ALJ may treat the absence of complaints in treatment records as substantial evidence against the claimant’s testimony.

Wallace-Barnes v. Bisignano · filed 2025-09-02(c)(1)-(2)

The ALJ’s reliance on the absence of complaints to medical providers in Wallace-Barnes’ treatment records is substantial evidence supporting his evaluation of her subjective complaints.

Subsection 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) permits consideration of medication dosage, effectiveness, and side effects, but an ALJ may not state that no evidence explains a refusal to increase dosage when the claimant testified that increased fatigue was the reason.

Drazkowski · filed 2026-03-05(c)(3)(iv)

The dosage and effectiveness of medication is undoubtedly a permissible factor to consider when evaluating Plaintiff’s subjective complaints. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv). However, the record does show that Plaintiff declined increasing her Effexor dosage and, as the ALJ recognized earlier in her opinion, Plaintiff testified that this was because “she did not want to be more tired.” R. 23. ... But the ALJ cannot, without explanation, find that there is no indication that side effects were the reason Plaintiff chose not to increase her Effexor dosage when Plaintiff testified to that effect. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3) (“We will consider all of the evidence presented, including . . . your statements about your symptoms.”).

Subsection 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires consideration of medication type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects during the eligible period, but an ALJ need not discuss alleged side effects unsupported by the record.

Valle-Ortiz · filed 2026-05-22(c)(3)(iv)

Social Security regulations require the ALJ to consider “the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication” when assessing the intensity and persistence of symptoms. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv). However, this requirement is within the context of the disability assessment, which is confined to the period of eligibility for the claimant. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529 et seq. Additionally, the ALJ is not required to address side effects where the plaintiff’s self-serving statements are unsupported by the record. ... Therefore, the ALJ did not err in omitting discussion of side effects from her ruling.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires consideration of medication side effects when evaluating symptoms, but an ALJ need not include claimed side effects in the residual functional capacity when medical records do not corroborate them.

Martes v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. · filed 2018-11-02(c)(3)(iv)

Given the lack of any medical records corroborating Martes's claimed side effects, we find no error in the ALJ's decision not to incorporate the side effects into a discussion of Martes's RFC or into the resulting RFC itself.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires ALJs to address evidence of medication side effects when evaluating reported symptoms.

Smith v. Kijakazi · filed 2022-09-28(c)(3)

Also, to provide further guidance on remand, the Court briefly notes that: ... (3) ALJs ... are required to address evidence of medication side effects,75 and the record includes several indications of significant side effects and even suggests that Plaintiff’s headaches may be caused, at least in part, by his prescribed medications;76 and (4) as to his headaches, Plaintiff described two distinct kinds of headaches/migraines, and he explained that his doctors would not continue with the migraine treatments because they were ineffective.

Section 404.1529(c)(3) requires consideration of medication side effects when assessing how symptoms limit a claimant’s ability to work.

Dawn Wilson v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. · filed 2019-08-06(c)(3)

The side effects of any medication taken to alleviate pain or other symptoms are relevant to determining the extent to which a claimant’s pain and other symptoms limit her capacity for work. ... The ALJ did not have substantial evidence in the record to reject Wilson’s complaint of the side effects of drowsiness.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires an ALJ evaluating symptoms to consider the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of a claimant’s medications.

Williams v. Saul · filed 2020-11-19(c)(3)(iv)

Moreover, the regulations require an ALJ evaluating a claimant’s symptoms to consider the “type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication” the claimant takes or has taken.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires consideration of the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of medication taken to relieve symptoms.

Buie v. Commissioner of Social Security · filed 2021-01-21(c)(3)(iv)

Additionally on remand, the ALJ should reassess the plaintiff’s credibility in light of the record as a whole. In particular, the ALJ should consider the plaintiff’s activities of daily living and the side effects of his seizure medication.

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires an ALJ to consider medication side effects when evaluating a claimant’s reported symptoms.

Box v. Saul · filed 2021-01-29(c)(3)(iv)

It is correct that an ALJ must consider a claimant’s medication side effects when evaluating whether her reported symptoms are inconsistent with other evidence. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv).

Section 404.1529(c)(3)(iv) requires an ALJ evaluating a claimant’s symptoms to consider the type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of medication taken to relieve them.

Lagace v. Saul · filed 2021-05-07(c)(3)(iv)

In evaluating a claimant’s subjective symptoms, an ALJ must consider “[t]he type, dosage, effectiveness, and side effects of any medication [he] take[s] or ha[s] taken to alleviate [his] pain or other symptoms.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(iv).