Cited by

Comm’n, (an ALJ may disregard a medical opinion which depends on an incorrect factual background).

Comm’n, (recognizing that an underlying material factual inaccuracy may undermine medical testimony).

Comm’n, (citation omitted), medical testimony is only compromised if the factual inaccuracy is material or significant to the doctor’s medical opinion.

Comm'n, (stating that a foundational flaw upon which medical opinion is given can weaken the opinion); but see Fry's Food Stores v. Indus.

Comm’n, (stating that medical testimony can be so weakened by proof of an inaccurate factual background that it cannot be 6 TOOLEY v. FRY’S Decision of the Court said to constitute substantial evidence to support an a

Comm’n, we disagree with Pate’s characterization of Theiler’s opinion in this case.

Comm’n, P.2d 296 (App. 1982), the ALJ stated that because Petitioner was “not credible,” the ALJ was “not bound to adopt medical findings premised on [the Petitioner’s] described medical history.” ¶14 Petitioner filed a timely petition for special action, and we have jurisdiction pursuant to Arizona Revised St

Comm’n, (recognizing that medical testimony can be so weakened by proof of an inaccurate factual background that it cannot be substantial evidence supporting an award but noting that not every factual inaccuracy will undermine the sufficiency of the opinion).

Comm’n, (medical testimony must have an accurate factual background to constitute substantial evidence).

Comm’n, (citations omitted); see also Fry’s Food Stores v. Indus.

Comm’n, (citations omitted).

While this Court has recognized that “medical testimony can be so weakened by proof of an inaccurate factual background that the testimony cannot be said to constitute ‘substantial evidence,’ ” Desert Insulations v. Industrial Comm’n, , (citations omitted), we have also recognized that positive knowledge of causation is not always possible and this uncertainty will not prevent a physician from stating a legally sufficient opinion.

See Fry’s Food Stores, 161 Ariz. at 122 , 776 P.2d at 800 ; see also Desert Insulations, Inc. v. Industrial Comm’n

When there is no dispute or when the credible medical evidence establishes that the Guides cover and permit *538 a fair and accurate assessment of a claimant’s condition and alleged impairment, however, the impairment “must be rated, if at all, under the AMA guidelines.” Desert Insulations, Inc. v. Industrial Comm’n

§ 23-1044(D).” See generally Desert Insulations, Inc. v. Industrial Comm’n

Adams v. Industrial Commission, supra.