Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
on August 9, 2005, after Appellant was referred to him by Dr. Earl Stewart. Dr. Bingham prepared a second EMG report on May 9, 2008, upon referral from Dr. Michael Caifee. Dr. Bingham noted his plan to refer Appellant back to Dr. Caifee. Finally, Dr. Valdivia prepared a third EMG report on October 23, 2009, upon referral from Dr. Stewart. There is no indication that the doctors saw Appellant on any other occasion. The records thus show that Dr. Tucker saw Appellant with much greater frequency and regularity than Drs. Bingham and Valdivia. It is unclear whether the ALJ recognized this difference and, if so, why she concluded that the opinions of all three doctors were entitled to equal weight. This ambiguity hinders meaningful review of the ALJ’s decision. See Blakley, 581 F.3d at 409 . Even if the ALJ considered Drs. Bing-ham and
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding in the absence of alj findings supported by specific weighing of the evidence we cannot assess whether relevant evidence adequately supports the aljs conclusion and thus the aljs unexplained conclusion was beyond meaningful review
B. holding an aljs failure to adequately explain the weight given to treating sources opinions not harmless because the aljs reasoning was not sufficiently specific to make clear that the alj recognized and evaluated the treating relationships
C. holding that remand was not required and that the aljs failure to mention treating physicians opinion was harmless error because the alj adopted the treating physicians recommendations
D. holding that where the alj had already  obtained and considered reports from treating physicians the alj had before him a complete medical history and the evidence received from the treating physicians was adequate for him to make a determination as to disability
E. holding that where a treating physicians opinion is contradicted by a consulting physician the alj must explain on the record the reasons for rejecting the opinion of the treating physician
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.