Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
and that “[i]t is simply best just to go to bed when that occurs.” JA 462 Getter from Mitchell K. Schwaber, M.D., to Kenneth A. Miller dated October 28, 2002). In the context of this case and this episodic disease, the ALJ has failed adequately to explain why Dr. Schwaber’s opinion (if not the opinions of other treating doctors) should not be treated as a valid medical opinion regarding “the frequency and duration of the disease’s exacerbations” rather than an opinion “on issues reserved to the Commissioner.” See Groskreutz v. Barnhart, 108 Fed.Appx. 412 (7th Cir.2004) (“The ALJ erroneously disregarded [a physician’s] opinion regarding how much weight [the applicant] could lift and how many days of work she may have to miss.”); Alexander v. Barnhart, 74 Fed.Appx. 23 (10th Cir.2003) ; Abendroth v. Barnhart, 26 Fed.Appx. 580 (7th
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. 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
B. holding that the alj erred by failing to mention the contrary opinion of a treating physician
C. recognizing that the alj erred in disregarding a treating physicians opinion that a disabilitybenefits applicant might miss a day a week of work and need to lie down twice a day
D. 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
E. recognizing treating physicians opinion that he would expect the applicant to miss more than two or more days of work per month as an opinion regarding the nature and severity of a medical condition that is entitled to controlling weight if wellsupported by medical findings and not inconsistent with other substantial evidence
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.