Where the factual record contains sufficient persuasive medical evidence, it is within an ALJ’s discretion to find that the testimony of Employer’s independent medical examiners (IMEs) rebuts and prevails over the general presumption favoring testimony provided by Claimant’s treating physician.  The ALJ was thus acting within his discretion when he determined that the unanimous testimony of three orthopedic surgeon IMEs derived from multiple objective tests was more persuasive than an opinion of Claimant’s treating physician based on a single test, where that diagnosis went beyond the scope of the objective test, and where there existed grounds to question both the Claimant’s credibility and the validity of the test’s outcome.