deletions | additions       diff --git a/begin_quote_textbf_Perspectives_WSA__.tex b/begin_quote_textbf_Perspectives_WSA__.tex  index b67800b..39897f4 100644  --- a/begin_quote_textbf_Perspectives_WSA__.tex  +++ b/begin_quote_textbf_Perspectives_WSA__.tex 
...
\begin{quote}  \textbf{Perspectives} \section{Perspectives}  WSA and WIA are strongly related and their difference is mainly in their derivations. \textbf{[C18]} However, WIA suggests, incorrectly, that  there is a wave-free period (diastole), and this assumption has led to the RWC and the instantaneous wave-free pressure/flow ratio, iFR. Both the concepts, based on flawed interpretations of arterial hemodynamics, are increasingly used in practice, which is worrisome. \textbf{[C19]} The internal inconsistencies in both the concepts are easily demonstrated, the most important ones being: 
...
2. The instantaneous ratio of pressure and flow assumed in the wave-free period is assumed a measure of (dilated) resistance. However, division of diastolic pressure by (zero) diastolic flow gives nonsensical results. The reservoir pressure concept and the (diastolic) instantaneous pressure flow ratio, are both physically incorrect, and should be abandoned. \textbf{[C21]}  \end{quote}