deletions | additions       diff --git a/textbf_The_fundamental_errors_The__.tex b/textbf_The_fundamental_errors_The__.tex  index 8fc8871..4ea32e0 100644  --- a/textbf_The_fundamental_errors_The__.tex  +++ b/textbf_The_fundamental_errors_The__.tex 
...
The first major error is the assumption that RWC and iFR are directly related and that conclusions drawn from our work on the two ideas can be related to each other directly. This assumption is not stated directly but it permeates almost all of their discussion.  In fact, iFR makes no use of the reservoir-wave concept and none of our papers imply that it does. We did look into the idea of applying the reservoir pressure to our coronary measurements and very quickly decided that it added nothing to the wave intensity analysis. analysis based on the measured pressures.  Similarly, in none of our published work on reservoir pressure have we extended the analysis to the coronary arteries. It is my belief, and that of most of my colleagues, that the reservoir pressure hypothesis is very likely to fail in the coronary arteries because of their proximity to the terminal reflection sites. We have used reservoir pressure analysis of pressure measured in various distal locations, e.g. the radial artery in the analysis of the CAFE measurements and while we have some reservations about the validity of those calculations theoretically, one cannot contest their epidemiological predictive power. Conversely, iFR played no role in the develpment of the reservoir-wave hypothesis which antedated iFR by more than a decade. After the development of iFR there has never been any attempt to apply that principle to Pr.  Examples of this basic error will be discussed at various points in the following discussion which concentrates on first Pr and then iFR.