Hoi Ric,

another comment. 

 > As far as the comment on the theoretical error, I would truncate the
 > sentence as he suggests, but put no reference. It is after all a general
 > statement on the analysis.

I think I was unclear in the formulation. This statement did NOT refer
to  the  current  analysis  precisely  because it  has  such  a  large
acceptance  and therefore  QHD is  not  much of  an issue  for us.  It
actually was OK to have the reference to QHD there. 

Maybe we should have had something like 

"leads to complications in  the theoretical description of traditional

to make  it clear  that the "novel  analysis method" described  in the
second paragraph falls into a different class.

Just my $0.02...