My point was to demonstrate that your "hypersensitivity" hypothesis has no evidentiary basis, and in fact runs counter to easily available evidence. I believe

My point was to demonstrate that your "hypersensitivity" hypothesis has no evidentiary basis, and in fact runs counter to easily available evidence. I believe I have done that, in way that other HN readers can easily verify for themselves. Had you researched the topic yourself you would find more supporting evidence for my pet theory. I only presented a sampling of what I found, to keep my comment from being a wall of text. Your saying doesn't even apply to you as you have not presented any evidence, not even a single feather. As you don't seem to care, my interest here is done.