I mean, I didn't have anything to say with regards to the 2nd degree burns, really, so I didn't feel the need to comment on them. Didn't know any reply I made had to both acknowledge everything I agree with as well as make comment on what I feel was comment-worthy.

So I'll start now. I disagree with your lackadaisical portrayal of me. Neither is it accurate nor does it form a coherent argument against me. It simply acts as an ad hominem used in the place of a substantiated or communicated argument.

I agree with nothing in your non-statement.

Also characterizing 2nd degree burns on the hands as potentially life-threatening was irresponsible of pseudo-me. Pseudo-I shouldn't have done that, as it's untrue. Pseudo-me should know they're severe and serious, but something doesn't need to be described as "potentially life-threatening" to be severe and serious, and in fact, pseudo-me should be aware that this is a minimization of things that don't kill you but severely impact one's quality-of-life, as 2nd degree hand burns would.