andyt andyt:
Since they went with 2% for the upper limit, apply the same error factor to the lower limit. ie from .8 to 25.5
No need. One is one. Any percentage of one is a different number than one.
However, the angle at which they went at the argument to rule on it was wrong as well. While they were arguing what the value of one really was, the case was centered around isotonic solutions in the percentile range. Therefore, as I said previously, 1% of something does not equal one. Unless it's 1% of 100.
Their argument of how rounding up numbers is the standard is also faulty. We only round off numbers when the system they are plugged into doesn't allow fractions, like our monetary system which doesn't have half cents. Secondly, their claim that the value of 1 can range from 0.5 to 1.5 doesn't work under their rounding up scheme as 1.5 would become 2. At which point 1 would then have to equal 2.