Good synopsis. Hydrostatic Shock is a controversial subject, not just among hunters, but also among scientists and surgeons. Not only that it exists, but how much it contributes to incapacitation. While I believe it does exist to some extent, I also believe it is not a real contribution to the incapacitation of animals at revolver velocities. Just MTCs from my experience. I have processed/butchered more deer than I can remember in the last half a century. This includes animals shot with bow, handguns and rifles. I have seen wounds larger than projectile diameter in all of them. Angle of the shot, along with what was hit along the path of the projectile(before and after entering the body) and with high enough velocity, Hydrostatic shock, all contributed. I have seen bone shattered and bleeding/bruising far away from the wound channel, even with bow velocity projectiles. This is surely not from Hydrostatic shock, but direct pressure from the projectile. I have seen what a ought-six does to soft tissue when hit at close range and will readily admit that some of it was probably due to Hydrostatic shock. I have also seem wound channels produced by 30-30 and .32 Special, that were a clean hole all the way thru, even after hitting shoulder bone. These were probably shot at a distance where the velocity had fallen off enough that Hydrostatic shock was not any contribution. As a kid, many of the older hunters I knew, went to faster calibers than their old vulnerable 30-30s just because of this. My bullets are just fine. They do exactly what I want them to do when I do my part. I do not have to have wound channel measures in multiples of inches in order to consider it a clean and humane kill. I gave up hunting deer with rifle calibers more than a dozen years ago. I don't concern myself with Hydrostatic shock any more as I truly believe I don't have the velocities to achieve it to any great proportion. This even with the .460 in a long piped revolver, or .357 and .44 mag in carbines. While I have had bullet fragmentation with my carbines and have since changed bullet types and construction because of it, I changed to something that would give me better penetration at those higher velocities, even tho the wound channel itself may be not as ugly. We as hunters, should use what we are most confident with and what has worked best for us, in our hunting scenarios over the years. We may not agree with others on everything, but what we need to agree with, is that condescending and attempting to belittle others for what they believe works the best for them, is not doing anything to help promote the sport of hunting. Again.....JMTCs.