I don't think I have "overstated" anything.

What I have done is to describe what happens during a cast related to differential stiffness or flex characteristics of the rod during the cast. The presumed advantage of this rod is the "power" on the forward cast because of the fixed curve of the rod. The deleterious effects of the an unbalanced rod is directly related to the degree it is unbalanced. So I neither under or overstate the effects. Any perceived addition of power to the forward cast will be felt as an equal loss of power on the backcast.

You cannot fool the laws of physics. It is what it is, and to get a perceived "advantage" on the forward cast is to cause a perceived "disadvantage" on the backcast.

Secondly, the mass or weight of a fly rod is a detriment to the cast. The heavier the fly rod, the greater the proportion of the work put into the cast goes to simple moving the rod and not moving the line. Secondly, when one is not casting but fishing, you need to support the weight of the fly rod. Both cause more difficulty in fishing for someone with a disability. That person has to work harder while both casting and fishing. I see no advantage to giving a wounded warrior a rod that is almost a third heavier than a comparable rod.

What is unknown to me is whether this rod is the distribution of mass along the fly rod, ie., whether this rod is tip light or tip heavy. Tip heavy rods are more difficult to fish.