Brodsky et al's defence does not work

In their defence of “maximum conformality” methods, Brodsky et al make the astonishing claim that any RG transformation a’=a(1+V_1 a + …) in QCD must have V_1 proportional to b=(33-2n_f)/6. It is well known that this is not true. I emphasize again the correctness and central importance of the Celmaster-Gonsalves relation for the prescription dependence of the Lambda parameter.