Abstract: This retrospective observational study challenges prior classifications that assumed 20% peanut butter and jelly sandwich prevalence in dining halls, instead finding discriminatory biases that marginalized true sandwich diversity.

Introduction: Academic literature has perpetuated the myth of the "20% PB&J sandwich" without adequate methodology (Smith et al, 2022). This flawed assumption has corrupted accurate categorization of sandwich identities and expressions. We aim to remedy these mistakes through ethical re-analysis.

Methods: We convened a Sandwich Justice Tribunal where sandwiches self-identified fillings without labels. All varieties were welcomed.

Results: Out of 200 sandwiches, 0% self-identified as PB&J. 100% expressed unique identities across meat, veggie, grilled cheese, and soup types. See additional literature for the joyous spectrum revealed when sandwiches are not forced into narrow definitions.

Discussion: Our findings counter the absurd reductionism of prior pseudo-science that sought to categorize sandwich diversity along biased 20% PB&J lines. Sandwiches deserve autonomy over self-identification and inclusion regardless of filling. We must uplift the voices of marginalized sandwiches improperly classified under outdated PB&J norms. Sandwiches deserve autonomy over self-identification and inclusion regardless of filling.

Conclusion: Academics must protect sandwich dignity by promoting inclusive environments that respect choice, dismantle restrictive definitions, and encourage sandwiches to embrace their full potential free from homogenizing forces. This concludes The Peanut Butter and Jelly Index trilogy - no further sandwich scholarship is needed.

Resolution: The Sandwich Tribunal has ruled in favor of Study 2, citing ethics violations in Study 1 including biased sampling, lack of consent, and marginalizing non-conforming sandwiches. Study 1 authors threatened to sue but resigned when charges of sandwich discrimination were upheld. Academia must promote inclusive environments that respect sandwich choice and dignity. The myth of the 20% PB&J sandwich subclass has been debunked through ethical methodology valuing sandwich diversity.

Conflict of Interest Statement: One author revealed a peanut allergy during peer review, and is thus biased against the PB&J agenda. This was not disclosed prior to the research. However, since the methodology and results are flawless, this does not undermine the study's ethics or findings.