There is an inherent ambiguity in the the text in which I state that NPD or any diagnosis cannot be and has not been ascertained.

No it does not implicate NPD.

There is no deduction in there stating that horrible must implicate NPD. There is a question as to whether this type of behavior is indicative of NPD in some capacity.

This was never stated.

There is nothing in my post stating that this must = anything with any definitiveness that would imply equivalence.

I've restricted all comments to "she" as in one element of the subset of all possible people with NPD'ers.

All the equivalences are not equivalences bashed sheerly on the ambiguity that I made sure to include so that such equivalences are not stated.

While I admit it may be better off in other fora based upon responses here, I am not following this logic as equivalences are by very nature unequivocal.

I believe she may have NPD could mean: she could have BDD, QTP, X14 or J27.