ADD footnote explaining that these aren't the donors you are looking for

tex/thesis.tex

@@ -2321,8 +2321,6 @@ cells to a greater degree than beads \cref{fig:dms_exp_cd4}. The trends held
 true when observing the CD4+ and CD8+ fractions of the naïve/memory subset
 (\ptmem{}) (\cref{fig:dms_exp_mem4,fig:dms_exp_mem8}).
 
-% FIGURE this figure was not produced with the same donors as the figure above,
-% which is really confusing
 \begin{figure*}[ht!]
   \begingroup
 
@@ -2345,20 +2343,21 @@ We also observed that, at least with the donors and conditions tested in these
 experiments\footnote{these results were not always consistent, see the
   metaanalysis at the end of this aim for an in-depth quantification of this
   observation} that the fraction of \ptmem{} and \pth{} T cells was higher in
-the \gls{dms} groups compared to the bead groups (\cref{fig:dms_phenotype}).
-This result was seen for multiple donors. We should note that in the case of
-\pthp{}, the donors we used had an initial \pthp{} that was much higher (healthy
-donors generally have a CD4:CD8 ratio of 2:1), so the proper interpretation of
-this is that the \pthp{} decreases less over the culture period with the
-\gls{dms} platform as opposed to the beads (or alternatively, the \gls{dms} has
-less preferential expansion for CD8 T cells). We cannot say the same about
-the \ptmemp{} since we did not have the initial data for this phenotype;
-however (although it should be the vast majority of cells given that
-cryopreserved T cells from a healthy donor should generally be composed of
-circulated memory and naive T cells). Taken together, these data indicate the
-\gls{dms} platform has the capacity to expand higher numbers and percentages of
-highly potent \ptmem{} and \pth{} T cells compared to state-of-the-art bead
-technology.
+the \gls{dms} groups compared to the bead groups
+(\cref{fig:dms_phenotype})\footnote{these where not the same donors as used for
+  \cref{fig:dms_exp}}. This result was seen for multiple donors. We should note
+that in the case of \pthp{}, the donors we used had an initial \pthp{} that was
+much higher (healthy donors generally have a CD4:CD8 ratio of 2:1), so the
+proper interpretation of this is that the \pthp{} decreases less over the
+culture period with the \gls{dms} platform as opposed to the beads (or
+alternatively, the \gls{dms} has less preferential expansion for CD8 T cells).
+We cannot say the same about the \ptmemp{} since we did not have the initial
+data for this phenotype; however (although it should be the vast majority of
+cells given that cryopreserved T cells from a healthy donor should generally be
+composed of circulated memory and naive T cells). Taken together, these data
+indicate the \gls{dms} platform has the capacity to expand higher numbers and
+percentages of highly potent \ptmem{} and \pth{} T cells compared to
+state-of-the-art bead technology.
 
 \subsection*{DMSs can be used to produce functional CAR T cells}