In a recent Letter [1] a direct measurement of the three-body interaction parameter was reported. The authors also have obtained the extrapolated values of 0(°°) and critical demixing T c (°°) temperatures which differ from each other. This difference was left unexplained in [1]. Here we would like to provide some explanation of the above difference.We begin with the observation that Eqs. (2) and (6) of [1] are taken from theories describing different critical regimes (e.g., see Ref. [2]): Equation (2) is valid in the tricritical region of the phase diagram (e.g., see Fig. 1 of [2]) while Eq. (6) is valid in the critical region. Moreover, Eq. (6) is obtained in Ref. [3] in the mean field approximation which cannot reliably be used in the vicinity of the critical point. The distance between 0 and T c reflects the width of the crossover region from critical to tricritical.In our work [4] we have demonstrated that at the critical demixing point T c , polymer solutions must exhibit Ising-like critical behavior which is confirmed in [2]. The theory developed in [4] does not involve three-body interactions at the microscopic level; they appear, nevertheless, as fluctuation corrections to Flory-Huggins mean field theory [4,5]. The role of microscopic three-body interactions in the critical region was discussed recently for the case of simple fluids in [6] and for the model lattice gas in [7]. In particular, in [7] the role of three-body interactions was studied nonperturbatively while in [3] these interactions were included perturbatively [which resulted in Eq. (6) of [1]] based on the earlier computational scheme of Ref. [8]. For the case of polymers, their nonperturbative role was emphasized in [9] while [4,5] provide some discussion of their importance in calculations of molecular weight dependencies of T C (M) and fluid diameter amplitude. In spite of the progress already achieved, some fundamental problems still remain to be solved (e.g., associated with field mixing [10]).We would also like to emphasize some aspects of Eq. (2) in [1], which are very important from the theoretical standpoint. Equation (2) can be obtained using Eqs. (2.3), (2.4), (7.13), and (7.17) of Ref. [11]. Unlike the previous calculation [12], where the dimensional regularization method was used, Ref.[11] employs the cutoff regularization so that Eq. (2) and Fig. 2(a) of [1] are direct manifestations of the importance of the cutoff methods in the tricritical theories. Moreover, by combining Eqs. (2) and (5) of [1] we can measure the cutoff directly and whence the persistence length [see, e.g., Eqs. (4.11) and (4.12) of [13]]. For the most recent study of these theories see also [14].Finally, the role of three-body interactions in the coilglobule [15] and polymer network [16] collapse transition is well known. It is of interest to study to what extent the data of Ref.[1] can be useful in this regard.