“…The origin of this belief is unknown to the original authors of the work; (3) The 2007 article by Collé et al [7] did not refer to the fitted value of 128.3 a as a half-life determination (clearly insisting that it was not), and never claimed that the reported fitting uncertainty of 7 a was an uncertainty on the half-life; (4) The ''robustness'', dependent on the 209 Po solution stability, and the ''trueness and repeatability'' of the LS spectrometry was treated in extenso in the Collé et al articles [6,7,15], while the PSB authors largely neglected to appreciate the rigor employed to ensure that ''the measurement method and data analyses used the identical protocols in all cases'' [7,15]; and (5) The NIST measurement methodology for the half-life determination was based on a unique LS spectral analysis procedure that is specific for the case of 209 Po decay (to account for the delayed 2-keV isomeric transition in 205 Pb and for the radiations accompanying the 0.45 % electron-capture branch to 209 Bi), and had absolutely no relation or relevance to the two references (Broda [21] and Pommé [22] ) cited in PSB. The PSB authors could have more usefully directed readers to any one of the three publications [6,7,15] (and even a pending one [16] referenced in [15] ) that describes the measurement method in great detail.…”