Response to “μg/kg-day or μg/day? A commentary on Georgopoulos et al., JESEE 2008”

Response to commentary by Gutierrez et al.

Department of Entomology and Nematology, Department of Plant Sciences, and Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA Center for the Economics and Demography of Aging, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA Laboratory of Entomology and Agricultural Zoology, School of Agricultural Sciences, University of Thessaly, Phytokoy St....

Public Participation: Methods Matter; A Response to Boaz et al.

Commentary Commentary on Ullman et al

Ullman and colleagues should be congratulated for an energetic assault on some of the core issues in neurolinguistics. This work attempts to detect an impact of productivity differences in morphology upon fluency differences in aphasia. This basic goal is well-motivated empirically and should eventually succeed. However, I believe that the links currently being proposed between language and the...

Commentary on Generoso et al

Commentary on “Improving the seasonal cycle and interannual variations of biomass burning aerosol sources” by Generoso et al. L. Giglio and J. D. Kendall Science Systems and Applications, Inc., NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Code 923, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA Received: 21 October 2003 – Accepted: 26 November 2003 – Published: 27 November 2003 Correspondence to: L. Giglio ([email protected]...

Response to commentary by Skinner et al. on Regression to the Mean (RTM) in Burke et al.

This letter is a response to commentary by Skinner et al. on an evaluation by Burke et al. of the HealthMPowers program, an elementary-school-based program developed to improve child health and wellness. In their commentary, Skinner et al. make the criticism that our results for changes in BMI-for-Age Z score were simply reflective of Regression to the Mean (RTM). In this response, we show that...