|I appreciate that the authors have provided additional information on the health impact assessment methods. I continue to believe that these methods are outdated and do not reflect the state of the science in air pollution epidemiology. I do not believe this should hold up publication of the paper since they are being applied in US and Europe, where the changes in air pollution epidemiology have not changed as radically as they have in other parts of the world. I would still like to see additional information given about how different concentration-response factors and shape of the concentration-response curve might influence results and conclusions.|
Lines 193-194: I still don’t believe this is true. See for example:
World Bank (2016) The Cost of Air Pollution: Strengthening the Economic Case for Action. Available at: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/25013
Shindell et al. Simultaneously mitigating near-term climate change and improving human health and food security, Science, doi:10.1126/science.1210026 (2012).
Anenberg et al. Global air quality and health co-benefits of mitigating near-term climate change through methane and black carbon emission controls, Environ Health Perspect, 120:831-839 (2012).
Shindell et al. Climate, health, agricultural and economic impacts of tighter vehicle emissions standards, Nature Climate Change, doi:10.1038/NCLIMATE1066 (2011).