breaks the remaining degeneracy, as is clear from Fig. \[fig:joint\] (left panel, smaller contour) and from the fact that the combined contour has very small correlation ($\sigma_{12}<
 0.1\%$, for un-normalised parameters $\omega_c$ and $\omega_\nu$).

Figure \[fig:joint\] (right panel) shows the one-dimensional marginalized probability distributions of the neutrino masses in the four cases. The upper 95% confidence levels are $\sum m_\nu < 1.32$ eV (WMAP5), $\sum m_\nu < 1.22$ eV (WMAP5 + CFHTLS) and $\sum m_\nu < 0.62$ eV (WMAP5 + BAO + SNe). For the full combination (WMAP5 + BAO + SNe + CFHTLS), we find that $$0.03\,\mbox{eV}\, < \sum m_\nu < 0.54\,\mbox{eV (95\% C.L.)},$$ with mean 0.31 eV. Interestingly, we obtain a lower bound, and thus a preference for massive neutrinos at the $2\sigma$ level.

It is worth to point out that the lower bound on $\sum m_\nu$ is strongly dependent on the position of the WMAP5 + CFHTLS contour in the $(\omega_\nu,\omega_{\mathrm{cdm}})$ plane (see Fig. \[fig:joint\], left panel). Any systematic effect that underestimates the cosmic-shear signal would shift the $({\Omega_{\mathrm{m}}},\sigma_8)$ contour towards the bottom-left corner of Fig. \[fig:nufu\] with a consequent shift in the $(\omega_\nu,\omega_{\mathrm{cdm}})$ contour towards the bottom-right corner of Fig. \[fig:joint\] (left panel). The WMAP5 + 