[@ChengZhang] also fits the frequency band requirements of the haze very well. We show in Fig. \[fig:E500alpha1p6\] the results for a larger choice of ${E_{\rm cut}}$. Since the parameters $W_0$, $f_e$, and $\dot{N}_{100}$ are interchangeable, to get a reasonable efficiency the most likely course is to raise the average pulsar spin down power. In general, the efficiencies noted there can be substantially and easily lowered by taking the power per pulsar $W_0$ and the magnetic field at the galactic center $B_0$ to higher, but still reasonable, values. In short, pulsars are a plausible explanation of the haze.

We also note that the choices of parameters we have made are consistent with those utilized in [@Blasi; @Profumo] as a means to explain the HEAT, AMS, PAMELA, ATIC and PPB-BETs cosmic ray positron excesses with a single pulsar, or collection of local pulsars, suggesting that cosmic ray positron and dark matter anomalies may naturally have the same source.

We urge caution here that using the local measurements, say from HEAT and PAMELA, to normalize the pulsar synchrotron contribution requires many assumptions.

-   Normalizing the distribution of the pulsars to the local density of pulsars and then using an analytic form to extrapolate 