In their paper ''First measurements of the supersonic polar wind'', Nagal et al. (1984) make the point that, because the ion measurements presented in our earlier publication on the polar wind (Gurgiolo and Burch, 1982) were probably of oxygen, the observations were not of the polar wind but of an unspecified alternate ion upflow. The impression is given that oxygen is not considered a polar wind constituent. Allusions are also made to the energy range of our measurements indicating that it is too high to measure the polar wind. Such arguments are not consistent with the current work being done on the supersonic polar wind.