Our results for the work of adhesion and contact angle differ significantly from the QM/MM results reported by Gim et al. who predicted that Ag and Au would have much stronger water adhesion and contact angles of zero. We should also note that their water distribution functions are quite different from ours. The QM/MM simulations predict the water distribution on Ag and Au to be very similar to that on Pd and Pt while our results in Figure show that both the water density and orientation of Ag and Au are drastically different from those of Pd and Pt; the QM/MM simulations do not capture the water adsorption peak on Pd and Pt but still predict a high interfacial water concentration. While the adsorption energies of a water molecule reported by Gim et al. are similar to ours, we suppose that the differences in the water structure are likely due to the use of just a single water orientation in the QM/MM parameterization.