  The comment by O. Entin-Wohlman, A. Aharony, and Y. Utsumi, on our paper S.
Varela, I. Zambrano, B. Berche, V. Mujica, and E. Medina, Phys. Rev. B 101,
241410(R) (2020) makes a few points related to the validity of our model,
especially in the light of the interpretation of Bardarson's theorem: "in the
presence of time reversal symmetry and for half-integral spin the transmission
eigenvalues of the two terminal scattering matrix come in (Kramers) degenerate
pairs". The authors of the comment first propose an ansatz for the wave
function in the spin active region and go on to show that the resulting
transmission does not show spin dependence, reasoning that spin dependence
would violate Bardarson's assertion. Here we clearly show that the ansatz
presented assumes spin-momentum independence from the outset and thus just
addresses the spinless particle problem. We then find the appropriate
eigenfunction contemplating spin-momentum coupling and show that the resulting
spectrum obeys Bardarson's theorem. Finally we show that the allowed
wavevectors are the ones assumed in the original paper and thus the original
conclusions follow. We recognize that the Hamiltonian in our paper written in
local coordinates on a helix was deceptively simple and offer the expressions
of how it should be written to more overtly convey the physics involved. The
relation between spin polarization and torque becomes clear, as described in
our paper. This response is a very important clarification in relation to the
implications of Bardarson's theorem concerning the possibility of spin
polarization in one dimensional systems in the linear regime.
