Just to clarify:
The application of harmonised standards gives you a presumption of conformity (see Article 5), which effectively absolves you of having to explain why you meet the essential requirement. In fact, you don't even need an essential requirements checklist - the list of applied standards and the "risk analysis" is enough. Only where you do not apply the harmonised standard, you are legally required to explain your alternate solution for the applicable essential requirements.
If you find this surprising and unreasonable (as I did), take a careful look at the wording in the MDD itself, for example Annex II, 3.2 (c) 2nd dash.
After digging through EU commission docs dating back to 1984 I found the reason for this, but that's too long and explanation for this post!