Replies

That sounds like a raw deal. Fight it.

Thanks. Well, let's just say that was a wasted couple years of a post-doc fellowship in a really, really unpleasant laboratory environment, though the confocal microscopy was fun. The funny thing is when I was trying to get in touch with this particular researcher I called his university and asked the department secretary if he was there and she said that he was "still there," with a certain sound in her voice that indicated that they were glad that he soon no longer would be. Ha ha ha.

I was just looking over some of the reviewers' comments. Given what I know about expression levels of muscle acetylcholine receptors in both COS and HEK293 cells, I know they didn't know what they were talking about. If we got normal levels of expression using wild type subunit DNA and failed to show the greater than 50-fold expression level the guy claimed for his mutation (either as published or using his frame-shifted version), the problem in expression wasn't due to our cell-expression system.

I was just looking over some of the reviewers' comments. Given what I know about expression levels of muscle acetylcholine receptors in both COS and HEK293 cells, I know they didn't know what they were talking about. If we got normal levels of expression using wild type subunit DNA and failed to show the greater than 50-fold expression level the guy claimed for his mutation (either as published or using his frame-shifted version), the problem in expression wasn't due to our cell-expression system.

In science evidence wins out. Fight it.

That's what this whole thing is all about--evidence wins out. But sometimes it requires a bit of persistence to overcome human foibles.

If you got bad reviews from just one reviewer--get a couple of good reviews from recognized experts on your own and resubmit the article with those reviews attached. Have those positive reviewers contact the editor. There are a lot of ways to get around a single bad review. Go for it!