Though somewhat painful at the time, I find that a manuscript invariably improves after a comprehensive review at a decent journal (even if it is rejected after review). Sometimes it improves a lot, making arguments clear and helping you see the differences between what you think your data says and what your data REALLY says (and the way others look at it).
However there are times when "peer reviews" are completely worthless, especially when they are provided as one-liners to the author (usually meant to help editors decide whether the paper is good enough for further review or not). One of the best one-liners I got from an esteemed cell biology journal was "The data are novel, but expected.....not suitable for the journal".
Ponder upon that one.
Some old ones Reposted...
8/18/13 - A Classification of PI's - find yours' in the list!
7/6/12 - Way to a "Science paper"
5/30/11 - 20/20 Hindsights
9/30/11 - Evolution of a bizzare, new Idea
11/17/2011 - Rationale for curiosty-driven research...
lessons from a 4 year old
1/28/12 - "GTFM" - hilarious article on grant writing!
The PI Blog
This blog exists because my wife seemed a bit tired of being the only recipient of my random pontifications on life and Science for many years; and gently encouraged me to vent in a blog instead. From time to time, I put down thoughts that occur to me as I naiively stumble through a life in Science - bestowed upon me by accident (literally!). Please keep in mind that these musings are rather obvious things of little or no use to anyone, and are certainly not personally targeted in any way, even though they are obviously derived from my experiences. OK, enough said.