Although I graduated at the top of my class, and in the top 1 percent worldwide, this inability to publish a unifying theory has not only had detrimental consequences on my career, but also casts serious aspersions upon both the recognized scientific leadership and the hierarchical bureaucratic publication mechanism in the medical, biomolecular, and allied sciences. It is nothing short of ethical scientific crime when United States patents can be granted, based upon a theory that can't even be published. How much "proof in the pudding" is required to couple theory and application to publication?
I find Horrobin's efforts to be laudable and downright heroic. We theoreticians tire of receiving blanket rejections by publication staff members who do not even permit our work to be submitted to the review process. There is nothing more demeaning to a qualified professional than to be rejected from peer review consideration by the publication ...
