In response to ‘A Zika Paper’, in which I discussed my thoughts on the problems with scientific publishing, Kim from Stockholm wrote to TWiV. "This Zika Diary post really made me depressed"
Those of us working in scientific research often receive critiques of our grant applications or papers that we submitted for publication. In most cases it's necessary to respond to these critiques to obtain funding or to publish a paper. I'm sure that the responses that many of us provide are quite different from what we are thinking.
In the last column I wrote of our first unsuccessful attempt to secure funding for our work on Zika virus. Since then we have received the reviewers' comments and now we can determine what they did not like.
When Zika virus grabbed the attention of my laboratory at the beginning of 2016, we had been searching for a new object of interest after many years of working on poliovirus. We had been doing experiments with enterovirus D68 (EV-D68), but were stymied in our ability to study the neurovirulence of that virus. As a consequence of our work on Zika virus, that problem might have been solved.