Thanks guys.

Anyway - since I posted that, it turns out that pretty much all my data for the past year is background noise, even on my positive control. So that's a year wasted and basically back to square one. Frick.

Ok, time to get some things off my chest...

I'm just over a year into my PhD, full time. I've been struggling to keep up with the workload for a few months now and it's getting worse - I keep screwing things up and having to re-do them, actually forgetting to do some stuff even though I plan it properly and generally being a bit shit. To cap it off, my sup (who is a very supportive guy) is starting to get annoyed with me for basically getting it all wrong, which I guess is understandable.

Another issue is this - I decided a while back that academia isn't for me but thought it would be a hell of a waste to drop out since funded PhD positions are so coveted. But now I'm wondering if it's worth it after all. I'm not sleeping, am grumpy and irritable all the time am so fed up of feeling like an idiot every day. I came into this PhD (science-based) from a humanities background after doing a science 'conversion' masters' that really wasn't all it promised to be so in all honesty I've been doubtful of my abilities since pretty much day one. In fact, after I did the masters, I had huge trouble getting a normal job because I was overqualified - imagine how bad it'll be with a PhD as well. Should I cut my losses now and face the uncertainty the real world, or wait and (hopefully) pass the PhD and...THEN face the uncertainty of the real world?

What does everyone think? Any advice greatly appreciated!

Thanks guys :)

Not feeling quite so rubbish now since I know I was put into a complete no-win situation. I was writing for a conference publication, biosciences for humanities students - and was told under no uncertain terms by the editor not to dumb any of the science down. So I did as I was told, and his reason for rejecting the paper was that it was 'too complicated'!! He sent it to a third peer reviewer, after it had been accepted by the first two - without telling me - to justify his decision. I've heard that this is actually pretty bad form from an editorial point of view, so now I know I'm not the one with the problem.

Developing a thicker skin for this stuff now...

Stressing justified, paper got rejected after however many months.

Gutted :-(

I just got my first (ever) article back from the peer reviewers - one said it wasn't bad, but the other totally ripped it to shreds so that's put a downer on things :-( It's been accepted though, provided I make a bunch of changes so that's some good news. It was based on a condensed version of my MSc that my supervisor said was really good, so I guess opinions can vary massively.

Slightly worried now though - I'm starting a PhD in a couple of months and starting to wonder if I've got what it takes...