Maybe the world would be a slightly better place if your overly skeptical reviewer had reviewed this http://briandeer.com/mmr/lancet-paper.htm
I believe I was the beneficiary of good fortune in overcoming the barriers, but luck is a very thin and unreliable conduit to success. Indeed I know authors not as lucky, and their good work was blocked.
Fields of research are often highly specialized and a small community of interest can become insulated from voices outside that world. It's my impression that was the basis of the difficulty I encountered.
Not that I have a solution to the problem, but I've wondered how many worthwhile novel contributions by "outsiders" not affiliated with a field's main research centers are being lost under current peer review regimes.
Back in the early 2000's, in the course of clinical practice I encountered some unexpected outcomes of treatment which correlated to a particular, if unexpected diagnosis. I tried to find info about this, but to my surprise a thorough search of the literature came up empty.
I felt a duty to report my observations. Putting it into a formal paper was difficult for me to accomplish, but did get it organized. Believing in the idea of open access, I decided to submit to a newly established open-access publisher.
Peer review did not go smoothly. Because the subject had never been reported before, at least in a peer-reviewed journal, the reviewers expressed doubt about the reality of the data. One "peer" was determined to disparage the report to the extent of making glaringly inaccurate, distorted comments about the nature of the condition in the subjects of my report. After a rigorous defense of data and procedure the editors decided to ignore the negative review and the report was published.
Novelty is not only apparent in terms of methodology or cross-discipline application of ideas, but also arises when attempting to share previously unreported observations. The closed-mindedness of many in the academic community (who are the predominant peer reviewers) is apparently a pervasive problem in the sciences, and possibly endemic in academic culture in general.