The reviewers of the journal have put forward reasonable revision suggestions, but I don't agree. What should I do?

Disagreeing with reviewer suggestions is acceptable when justified, but requires objective rationale and respectful negotiation. Such disagreements can be feasible and constructive if handled professionally within the journal's revision process. Provide a detailed, point-by-point response to every comment. Explicitly state disagreements only when supported by robust evidence and sound scholarly arguments. Ensure your counterarguments directly address the reviewer's concerns and demonstrate a thorough understanding of the feedback. Maintain a respectful and constructive tone throughout your rebuttal, acknowledging the reviewers' effort. Crucially, clearly distinguish between substantial scholarly disagreements and corrections required for technical accuracy or clarity. Within your revision cover letter, meticulously justify each disagreement with concrete evidence, citing relevant literature or data from your study. Substantiate claims that requested changes are unnecessary or incorrect beyond reasonable doubt. For points where revisions were possible but not implemented as suggested, detail the alternative changes made and explain how they sufficiently address the core concern. Frame all responses as a collaborative effort to strengthen the manuscript, seeking editorial guidance if necessary. Adhere strictly to the journal's instructions for rebuttals.