EFCS Discussion Forum
G.Brugal, Nov.28,1996
Dear Colleagues,
The discussion which has started is wonderful and fruitful. I like it
because it is becoming a very efficient and open way to collect opinions,
feelings and specific sensitivities.
In my opinion, the question whether we will go with both the new European
Union of National Cytometry Societies (Say EUNMS) AND the existing ESACP or
whther we will replace the ESACP (mainly aiming at pathology) by the EUNMS
having a much broader scope (aiming at both medical and biological
cytometry in addition to technical and fundamental aspects of cytometry) is
not wise.
As the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Analytical Cellular Pathology, I
would like to bring in the following arguments:
- 1- It would be a better basis for the journal to be the official media of
the EUNCS than the ESACP.
- 2- Accordingly, the title (and the scope) of the journal will have to be
extended to "Analytical Cellular Pathology and Biology". Since this would
not be a big change with respect to the indexing organisms, the ACPB will
be easily identified as the continuation of ACP and built up from the
already high impact factor. A smooth shift from the "old" ACP to the "new"
ACPB can be achieved in 2 years and would concern both the journal layout
and content.
- 3- The EUNCS should well define some dedicated branches addressing the
specific needs of any identified cytometry sub-communities, one of them can
be in the direction of pathologits and clinicians. This branch will then
start from the already identified ESACP community. An other branch could be
contemplated in the direction of molecular genetics for the fishermen,
etc... In this context, "addressing the specific needs of cytometry
sub-communities" means organising targetted conferences, tutorials, working
groups (such as DNA ploidy, AgNORs, etc.) and being in close contact with
European projects aiming at standardisation, quality control, quality
assurance, etc...
- 4- The most uncomfortable and puzzling situation would be 2 European
entities at the same level, one clinical and the other with broader scope,
but still with significant overlapping.
- 5- Should we be able to create the EUNCS, it has to be the only European
"official" entity in Cytometry actually driving the journal although its
membership still remains to be clarified. ESACP would then become a well
identified activity of EUNCS.
Most cordially
Gerard Brugal