I second Lowell Ericssons opinion on not to change the ABRF name for our
society.
My viewpoint is based on the fact that my Institution, the Fox Chase
Cancer Center, not unlike many other research centers, has an
infrastructure of over 30 Biomolecular Resources Facilities of which only
four, DNA synthesis, Mass-spectrometry, HPLC, and DNA sequencing, are
represented broadly in ABRF technologies. Peptide synthesis and Sequencing
facility has closed. Examples of those rarely represented are: NMR imaging
facility, Micro-NMR imaging facility, Spectroscopy support facility,
Confocal Microscopy facility, Electron microscopy facility, Optical imaging
facility, Central Animal facility, Mouse genetics monitoring facility,
Tumor bank facility, Breast Cancer Tissue Registry facility, Human Genetic
screening facility, Fermentation Facility, BIAcore biosensor facility, Cell
culture facility, Flow cytometry and cell sorting facility, Histopathology
facility, Hybridoma facility, Irradiation facility, Research Computing
facility, Research Cytogenetics Facility, Statistical Consulting Facility,
Transgenic mouse facility, and a few others that may be less technological.
Other major technologies with heavy workloads but not yet formalized as
facilities include a Two hybrid selection service, a knockout mice
production service, GeneScan Facility, and an enzymatic mutation detection
service. These and other technologies are mainstay Biomolecular Resources
Technologies that ABRF may not be ready to represent in the near future. As
facility operation concerns go, ABRF and these facilities have a lot in
common. As technologies go, they are hardly represented in ABRF. My opinion
is that we should have a commitment to build the infrastructure to broaden
the range of technologies served by ABRF before we change our name. I would
like to hear your opinion as well.
Thanks!
Tony
At 06:08 AM 5/27/98 -0700, L. Ericsson wrote:
>Before sending in my ballot I would appreciate a discussion on this
>bulletin board on the pros and cons for the proposed changes in the ABRF
>Bylaws. I am certain that the ABRF Executive Board and chairmen of the
>research committees have had this discussion, but the topic was not
>discussed at the poorly attended annual meeting and no pro and con
>positions were sent out with the ballot.
>
>The proposed change in name to "Association for Biomolecular Research and
>Technology" from the present name of "Association of Biomolecular Resource
>Facilities" reflects the composition of the present membership where many
>are not part of a "core facility laboratory" but have a scientific
>interest in the analytical tools and methods which are important in core
>facilities. However, I have a concern that the name change will result in
>a loss of concern for problems unique to the operation of a core facility
>which are not scientific but managerial e.g. obtaining shared instrument
>grants, maintaining a cost facility, salary surveys reflecting personel
>dedicated to service to others thus frequently low on publications,
>special problems concerned with the interaction between core facility
>directors and institutional administrators, etc.. A great deal of time
>and money has been spent and a good reputation has been earned for the
>name ABRF and some loss of identity and confusion could be expected by
>changing to ABRT.
>
>I find the second bylaw change somewhat less controversial. If a larger
>organization requires a larger executive board, so be it - but I found 3
>years on the board long enough to of use to the board without taking too
>much time away from my regular job. Turnover on the board is important,
>but so is experience. The cost of operating the board; phone
>conferences, trips to special board meetings, etc. would be expected to
>increase by increasing the number on the board -but it may be well worth
>the cost.
>
>I encourage the ABRF membership not to vote until they have participated
>in or at least listened to a discussion on this bulletin board.
>
>-Lowell H. Ericsson, Dept. of Biochemistry, U. of Washington, Seattle, WA
>
>
>
>
************************************
Dr. Anthony T. Yeung, Ph.D.
Director, Fannie E. Rippel Biotechnology Facility
Member, Institute for Cancer Research
Fox Chase Cancer Center
7701 Burholme Ave. Philadelphia, PA 19111
Voice: 215-728-2488
FAX: 215-728-3647
email: AT_Yeung@FCCC.edu
http://www.fccc.edu/research/labs/yeung/
************************************