As one of those who finds this forum valuable, but does NOT run a core
facility, I would like to second the motions of Lowell Ericsson, Greg Grant
and others NOT to change the name of the ABRF. I think it is important to
have an organization that is concerned with the "nitty-gritty" of getting
the job done. A name like the "Association for Biomolecular Research and
Technology" seems just one step away from becoming the "Association for
Biomolecular Research," a name that sounds like a lot of other
organizations.
Perhaps I am thinking of the history of the MPSA. When I organized the
first conference in 1975, it was called "Solid-Phase Methods in Protein
Sequence Analysis." A few years later it became "Methods in Protein
Sequence Analysis." Some years after that it became "Methods in Protein
Structure Analysis." In this case, of course, the name had to change
because the technology changed, but you see what can happen. Over the
years the content of the meetings has changed, too, from almost exclusively
methodology to more general protein chemistry and structure.
ABRF is a good name. Why change it? Perhaps it would be best to ABORT
"ABRT". (Note that even the acronym has unfortunate connotations)
Richard Laursen
Richard A. Laursen
Department of Chemistry
Boston University
590 Commonwealth Ave.
Boston, MA 02215
Tel (617) 353-2491; FAX (617) 353-6466
email: <laursen@bu.edu>