Teratology Society Newsletter V.7 No.2

George P. Daston, Ph.D., Editor, The Procter & Gamble Co., Miami Valley Labs.,
P O Box 538707, Cincinnati, OH 45253
TEL (513) 627-2886 - FAX (513) 627-1908 - Email: daston.gp@pg.com
Carol C. Lemire, Executive Secretary, Eve G. Kagan, Assistant Exec. Secretary,
9650 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20814
TEL: (301) 571-1841 - FAX: (301) 571-1852 - Email: clemire@act.faseb.org or ekagan@act.faseb.org

In just two months we will converge in West Palm Beach for our 1997 meeting. As we prepare our posters, and presentations for the meeting, it is time to think about the future of our Teratology Society. More than ever, the upcoming annual meeting will be crucial in defining and shaping the future direction of our scientific society. As a professional group we are facing many challenges. How to address these challenges is the most important question that we must answer.

The Teratology Society is experiencing several downward trends, at a time when growth would be expected. Since 1994, our attendance at the annual meeting has been decreasing. The number of abstracts submitted to the meeting has decreased in the last 4 years. Manuscript submissions to the Teratology journal, on a yearly basis, have decreased or remained constant. Fewer students are submitting abstracts. Funding for research in Teratology is also decreasing. The job market in the industry is shrinking. The merger of some pharmaceutical companies has led to closing of more than one industry's reproductive toxicology units. On the other hand, birth defects continue to be the leading cause of infant mortality in the United States and most developed countries. Concerns about exposures in pregnancy have led to a growth in the number of teratology information systems, the so called "hotlines." Articles about pregnancy and how to avoid potential exposures appear regularly in the lay press. The health of children has become the main priority for the Federal government.

We are at a cross-roads. It is a time to come together and take a hard look at where we are and define what road to take ahead. That is why we began a strategic planning effort even as we were still holding the 1996 annual meeting. While in Keystone, I contacted Mr. Vince Coughlan who works for the March of Dimes, National Foundation. An expert in strategic planning, Mr. Coughlan had guided the Foundation through a very successful strategic planning. He was extremely helpful in laying out the process for successful strategic planning. He took the time to review our "Blueprint for the Prevention of Birth Defects in the Year 2000" and program of the 1996 annual meeting and then spent several hours with Phil Mirkes and me on July 18th, 1996 discussing the issues and the process. Phil Mirkes, George Daston and Bob Kavlock worked very hard in organizing the strategic planning session held in Cincinnati on March 6-8, 1997. At that session, over 20 members of the Teratology Society met to brainstorm and lay out issues and made recommendations. The group represented different sectors of the Teratology Society in terms of scientific field, age, gender and current professional activities. A summary of the meeting is included in this newsletter. I urge you to review it in preparation for the annual meeting where we are planning a broad discussion session with the membership. We have set aside time on June 24, 1997 to hold discussions on the issues identified at the strategic planning retreat. I look forward to your participation in this most important meeting.

I believe the success of the Teratology Society hinges on membership participation. We are a professional society organized by members and for the members. The role of the leadership is to execute and follow the directions of the membership. For this reason, the council has been looking for ways to expand the participation of the membership in the Society's activities and to understand what the priorities of the membership are. On the participation side, the Warkany lecture selection this year was based on recommendations of a committee led by Lew Holmes. Membership selection for the committees took into account the recommendations of the Societal Participation Committee. This year we are requesting the membership to submit agenda items for the business meeting. The last newsletter included the survey of the membership. The results of the survey will be used to focus the activities of the Society in a way that is most responsive to the membership.

We have many challenges ahead, but together we will move forward and have a stronger and successful Teratology Society for many years to come.

For a Registration Packet, please contact the Secretariat at:
Tel. (301) 571-1841; Fax (301) 571-1852;
Email clemire@act.faseb.org.

The Breakers
One South County Road
Palm Beach, FL 33480
(561) 655-6611
(561) 659-8403

A special lecture has been added to the OTIS Program for Saturday June 21, 1997 at 11:00 a.m. The Lecture is entitled "THERAPEUTIC APPLICATIONS OF THALIDOMIDE AND PREGNANCY PREVENTION". Jerome B. Zeldis, M.D., Ph.D., Vice President for Medical Affairs at Celgen Corporation will present.

The Annual Business Meeting of the Teratology Society will be held on June 24, 1997 at The Breakers Hotel, from 6:00 - 7:30 p.m. If you have items for the business meeting agenda, please send them to Dr. George P. Daston, The Procter & Gamble Co., Miami Valley Laboratories, P. O. Box 538707, Cincinnati, OH 45253, Tel. (513) 627-2886; Fax. (513) 627-1908; Email. daston.gp@pg.com.

All of you are aware from previous newsletters that in early March, members of the strategic planning committee would meet in Cincinnati for a 2 1/2 day retreat. The various issues to be discussed were also included in a previous newsletter. In this newsletter, the strategic planning committee is presenting a summary of that retreat. A wide range of issues were discussed at this retreat, which resulted in the formulation of a priority list of issues that need to be addressed. Clearly, this retreat is just the beginning of what I hope will be a continuing process of self-analysis followed by formulation of action plans.

Please take the time to read this document, as it raises a number of both large and small issues that, if addressed, should improve our society. We have reserved Tuesday afternoon (1:00 - 2:00 pm), June 24th, to have an in depth discussion with the general membership regarding development of an action plan to address the issues identified in the retreat. I hope you will take this opportunity to come with a positive attitude for improving our Society, and that you will become personally engaged in making the changes that are needed. At this open meeting, we will present preliminary action plans related to development of a mission statement, a financial improvement plan, and options for changing the name of the society. As you can see, these have the potential to fundamentally change the Society, and we need your advice and assistance in moving forward.

Directly or indirectly, I have received letters from individual members expressing a variety of concerns about the future of our society. We need to hear these concerns and to take the actions necessary to address them. This open forum will also be an opportunity to voice any concerns you may have. Our task is nothing less than making the Teratology Society the best that it can be. Whether or not we succeed in this endeavor depends in large part on the willingness of every member to participate and thereby contribute to the accomplishment of our goals. I am confident and optimistic that together we will do just that. I look forward to seeing you at the Breakers!

The Teratology Society Strategic Planning Retreat (SPR) was held in Cincinnati, Ohio on March 6-8, 1997. The SPR was organized by Council Members Phil Mirkes, George Daston and Robert Kavlock, with participation of Jane Adams, Robert Brent, Michael Cunningham, Richard Finnell, Craig Harris, John Harris, Lewis Holmes, Diana Juriloff, Carole Kimmel, Thomas Knudsen, Edward Lammer, Patricia Rodier, John Rogers, Thomas Sadler, Bernard Schwetz, Daniel Sheehan, Dana Shuey, Melissa Tassinari and Patrick Wier. These participants were selected to represent all segments of the Membership, from basic scientists to clinicians to government regulators. The meeting was facilitated by Tracy Tufillaro of TAT, Inc and followed a Strategic Planning Process which entailed describing the current environment of the society, the environment we wanted to have in the future, and defining and prioritizing for action the gaps between the current state and the desired state. The current environment was defined as including customers, competitors, areas of endeavor, capabilities and organizational effectiveness, while the future environment was viewed in terms of the end state, market drivers, key trends, critical success factors and core competencies. Customers were defined as individuals willing to pay (in a broad sense) for a service provided. Capabilities were defined in terms of skills, processes, tools, systems and relationships. Through breakout groups and plenary sessions, each of these areas was analyzed in detail, and then a process termed Gap Analysis was applied in which consensus was reached on the most critical topics in need of attention. These major gaps form the basis for establishing a strategic action plan to provide a target for planning, allocating resources, sustaining momentum and applying energy toward the target.

The Strategic Planning Retreat is the first step in a long process to improve the stature, impact and general health of our Society. The key issues and action items identified in the strategic planning process must be efficiently communicated membership so that a broader consensus is obtained. We must then move rapidly to develop measurable action plans so that the changes can be implemented in a timely fashion. It will take the efforts of many members to get us to where we want to go, although some steps are already underway in this regard.

The following text describes the events and discussions that took place at the SPR that led to the issues and actions identified above.

	Jose Cordero, President of the Society, addressed the SPR regarding the concerns of Council that led to the decision to proceed with the effort and read a letter of support from Tony Scialli, Vice-President of the Society, who was unable to attend. Dr. Cordero remained at the SPR for a short time and then departed to minimize the perception that Council would be the driving force of the discussions rather than the chosen participants. Phil Mirkes, chair of the organizing committee, then provided a background on the magnitude of the problem of birth defects in today's society (e.g., lifetime cost of children born each year with any of 17 major birth defects is $8 billion) prior to describing the status and trends of the Society. For example, presentations at the annual meeting ranged between 185 and 220 between 1990 and 1994, and since then have declined by more than 10% per year; abstracts from pre- and postdoctoral students reached a high of 35 in 1994 and have been 30% lower in the last two years, while overall membership in the society has declined from 870 to 830 since the peak in 1994. Results of the recently distributed membership survey were also provided, although it was noted that only about 60 responses have been obtained from the nearly 800 questionnaires that were sent out with the newsletter just before this meeting.

Breakout Session 1: Defining Providers - Outputs - Customer Relationships:

	 One clear consensus that emerged was that we are a very diverse society in terms of membership from the basic sciences, toxicological sciences, and clinical and genetic sciences and that this diversity is one of the true strengths of the Teratology Society. This unique multi-disciplinary group of experts, with an accompanying integrated approach to birth defects has a strong potential for real world impact in preventing human disease and is our principal competitive advantage in the marketplace. The biggest gaps between the current and desired state are (1) that we view our customers as largely internal (ourselves); (2) we need to reach out to broader groups to provide information and support such as government agencies; (3) reestablish relationships with competitors that we have in some ways helped spawn (OTIS, NBTS); and (4) display the value of our society to other societies.

	These conclusion were derived from three parallel breakout groups, with the following representing a compendium of the discussions. Current providers included members, Council, official committees (e.g., Public Affairs, Membership, Ethics, Student Affairs, Legislative Affairs, Education, Fund Raising), Wiley-Liss, the central business office, and sponsoring corporations and foundations. These were not projected to change appreciably in the future. Societal outputs were defined as the Annual Meeting, student education, CE Courses, the journal, newsletter and position papers, and the placement service. In the future, desired environment, we envisioned repeating CE Course at other venues, increasing the size, mass and impact of the journal; increasing the scientific exchange at the annual meeting; improving communication of society efforts to the general membership; increasing scientific outreach to other societies; increasing membership among students and other scientific disciplines; and increasing attendance and participation at the annual meeting. Current customers included the membership, regulatory agencies, health professionals, the related scientific community, related societies (NBTS, OTIS, ETS, JTS, ATS), journal readers, granting agencies, law firms and the general public. In the future, we believed we should work to expand our customer base by publishing more position papers (faster and more varied topics than currently done), increasing involvement with regulatory agencies and industry providing information relative to establishment of policies, providing information to families with birth defects and to public advocacy groups, and taking steps to increase research funding to the field.

	The principal focus of this group was to identify competitors (i.e., organizations with overlapping interests) of the Society, determine why they are competitors and whether there are opportunities to partner with them to produce better and more desirable outputs. Competitors of the Teratology Society consist of a long list of scientific societies and their journals, specialty meetings (e.g., Keystone and Gordon Conferences), specialty groups (regional teratology societies) and the March of Dimes. Substitutes for the Society were considered to be experts working as independent persons, government agencies, other areas of science (molecular biology, human genetics), other diseases that are perceived by the public to be of greater importance, the current focus of many organizations and agencies on postnatal children's health issues, the controversy surrounding endocrine disrupters, and the March of Dimes. Successful partnering requires that one or more of three advantages are proffered: (1) lowered cost; (2) faster development or a superior product if not the cheapest; and (3) greater innovation. Partnerships that might be developed include overlap with many of the competitors listed above, related societies such as OTIS, NBTS, ASGC, ASHG, IFTS (along with ETS, JTS and ATS), other societal journals that might offer discounts for subscriptions to our members (and vice versa), government agencies to assist in the development of public policy, advocacy groups for children with birth defects, foundations that focus on children's health issues, celebrities or politicians with interest in birth defects, international organizations and industrial concerns with involvement in birth defect prevention.

	One hindrance to developing partnerships that was expressed was the name of our Society, which fails to convey in lay terms the true focus of our efforts.

	This group was charged with identifying the key activities, or services, that the Society provides and the associated outputs. Five principal services and/or functions were identified: (1) scientific forum to facilitate the development and dissemination of new information; (2) liaisons to other groups doing similar work; (3) communication of research advances through the journal, position papers and annual meetings; (4) education to the members at CE course, to the public through position papers, and to health professionals through the annual meeting and journal; and (5) professional development of the membership through educational efforts, placement service, fostering collaborations, and influencing funding to the discipline. Current associated outputs included the annual meeting, the journal and student travel and scientific awards.

	In the future, we foresaw development of fellowship awards to promote career development, increased dissemination of information in the journal and forums at the annual meeting that could attract a wider range of knowledge and expertise, and the development of a traveling CE course that could be given at medical schools. Although some did not see much innovation in these concepts, these were ranked by the entire SPR by their perceived importance to the future of the society, to future customers, and for the ability to have a real impact. In general, the first item was ranked as most important in these regards, while the second tended to rank near the bottom and the middle three tended to rotate slightly in importance among the participants.

	This activity included defining the skills (technical management, etc.), processes (decision levels, reviews); tools (manuals, methods), systems (databases) and relationships (alliances, partnerships) inherent in the society, both in the present environment and in the desired future environment. Skills identified included the communication of research to scientific and public communities, organizational activities in the central office, the ability to conduct interdisciplinary scientific meetings, and individual skills of the membership (specialized methodologies, communication skills, expert testimony, regulatory affairs). It was felt that the Society needed to do a better job in the future in tapping the skills of the general membership. Our processes were largely targeted at the tangible items that we as a society produce (e.g., the journal and newsletter). The systems that we rely upon to engage our capabilities include the membership list, E-mail among our membership (which can be markedly increased), and the information maintained by members or allied members in OTIS, TERIS and ReproTox, Current relationships were identified with multiple societies (e.g., SOT, ETS, NBTS, MARTA and other regional groups, JTS, ATS, March of Dimes, Wiley-Liss and corporate sponsors).

	It was agreed that we need to have a change in flow and speed of societal capabilities such that when actions are decided, they can be expeditiously conducted and communicated as appropriate. The tools that enable us to communicate our activities are our position papers (for which it was felt that we needed to do more and quicker), our outreach actions such as the production of a slide set, the educational material generated in conjunction with the CE courses; and the development of a world wide web site. In the future, greater contacts could be established with associations devoted to specific defects such as cleft lip and palate and spina bifida, umbrella scientific organizations such as FASEB and other parent group efforts. Comparisons were made with certain parent-activist groups such as the Cranio-Facial Society, and it was pointed out that such groups have extensive administrative support structures that we tend to lack, although recent efforts to investigate other society management arrangements might remove this obstacle to improved performance (this issue is currently before Council, and will be discussed in upcoming newsletters and at this year's annual meeting). It was felt, nevertheless, that we have much to offer some of these groups in terms of improved access to scientific results.

	The problem was stated as the need to expand the membership base, especially in the direction of clinicians who work with human teratology, because the most important area of endeavor is the ability to foster interdisciplinary interactions and research. We also need to attract more younger members, and those from different areas of basic sciences. To accomplish this, we need to gather more information from members who are in the clinical field about what would help appeal to their peers to join the society. We might consider arranging a joint symposium at one of their meetings, developing educational programs, and diversifying the types of articles published in the journal. Steps that could be taken to diversify the program include internal ones such as awards, certification, election of officers, and publishing symposia; performing more educational communication such as public affair committee publications, and reducing the cost of attending the meeting. In the general discussion, it was pointed out that our meeting would likely be the secondary, or even tertiary, meeting for clinicians, and steps such as shortening the meeting length and reducing registration fees might make our meeting more attractive to them. Simplified membership application, improving the interdisciplinary structure of the annual meeting, and the need to attract students from other disciplines were other suggestions.

	The basic problems with the journal were perceived to be a decline in the number of submissions (although this appears to have stabilized recently); a slight decline in the prestige as evidenced by the citation impact factor; the turnaround time to publication; and the range of material considered appropriate for the journal (e.g., descriptive developmental toxicity safety assessments have generally not been deemed appropriate). The decline in the number of abstracts at the annual meeting appears to be a leading indicator for journal submissions, and in this regard, further slippage in the future might be anticipated. The Journal Editor presented a few suggestions: an expanded editorial board (in which all prominent reviewers would be listed (like TAP); increasing the number of prominent names who serve as reviewers; increasing the number of free color plates available to authors (currently 12 per year); the initiation of a rapid publication feature; offer individual subscriptions to non-members (the only non-member subscription is the library rate of ~$1200 per year) and the launching of an advertising campaign to communicate these points, with emphasis on targeting specific groups like the NBTS, perinatalogists, developmental biologists, etc. The editor noted that he is stepping down at the end of the current year, and that some of the issues could not be addressed before the new editor is chosen.

	The publisher has agreed to expand the editorial board as suggested above, to subtitle the journal with an alternate name, and to provide office support to the editor and conduct an advertising campaign. However, the publisher (Wiley-Liss) owns the journal, and we are in the second year of a ten year contract with them. It was estimated that the publisher generates $750,000 annually from the journal, of which approximately $35,000 comes back to society to support the editorial office and sponsorship of a symposium. It was also estimated that an additional $50,000 comes back to societies who own a journal with similar revenues. Because the publisher owns the journal, they are reluctant to make major changes such as a new name due to the possibility of losing library subscriptions; it was also noted that we are contractually prohibited from publishing a "competing journal." It was clear from the discussions that issues related to the journal need a major attention and effort on the part of the society to remedy the problems identified, and that the legal constraints of the contract with Wiley-Liss pose large problems for some of them.

	This session identified problems with the ability to communicate scientific information, primarily in regards to the annual meeting. It was suggested that one of the barriers to greater communication was simply the cost of the meeting, but more information was needed from the general membership. A second issue dealt with ineffective communication across disciplines, such as the lack of integrated symposia organized along a common theme. Suggestions for improvement included having a standing program committee organize the meeting, and having the symposia published as separate or composite papers in the journal. Symposia should be chosen to optimize the potential to demonstrate common threads, and perhaps identified early enough to have research directed on the topic by the membership. The integrative perspective should be advertised to other societies, and we should attempt to co-sponsor sessions at other societal meetings (e.g., developmental biology). We could also improve our ability to communicate accurate information to advocacy groups and legislators so that they, in turn, can inform the general public and enact public policy, respectively. For internal and external purposes, the potential of the Internet (and Intranets) should be tapped.

	A second set of issues related to membership concern with the top-down management style of the society. It was suggested that tasks and information need to be distributed from Council in such a way that there is greater authority to complete that task in a reasonable time frame. One particular problem was noted with the expectations and lifespan of ad hoc committees. A suggestion was made to devote the business meeting to old business and have a second meeting devoted to societal participation. Finally, it was suggested that too much was being expected from too few people, and that by wider distribution of tasks and delegation of decision making authority to lower levels, the societal management would have more time to devote to communication issues. The example of the length of time (2-3 years) it took to produce a relatively small slide set was highlighted as an example of lack of delegated authority. To improve committee members's ability to do the jobs expected of them, resources will need to be made available, and Council must develop more effective ways to communicate with the membership.

	A central question is whether the society intends to function as a multi-disciplinary society, and, if so, how it intends to conduct itself to promote that goal. The various elements of the society were portrayed on two parallel columns. On one side, was the primarily directly human oriented progression from basic research to clinical practice to epidemiology; on the other side was the more toxicologically oriented efforts of applied research, industrial and governmental regulatory (and to a lesser extent basic research and public health oriented) activities, leading to legislative activity and international coordination efforts. These are all tied together by the goal of prevention of birth defects, but it is clear that the Society is no longer as integrated in these matters as it was in the past. We must do a better job of prevention, and all segments need to be engaged in the effort. Stronger links between our different segments will improve the potential to prevent birth defects. This emphasis therefore suggests that the primary purpose of the society must be the prevention of birth defects, although the potential for intervention in identified birth defects in the future should not be overlooked.

	Steps to foster interdisciplinary communication (IDC) involved the journal (more balanced publication from the constituencies, publishing reviews of particular interest, a section devoted to highlights in the current literature from related fields, a section of regulatory activities, and cut rate subscriptions for those with subscriptions to related journals); developing a mission statement that acknowledges IDC as the strength of the society and which specifically deals with prevention as a goal). Likewise, the annual meeting needs to be arranged to promote IDC, perhaps with a symposium with a talk from each element of the society, or a basic research symposium with panel discussions of IDC implications. The meeting must become inclusive, and avoid overlap with other related functions. We must take full advantage of electronic communications, and develop a budget that allows engagement in the desired activities.

	To move to the desired future environment, we need to develop a mission statement for the society, we must develop a responsible budget plan, the journal must support and facilitate IDC and the Society's mission, and the annual meeting must be better targeted. We must recognize that to become involved in some of these activities, the society must become more businesslike in its finances, and work toward a more positive cash flow from its revenue sources.

	Three elements were identified in the discussions. The first dealt with the visibility and recognition of the society. We tend to be defined by what we are not (not basic science, not clinical medicine) and we are perceived evolutionarily as slow to change our scientific methods and approaches. We need to better define our mission and to diversify our efforts such that we become the "one-stop shopping place" for information on birth defect prevention. We should consider renaming the society to better reflect our mission, list our key customers and focus our activities toward them, synergize our interdisciplinary components, and solicit contributions to the journal and to the meeting. Secondly, we need to promote ourselves better. Our individual members publish a lot, they receive many invitations to speak, and they occupy important positions; yet it is not clear whether the society is being promoted effectively by these possibilities. There is a need to promote the society and its activities in more forums and to use the journal as a central repository to follow up research on breaking scientific fronts. Finally, we are not maximizing the impact of our society. We need to ask ourselves what is the biggest (or best) thing the society has done, define and utilize our capabilities, and establish media contacts to show the relevance of our findings to other fields and to make linkages where appropriate. It was noted that our membership publishes a considerable amount of information, but often the target journal for submission is not Teratology. There are variety of reasons for this, some of which were touched upon in Breakout 3b.

	This session dealt with the Society office, the elected officers and Council. It was felt that there was a lack of continuity in management, inexperience in management, unclear job descriptions, difficult supervisor-employee relationship because of the geographical distance between the President and the Executive office, poor communication between membership and Council, and micro-management by Council (perceived or real). A need exists to establish organizational memory, plan for continuity, and implement initiatives arising from this retreat. A multiple year action plan should be developed and tracked. Communications through the annual meeting, newsletter and world wide web should be improved. Recommended improvement steps included hiring a professional manager, implementing the strategic plan, tracking progress on each initiative, making the newsletter a vehicle for communicating activities of Council; using email for rapid communication with the membership, establishing an electronic bulletin board like MARTA, establishing an active internet site, and having an issue section at the annual meeting.

	There are perceived and real problems with the annual meeting - there are too many social functions that drive the venue and the agenda; the meeting is too long, the registration fees too high, there are generally no options for lodging and meals other than the main hotel, and the concurrent scientific sessions inhibit IDC. A meeting planner is needed to bring a business sense to the effort (most societies have meals constituting less than 25% of the annual registration fees, versus our ___???), the scientific content and presentation needs to be improved, we need to benchmark against similar organizations, and to obtain input from our members on future desires. In doing so, we need to recognize that we are contractually tied to venues through the year 2000, although steps can be taken now to improve the scientific content of the meeting. We also need to realize the financial relationship between the number of social events included in the registration fee and the lowered room rates provided to attendees.

	Who one chooses to partner with is driven by several assumptions. If we assume that the Society is a forum for scientific exchange about birth defects at the basic and clinical level, then our partnerships need to be with other scientific societies. For this we do not need to change very much, we just need to be more proactive in working with related societies (NBTS, ETS, JTS, ATS, OTIS). On the other hand, if we assume that the Society is an advocacy organization for research about the causes, reasons and management of birth defects, then our current partners are ineffective for the stated purpose and we need to build partnerships that reflect the mission and goals. We should consider increasing our partnership with both scientific units (recognizing that we are strong in toxicology and basic mechanisms, moderate in epidemiology, and weak in genetics, prevention and treatment). For advocacy purposes, we would need to link more effectively with the March of Dimes, the Cleft Lip/Cleft Palate/Craniofacial societies, the Spina Bifida society and the Downs' Syndrome organizations. Debate ensued about the relative emphasis on clinical impact versus basic sciences, and it was recognized that if we pursued the former path then we would need to demonstrate that we were impacting individual lives and develop a host of new partnerships to become an effective player. The latter would represent a fundamental paradigm shift for the society, and we would not be starting from a position a strength in the early transition period.

	Three general directions for a mission were presented: (1) continuing as a forum for scientific exchange, (2) building upon promoting research into the causes of birth defects; and (3) moving stronger into the actual prevention of birth defects. A segment of the group felt that the current focus on research is too narrow and that we must reach out to affected humans, make the research work for real people, become more active advocates about communicating the real world implications of the research. It is clear that research is not sufficient, as the essence of the annual meeting is not to do research, but to communicate the research. The implications of this concept are that the society is lacking in several large pieces necessary to carry out the mission, and that considerable resources (time and money) will be needed to rectify the problem, and that some current components of the annual meeting may have to be omitted. It was felt that our scientific expertise would be valued by other organizations such as the March of Dimes, and that we needed to promote the impact of findings from members of the society in terms of prevention. Everyone agreed that we need to move from being a society interested only in research to one that communicates to the groups who need the information we generate. One future benefit of this change to the general membership might be the increased availability of research funds as NIH moves to attacking specific diseases. The connection we can make between the basic scientists and the clinicians will offer them a competitive advantage in funding.

These preliminary thoughts on the mission statement require additional thought and input to have a completed mission statement.

	The final session of the retreat dealt with defining the most important areas needed to move the Society from its present environment to its desired future state. Each participant was able to nominate an idea that was listed on flip charts around the room, and the cycle continued until everyone had expressed all the ideas they developed during the last two days of discussions. Approximately 60 individual items were suggested, and these were pared down to roughly fifty as redundant concepts were merged together. Each participant was then allowed to identify their eight most important topics (with 8 points assigned to the most critical, and 1 point to the least critical). These points were totaled to derive a consensus view of the most important issues facing the society. In order from most to least important, these areas were (with the point totals):

	6. Increasing the diversity and content of, and contributors to, the journal (35)

	9. Changing the scientific program of the annual meeting to attract new constituency (24)

Several of the items address very similar elements, and merging them yields the following priorities:

	In the ensuing discussions, it was pointed out that changing the name of the Society needs careful justification and an action plan, and involves much more than just changing the name on the marquee. Divergent views were expressed as to whether to pursue the original or pooled rankings, with some feeling that the former represented more of a paradigm shift in the society, while the latter tended to be more of a band aid; likewise there was divergent opinion on whether to keep the society and change the name, or to perform more radical actions like developing an entire new structure and beginning anew with a constitution, journal and membership, or following a middle ground between these two extremes. Future discussions must identify the preferred path after factoring in real world constraints, opportunities, speed, and developing contingency plans. The initial blueprints must specify the time, materials, and resources needed to accomplish the changes. Most of the items that have risen to the top of the list of critical gaps have troubled Council for several years, and they are likely to be receptive to the recommendations of the SPR. The challenge is to get people committed and to get them moving forward. Plans to present the findings of the SPR to Council were discussed, and to identify those actions we can take soon, those that will take additional time, and the potential for the participants in the SPR to act as a leadership board for the society. Whatever steps are taken, rapid and effective communication with Council and with the membership are critical to the success of the strategic implementation plan. A straw vote indicated strong support to change the name of the society to better reflect its mission and purpose; although it was re-emphasized that changing the name was merely one step in the process of improving the future health and viability. The SPR has discussed only concepts and not the minutiae of the wording of the mission statement; these details must be worked out in the near future by smaller working groups. No matter which path is taken, gaining better control over the journal and its direction is of paramount importance; it is not acceptable to have the publisher donate $6K to the annual meeting, and then turn around and charge us $10K for mailing to international members. Improving the financial position of the society relative to both the journal and the annual meeting is an enabling tool for many of the other issues raised.

The International Federation of Teratology Societies (IFTS), in its capacity to foster cooperation among society members, wishes to announce the opening of the Atlas of Developmental Abnormalities on the World Wide Wed. The web address (URL) is: http://www.ifts-atlas.org

This image-based web site builds upon another IFTS project recently completed which presents terminology of developmental abnormalities in common laboratory mammals. A manuscript listing this terminology will soon be published in Teratology. A short explanation of some of the features of the IFTS Atlas follows.

The web site is designed for rapid access to the image(s). Users will have a choice of essentially two modes to search for terms of interest. The user may either enter keywords to search (includes use of wildcards) or may browse external, visceral, or skeletal regions in a general head to tail order, and click to view all listed abnormalities of a given structure. Upon selecting a term, the associated information for the term appears (i.e., definition, synonym/related term, non-preferred term, and notes, if applicable) and available thumbnail images of rats, rabbits, and/or mice are displayed. Clicking on a thumbnail will display the larger images. It is important to point out that the keyword mode of search will also look for synonyms and non-preferred terms. A separate section is provided for users to submit comments. Initially there will be a paucity of images available. The web site will depend on images submitted by the community of teratologists. Instructions for submitting images will be available on the web site. An Atlas Oversight Committee has been established to judge acceptability of images, answer questions, address comments, and to maintain textual information and links to related sites. The Oversight Committee is composed of the following individuals: Pierre Guittin (France), Kohei Shiota (Japan), Meg Parkinson (UK), Bill Webster (Australia), and David Wise (USA).

The availability of such a web site to the scientific community of teratologists and developmental/ reproductive toxicologists will allow and foster discussion, training, resolution of issues, and significantly advance the process of harmonization or terminology.

Once again, the Public Education Subcommittee of the Teratology Society Public Affairs Committee has made available the 23 slide set which can be used when members are invited to speak to local groups, social organizations, high schools or college undergraduates and others not familiar with the science. Members can include their own slides along with those from the base slide set and can modify the talk as necessary for the particular audience and their interests. For example, an audience composed of senior citizens may be vitally concerned about the health of their grandchildren; legislators are focused on certain fiscal facts; and high school students are interested in facts about AIDS, birth defects and mental retardation.

A questionnaire on the utility of the slides will be included with each slide set and should be completed and returned to Dr. Jane Adams who will collate and analyze the data for the Society.

There are a limited number of sets available and they will be distributed on a first-come, first-serve basis. Please remember to enclose check for mailing.

To order a set of slides, please complete the following mailing label and send, together with $15.00 for shipping and handling to:

Dr. Ibrahim Chahoud has informed us that his laboratory has developed an atlas of external and skeletal anomalies on CD-ROM. The atlas will be available imminently. It is intended to facilitate the international harmonization of terminology by providing an image for each anomaly. If you would like more information about the atlas, including where to obtain a copy, please contact Dr. Chahoud at chahoud@zedat.fu-berlin.de.

RESEARCH TO SUPPORT BIOLOGICALLY-BASED DOSE-RESPONSE MODELING IN DEVELOPMENTAL TOXICOLOGY

Applications are sought for a postdoctoral fellow to participate in ongoing studies aimed at understanding the fundamental mechanisms of abnormal development and developing biomarkers and models of mechanism-based dose-response relationships in developmental toxicology. Ongoing research involves the use of hyperthermia as a model stressor to explore biochemical (including stress protein induction) and pathological effects in relation to the degree and duration of exposure. Current studies focus on segmentation anomalies, particularly relating to central nervous system and axial skeletal defects. Recent advances in understanding segmentation at the molecular level (i.e., the role of metabolism of retinoids and the spatially and temporally controlled induction of homeobox and related genes) makes this a potentially fruitful area of study. This research is being extended to the study of specific chemical agents.

The ideal candidate is a recent graduate (0-3 years postdoctoral) and has a strong background in molecular developmental biology/toxicology with a demonstrated interest in the application of such techniques to problems in developmental toxicology. Experience with studies on normal and altered segmentation will be helpful. Technical expertise in procedures at the molecular level which will support mechanistic studies of altered development following exposure to various agents is required. In particular, studies on the genetic control of segmentation and the role of stress proteins are of interest. The candidate should also have an interest in applying information from molecular studies to the level of the whole embryo and to the dynamic processes that occur during development.

This research project is supported by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration through the FDA Postgraduate Research Program at CDRH. The program is administered by the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE) which processes applications and makes awards, and is open to U.S. citizens and permanent residents. The research will be done at the FDA Center for Devices and Radiological Health laboratory in Rockville, MD. For further information, please contact Dr. Carole Kimmel (Tel: 301-827-3403; Fax: 301-443-3019; Email: ckimmel@nctr.fda.gov), National Center for Toxicological Research (HFT-10), U.S. FDA, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, or Dr. Gary Kimmel (Tel: 202-260-5978; Fax: 202-260-8719; Email: kimmel.gary@epamail.epa.gov), National Center for Environmental Assessment (8623), U.S. EPA. 401 M Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20460.

Members have now been billed twice for their membership dues. This last billing included a late fee. Please pay your dues promptly. DUES ARE PAYABLE ON RECEIPT.

Your Journal will have been discontinued if payment has not been received. Your subscription will be restarted on receipt of your check. Please note that if billed again, another $10 late fee will be added.

DON'T FORGET TO NOTIFY THE OFFICE OF NEW ADDRESSES, TELEPHONE-FAX NUMBERS AND EMAIL. THANK YOU.

The Society needs more Corporate Sponsors - Please ask your Company to be a Sustaining Member ($750.00) or a member of the President's Circle ($1500.00). The office will be delighted to send a letter with further information to your Company.

The newsletter is trying to put as much useful information into your hands as possible. We have a number of ideas as to how to do this, such as including the annual reports of some committees. But, in order to be really effective, we need your help. We solicit your meeting announcements, announcements of available fellowships and traineeships, observations of unusual drift in developmental parameters of commonly used populations of lab animals, important changes in testing guidelines, news from affiliated societies, or anything else that you think is of interest to the membership of the Teratology Society.

TERATOLOGY SOCIETY 37TH ANNUAL MEETING - June 21 - 26, 1997, The Breakers, Palm Beach, Florida. For further information, contact: The Secretariat, 9650 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20814. T:301-571-1841; F:301-571-1852; Email: clemire@act.faseb.org or ekagan@act.faseb.org.

MECHANISMS OF TOXICITY - September 7 - 10, 1997, Baltimore, Maryland. The Johns Hopkins Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing and The Industrial In Vitro Toxicology Group (IIVTG) present a Symposium on Mechanisms of Toxicity. This program is designed to explore the biological processes (mechanisms) involved in cellular function and to identify methods to evaluate these mechanisms as well as chemical effects on them. Each speaker has been requested to address this purpose in his/her talk. Additionally, each speaker shall address whether knowing how or if their mechanisms is affected he/she will be able to predict the consequence of the response. For further information, contact: Office of Continuing Medical Education, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Turner 20, 720 Rutland Avenue, Baltimore, MD 21205-2195. Tel: 410-955-2959, Fax: 410-955-0807, Email: cmenet@som.adm.jhu.edu.

COCAINE - EFFECTS ON THE DEVELOPING BRAIN - September 16-19, 1997, The Westin Hotel, Washington, DC. A New York Academy of Sciences Conference jointly sponsored with Allegheny University of the Health Sciences. For further information, contact: Science and Technology Meetings Department, New York Academy of Sciences, 2 East 63rd Street, New York, NY 10021, Tel: 212-838-0230, ext. 324.

FORGING NEW DIRECTIONS INTO THE NEXT MILLENNIUM - BIENNIAL NATIONAL CONFERENCE - October 19 - 22, 1997, Radisson Plaza Lord Baltimore Hotel, Baltimore, Maryland. We will explore the public health, policy and social implications of the state of maternal and child health as we head toward the new millennium. For more information, contact 202-863-2441.

THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF TOXICOLOGY 18TH ANNUAL MEETING - November 9 - 12, 1997, McLean Hilton, McLean, VA. For more information, contact The Secretariat, 9650 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20814, Tel: 301-571-1840; Fax: 301-571-1852; Email: ekagan@act.faseb.org.