Teratology Society

Members' Section

Teratology Society Newsletter

Volume 7, Number 3
Posted September 1997

Table of Contents

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

Although it will have been less than 3 months since our last annual meeting at The Breakers when you receive this newsletter, plans are already well underway for next year's meeting at the San Diego Princess. Mark your calendars, abstracts will be due in January. Also, we are planning a special session on neural tube defects and encourage submission of abstracts related to this topic. Tony Scialli is the Program Chair and, on the basis of his proposed meeting agenda, we can look forward to outstanding symposia and several innovative changes that you will hear about from Tony in the near future. I will say only that these changes are in response to suggestions submitted to the Strategic Planning Committee by a subcommittee on the annual meeting, chaired by Dan Sheehan. The work of this subcommittee is ongoing, but its objective is to redesign our annual meeting to best meet the needs of our membership. In this light, I also refer you to an enclosed document written by Tony Scialli entitled "Meeting Registration Fees and Hotel Rooms - Do They Cost Too Much?" This article presents some of the complexities associated with holding our annual meeting. In addition, I refer you to another article by Tony, entitled, "What Really Happened at Keystone?" for an update on this situation.

Redesigning the annual meeting to better meet the needs of our members is only one of several initiatives that have been undertaken recently. As those of you who attended this year's annual meeting know, beginning in January 1998, the business aspects of our society will be handled by the Association Development Group, Inc. (ADG). For an update on this transition and what it means, I refer you to the article by George Daston elsewhere in this newsletter.

In addition, on the basis of discussions by the Strategic Planning Committee, Council will propose to the membership that we change the name of our society from the Teratology Society to the Birth Defects Research Society. Because this proposed name change will require changes to the constitution, and therefore a vote of the membership, this matter has been referred to the Constitution and Bylaws Committee for implementation. While this proposed name change was unanimously recommended by the Strategic Planning Committee (see enclosed membership list for roster) and accepted by Council, I realize that this proposal is controversial. Therefore, I have asked Tony Scialli to write a brief statement outlining why we believe this name change is in the best interests of our society and what the process of changing our name entails. Tony's statement, "What's in a Name," can be found elsewhere in this newsletter. As indicated in Tony's statement, there will be ample opportunity for everyone to comment on the proposed name change.

On the journal front, we now have a new editor-in-chief, Lew Holmes. Congratulations to Lew, who will assume the editorship effective January 1, 1998. Because there have been a number of changes related to our relationship with the publisher, Wiley Liss, I have asked Lew to write a brief article detailing these changes together with a statement concerning his plans for the journal (see elsewhere in this newsletter). I also want to take this opportunity to thank Tom Sadler for his hard work and dedication to the journal over the past 5 years. Providing leadership for our journal is no small task, often done with little or no compensation, and on behalf of the Teratology Society, a collective thank you.

As you can see from what has been stated above, our society is in the process of changing. These changes are dictated not only by concerns voiced by our membership, but also by changes in the "environment" in which our society operates. I urge all of you to heighten your involvement with our society and to voice your opinions, concerns, suggestions, etc. with regard to the future of our society. To assist in this process, I have asked the Website Committee, chaired by David Wise, to upgrade our website so that it can become the principal means of communication within our society. This upgrade is already well underway as I write this, thanks to the efforts of David and his committee (Sid Hunter and Michael Blackburn) and I refer you to an article written by David on this topic elsewhere in this newsletter.

The Teratology Society in 1997 faces a far different future than it did in its founding year, 1960. To insure that our society fulfills its mission in the future, we must be ready to change if change is dictated. My association with the Teratology Society and many of its members over the past 18 years makes me confident that our society will prosper, and I eagerly look forward to working with all of you in the coming year to insure this prosperity. Finally, I refer you to the list of committee assignments for the coming year elsewhere in this newsletter. Thank you to all who have agreed to serve. For those not called upon to serve, but who are interested, please let me (pemst@u.washington.edu) or Tony Scialli (sciallia@gunet.georgetown.edu) know of your interests.

Philip E. Mirkes, Ph.D.
President

Planning the annual meeting is the major task of every president of the Teratology Society. The past year was no exception. It takes a great deal of work and collaboration of many dedicated people to ensure a seamless conference. I was very fortunate to have the collaboration of many of you during the past year.

The program committee, chaired by Phil Mirkes, did an outstanding job with a strong and diverse scientific program. The Education Committee, chaired by Pat Wier, developed a strong education course, building on the success of previous years. Once again, we were joined by our colleagues of the Neurobehavioral Teratology Society, a partnership that strengthens every year. We are very fortunate to have such strong collaboration with NTBS and would like to thank Diana Dow-Edwards for her assistance in organizing the March of Dimes Symposium. This year the Organization of Teratogen Information Services (OTIS) agreed to hold their annual meeting concurrently with the Teratology Society. I believe that OTIS is another natural partner of the Teratology Society and would hope that we can continue to meet together on a long term basis. I would like to thank the leadership and membership of OTIS for their participation in the 1997 meeting.

There are many logistics and administrative details that must be attended to in order to ensure a seamless meeting, from hotel contracts, coordination of room space, registration, and many little details, like signs for the meeting rooms, audiovisuals and many others that we just take for granted. I would like to thank Carol Lemire and Eve Kagan for their outstanding contribution to the success of the 1997 meeting. I would also like to thank the many students who helped with the audiovisual equipment during the meeting.

The 1997 meeting was financially successful. At the time of this newsletter the estimated profit of the meeting is about $66,000. The Education Course is projected to have a net earning of a little over $25,000.

I look forward to the 1998 meeting and hope to see you then.

José F. Cordero
Past President

For several years now, members of our Society have discussed whether the word "Teratology" should be replaced in the name of the organization. At the Strategic Planning meeting last spring, Society representatives unanimously indicated that a name change is necessary. A subcommittee, in consultation with a number of Society members, suggested "The Birth Defects Research Society." Here are some of the most commonly asked questions about changing the name of the Society.

1. What has to happen in order for the name change to occur?

An amendment to the Constitution and Bylaws is necessary. A proposed amendment will be sent to Society members at least 60 days before the Annual Meeting. Members not planning to attend the Annual Meeting should express their opinions in writing up to 15 days before the meeting. The proposed amendment will then be discussed at the Business Meeting. A vote will be taken by a mailed ballot sent to all members of the Society within 60 days of the business meeting.

2. Is the name change inevitable?

No. A different name can be proposed or members can decline to approve any name change, in which case, the name will remain unchanged.

3. Why do some members want the name changed?

Many members have commented on how little understanding of our Society there is among the public, including legislators. A simple name that communicates the gist of what we do will facilitate increased awareness of our purpose.

4. The March of Dimes doesn't have a problem with public awareness, in spite of a noncommunicative name, does it?

No, people generally understand the purpose of the March of Dimes, however, substantial resources would need to be devoted to advertising in order to make teratology a household name.

5. What about the members who do not think of their work as dealing with "birth defects?"

It is unlikely that one name will include the diverse disciplines of all our members. Given the disagreement about the subjects included in the designation "teratology," we are not really changing the argument, only whether the words we are discussing are Greek or English.

6. Will there be legal ramifications of a name change?

We will need to pay for a search of trademark names in order to avoid using a designation already in use by another society. Assuming the name is not protected, we would then need to apply for a trademark for ourselves. The estimated cost of this process is $600.

7. Won't a name change be a break with a 37-year-old tradition?

Yes, there will be a break with tradition. The Society was established for the exchange of scientific ideas among members and as such had no need of a more understandable name. Although the exchange of ideas among members remains an important function of the Society, outreach to other scientists and to the nonscientific public is a more recent priority. This outreach is also a break with tradition, and is the chief motive behind the name change.

8. How can I make my opinion known?

Write, phone, fax, or email any officer or the Secretariat. Your comments will be made available at the next Business meeting, when the proposed name change is discussed, unless you instruct us not to make your comments public. The name change will only be made if a majority of Society members want it--this change is not an attempt to force the wishes of a minority on everyone else. We very much want your input.

As those of you who attended the annual business meeting know, the Teratology Society will be contracting with Association Development Group (ADG) to provide management services, beginning on January 1, 1998. The purpose of this article is to give you some information about the change and about ADG.

ADG manages a number of professional societies, including the Society of Toxicology. Its headquarters are in Reston, VA, a suburb of Washington, DC. ADG has a complete staff of management specialists, professional meeting planners, database specialists, desktop publishing specialists, accountants, receptionists, clerical personnel, etc. It's facility has a number of conference rooms that will be available for meetings.

The Teratology Society will continue to have complete autonomy. Calls to ADG will be answered with the Teratology Society's name by staff directly assigned to our account. We will have an Executive Director who will work for our Society, come to our meetings and be responsible for the management of our Society.

The costs for ADG's services are a $10,000 management fee, plus hourly charges for the personnel time we use and pass-through costs for things like mailings and xeroxing. The management fee covers items like computer equipment, rent, furniture and the other basics needed to run an office. We estimate that the overall charge to the Society will be comparable to what we pay now for our management.

What we hope to gain by making this change is greater versatility. Having the opportunity to access people who specialize in meeting arrangements, lining up exhibitors, fundraising and financial planning, communication and outreach, should make our meetings more productive and attractive and will also be important in fulfilling the goals of our strategic plan.

It is important to let you know that we are not entering into this arrangement hastily. Council has been weighing its management options for over a year now. We solicited and considered several proposals, and a contingent visited two of the finalists. Through all of this, we kept ACT, the society with whom we share expenses for our current management, apprised of our actions. In the end, we were convinced that moving to ADG was the best choice for the Teratology Society.

I am sure that many of you have a lot of questions about the move. I will provide details like mailing address and phone numbers as we get closer to January 1. If you have other questions or concerns, please feel free to write or e-mail me (daston.gp@pg.com) or phone me (513-627-2886).

George Daston

The Teratology Society web site is under active construction, but can be accessed at http://teratology.org/. The web site committee is composed of Mike Blackburn, Sid Hunter, and David Wise; and the webmaster is Mr. Bill Landau. The primary goal of the web site is to provide current and useful information to the membership, so we are most involved in bringing the "Members" area on-line. We intend to post the most current information concerning the program of the next meeting in San Diego. Other member information will include minutes of meetings, committee goals and members, and the placement service. Finally, we have a page of links to related sites that we hope will be useful to the membership. Please take the time to look at the site at least once a week in the coming months. Feedback from the membership will be very important to the committee at this early stage; we will be very willing to add or subtract material based on your feedback. There will soon be an on-line comment form to use for this purpose, but feel free to call or email any of us.

We recognize that the public will also view the web site, perhaps coming to it with specific questions. For the public we are building pages that will define Teratology, what is our mission, and a little of our history. In addition, we will have links to information services, standard reference materials, the society's position papers, and links to other potentially useful sites.

The Teratology Society web site is owned by the all membership and hopefully we can all benefit from its content. The web site committee is here to serve you so please let us know what you think. Lastly we would welcome a volunteer to act as moderator to a journal club type area where current and relevant new publications are discussed.

The Josef Warkany Lecturer
The Teratology Society Meeting - June 1998

The Teratology Society is seeking nominations for presenters of the Josef Warkany Lecture. This lecture is the highlight of the annual meeting of the Teratology Society and is devoted to recognizing a scientist who has significantly contributed over his or her career to the field of teratology.

For nominations and details, please contact Lewis B. Holmes, M.D., Massachusetts General Hospital, Gen. & Ter. Unit - Warren 801, 32 Fruit Street, Boston, MA 02114-2696. Tel: (617) 726-1742; Fax: (617) 724-1911.

Organizing a meeting for four or five hundred scientists brings up some interesting problems for the Society. There have been suggestions for bringing down the costs of the annual meetings, and a subcommittee of the Strategic Planning Committee has been charged with developing a recommendation for the most appropriate length and location of our meetings. While the meetings are being redesigned, you may find it interesting to learn what determines the costs to those attending the meeting.

Size of Hotel

More than 400 people typically attend our scientific sessions. In order to find meeting space large enough to accommodate sessions with this attendance, we are restricted to properties of a given size. Facilities that are large enough to accommodate us are often in more expensive hotels and resorts, although the option of using university facilities is under consideration.

These properties handle many other meetings, and it is necessary to book space three years in advance of the meeting in order to obtain the location of our choice. We are, therefore, booked through the year 2000 meeting (1998 will be at the Princess in San Diego, 1999 at Keystone in Colorado, and 2000 at The Breakers in Palm Beach). If the result of the strategic planning process is a change in the type of site we use, for example, to a university, it will be 2001 before the change can be made.

Number of sleep rooms

The most important determinant of cost to the Society is the number of sleep rooms we guarantee. The hotel makes its living on its rooms and the attendant consumption of food in the hotel (see below). The more sleep rooms we can guarantee, the lower will be the individual cost of those rooms. For example, at the 1997 Breakers meeting, we were given about $30 right off the retail cost of the sleep rooms based on our guarantee of about 2400 room-nights for the meeting. For the member who attended the course and four days of the meeting, this savings could have been as high as $180 for the week.

Number of meal functions

The sleep room rate is also based on the number of receptions or banquets that the Society sponsors. Meal function costs go into the registration fee, and so the sponsoring of food functions by the Society is a way of shifting costs from sleep rooms to the registration fee. Of more importance, however, is the impact of meal functions on perks that the hotels offer the Society.

What are the perks?

In exchange for guaranteeing a sufficient number of sleep rooms and hosting a specific number of food functions, the Society gets a deal on sleep room rates, as discussed above, plus the hotel will throw in some freebies. Here are examples:

1. Meeting rooms: Because of the size of our meetings and food functions, we have not had to pay for our meeting rooms for recent meetings. Meeting rooms are the large ballrooms in which we have our nonconcurrent sessions and the small breakout rooms in which we have our concurrent sessions. Meeting room costs without our sponsoring of food functions would be at least $5000 per day. For our six-day meeting (including the course), this $30,000 meeting room cost would add $75 to each registration fee.
2. Free rooms: Many hotels will give a certain number of free room-nights based on the number of paid room-nights guaranteed by the Society. The Society uses these free rooms to house invited course faculty, symposium speakers, and keynote speakers.
3. Free coffee: Some hotels will provide free coffee for the continental breakfasts and the breaks. Catered hotel coffee is very expensive and so this perk can save us hundreds in not thousands of dollars per meeting.

Would a bare-bones meeting be less expensive?

It is possible to hold a meeting in a large hotel in a downtown area surrounded by hotels and restaurants of various price-ranges. The meeting need not include any food functions. The impact on the registration fees and meeting expense would not be straightforward, however. Registration fees would be decreased by the costs of the omitted meal functions but would be increased by costs for the meeting rooms and by the need to purchase rooms for speakers at retail rate. These changes might be of offsetting, resulting in about the same registration fee, but without food functions being included. The real savings to members could be in the sleep room accommodations, if members were able to locate very inexpensive rooms reasonably close to the meeting hotel.

How would members like such bare-bones meetings? Would there be enough members who wanted to stay in a Days Inn eights blocks from the meeting hotel to justify the change? We don't know yet, but through the Strategic Planning process, we will find out.

What can members do to help the Society?

Through the year 2000, we will be staying with our current pattern of meeting places. Given the importance of attendees in influencing rates, there are simple steps that members can take to help the Society manage meeting costs:

1. Plan to stay for the entire meeting. We know there is a sentiment in favor of a shorter meeting, but through the year 2000, we are committed by contract to four-day meetings. Members who leave after three days reduce the number of room-nights we use. We are designing our meetings to put important and interesting sessions on the last day--we want to make it worth your while to stay.
2. If you know you are coming to the meeting, reserve your room by the deadline given in the registration packet. Typically, hotels require that reservations be made at least one month before the start of the meeting in order for the Society to receive credit for the room-nights. At the 1997 Breakers meeting, we lost about 400 room-nights because attendees registered too late--and some of those attendees were unable to book at the meeting hotel.
3. If you know you will be unable to attend a scheduled meal function, let the meeting registration desk know 48 hours ahead of time. Hotels will allow a downward adjustment on the number of meals ordered if given 48 hours notice. We will not be able to give you a refund, but we will be able to give you a receipt for a charitable donation of the cost of the meal.
4. If you have an opinion about the meeting, either with regard to content, location, costs, meals, or any other issues, please do not keep your opinion a secret. We know there are members who have valuable input for us, and we need that input in order to make the meetings fit the needs of the membership. Send your comments by mail, fax, or email to any Society officer or the Society's office.

Chair, Patrick Wier, Secretary and Chair-elect, Craig Harris, Committee members: Melissa Tassinari, Martha Werler, JoLynda Jones, Thomas Knudsen and Narsingh Agnish (ad hoc members)

TOPIC SELECTION: On the basis of discussions within the Education Committee, the topic for the 1997 course selected was "Experimental Approaches for Studying Mechanisms of Abnormal Development".

ENROLLMENT STATISTICS: This year the course enrolled 173 attendees in a room with a capacity of 175! Registration fees were $250 for non-members, $200 for members of the Teratology Society and/or OTIS, and $25 for students and postdoctoral fellows. This fee schedule is unchanged from last year. The course feedback survey indicated that 95% of the respondents rated this year's course as good or excellent. Finally, the net revenue from this year's course was $25,494.22.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to serve as Editor-in-Chief of Teratology. This is an exciting time in research on abnormal and normal fetal development. I hope to have the journal reflect the new findings and hypotheses in all aspects of teratology. I will welcome the manuscripts of the members, as well as suggestions of topics and potential contributors. The publisher (Wiley Liss) has responded to many of Tom Sadler's suggestions and concerns and has expanded the number of color plates we can use at no cost to the author and the financial support for the editorial office. Also, individual subscriptions to the journal will now be available, which will make it possible to broaden the readership. A major advertising campaign for the journal is also planned

Lewis B. Holmes, M.D.

Alan G. Fantel, Chair

The Student Affairs Committee members consisted of Alan Fantel, Kit Keller, Dana Shuey, Trent Stephens, Bob Parker and Craig Harris. Because several regular committee members were unable to attend the annual meeting, the chair asked Tom Shepard and Tom Knudsen to assist in reviewing the oral presentations. The committee thanks them for their help. The chair also acknowledges the generous support of Bob Parker and Genzyme Transgenics/Argus Inc. which helped fund the Student Mixer and covered the costs of the Student Affairs Committee meeting at the annual Society meeting. The Committee offers sincere thanks to Harriet Wilson whose generosity enables the Society to present the Wilson Awards each year.

1. This year the Student Affairs Committee instituted new procedures for submission and review of papers by pre and postdoctoral fellows competing for scientific awards. Applicants were asked to submit abstracts plus 3 additional pages of hypothesis and data and up to 2 pages of figures, as needed. These materials were scored by each member of the Student Affairs Committee and the 8 papers with the highest totals were selected for competitive presentation at a special platform session. The remaining abstracts were sent to the Program Chair for placement in regular platform and poster sessions. All of the presentations selected in the first round were attended and reviewed by Student Affairs Committee members of the substitutes noted. From the 8 finalists, 2 individuals (one predoctoral and one postdoctoral fellow) were selected to receive the Wilson Award of $500, 2 (one predoctoral and one postdoctoral fellow) were selected to receive the Wilson Family Award of $500.00.
2. The new procedures for submission were published in two editions of the Society Newsletter. Nevertheless, there was some apparent misunderstanding since on their abstract forms, 20 individuals indicated their desire to be considered for a scientific award. Of the 20, 12 submitted all of the requested materials with one withdrawal after submission. Attempts to contact persons who submitted incomplete packages met with limited success. Because the chair, in consultation with Committee members and the Program Chair, Phil Mirkes, decided that it would be unfair to compare complete submissions with isolated abstracts, review was limited to complete packages. Several mentor faculty members, apparently unaware of the new procedures contacted the chair on behalf of their fellows. These problems might be avoided in the future by including detailed application instructions with the abstract forms.
3. The Committee selected 5 predoctoral and 3 postdoctoral fellows as finalists to present at the special platform session on Thursday. This session was very well attended (approximately 110), the quality of the presentations was outstanding and attendees expressed their appreciation of the quality of the science and the functioning of the session. The uniformly high quality of science and presentation prompted the council to recommend furnishing one year's free membership to each participant.
4. The Student Affairs Committee received 19 applications for travel awards and 17 were presented. Travel award recipients provided invaluable audiovisual service at the annual meeting. Several individuals contacted the chair regarding the requirement for presentation in order to qualify for a travel award. This regulation might be published more prominently.
5. The chair supplied Janet Markham with 2 names for the Annual Lilly Award to Women and Minorities of $500.00. These individuals were drawn from the list of travel award applicants and each received the Lilly Award in lieu of the Society Travel Award. All applicants for travel funding were awarded. The Student Affairs Committee and the Society wish to thank Lilly Pharmaceuticals for its continuing, generous support of young scientists.
6. The Student Mixer was poorly attended this year. This was most likely accounted for by a scheduling conflict with one of the other Society functions. Some consideration might be given to eliminating the mixer as a separate session if it conflicts with other popular events or perhaps to incorporate it into one of the other receptions.

In summary, despite confusion surrounding the awards application, this first experiment appears to have been highly successful. Membership attendance was high and the quality of science and its presentation were superb. Attendees uniformly praised the participants.

Award Recipients
Wilson Award (Postdoctoral) - Jeffrey M. Peters
Wilson Award (Predoctoral) - Jennifer L. Ingram
Wilson Family Award (Postdoctoral) - Keith W. Ward
Wilson Family Award (Predoctoral) - Terence R. Ozolins

Lilly Award Recipients
Shao-yu Chen
Natalie D. Mylniczenko

Travel Award Recipients
John Breen, Linh M. Bui, Karen Corrigan, Lynn A. Hanna, Kyu Hee Hong, Jennifer L. Ingram, Antonio F. Machado, Norbert Makori, Gloria E. Mao, Mark J. McMillan, Jr., Seyed A. Moallem, Eve Mylchreest, Terence R. Ozolins, Jeffrey M. Peters, Christopher J. Stodgell, Xin Wei, Judith A. Wubah

The questions of what happened at Keystone in 1996 was asked at the open forum during the annual meeting at the Breakers. A description of the Keystone events appeared in an edition of the newsletter a year ago, but it is clear that members of the Society continue to have questions. It is important to me that all members know what happened, what was done to address the problem, and what is being done to prevent problems in the future.

THE BACKGROUND

Our annual meeting has become large enough that we need to reserve space for it three years in advance. Hotels require a commitment on how many sleep rooms will be used and the size of the meal functions such as the Banquet. There is a financial penalty if the actual number of rooms rented is lower than the guarantee. When the Keystone meeting was planned, the most recent meeting attendance statistics were those from Puerto Rico, our best-attended meeting ever. Meeting attendance had been increasing prior to Puerto Rico as well, and so the high Puerto Rico attendance was not seen as an anomaly. In retrospect, however, it is clear that the attractiveness of the meeting site increased attendance more than we thought, because attendance was much lower the following year in Newport.

The agreement with Keystone called for adjustments in the room guarantee to be made at least one year before the start of the Keystone meeting. When we recognized the potential attendance problem based on the Newport meeting, we were less than a year away from the Keystone meeting. By contract, Keystone was not obligated to permit any reduction in the guarantee; however, they permitted a modest reduction all the same. The reduction was not, however, sufficient to bring the room guarantee down to the actual attendance figures and so we were faced with a penalty of about $60,000. The penalty without the reduction that Keystone permitted would have been about $85,000.

WHAT WERE OUR OPTIONS?

During the meeting at Keystone, the Society was offered a deal to reduce the penalty. If we would return for our 1999 meeting during a week determined by the resort, our obligation would be reduced to $10,000. The week determined by the Resort, the last days of June and the first days of July, are usually very slow at Keystone, so having our meeting during that week would provide business for the resort during a slack time.

We had our 1996 contract with Keystone reviewed by an attorney familiar with professional scientific organizations. It was her opinion that the contract was fair and enforceable. She believed that litigation would just run up legal expenses for the Society with the Society ultimately still responsible for the $60,000 penalty.

The other option would have been to simply pay the penalty and go on our way. The Society had enough money to pay the penalty; however, doing so would have reduced our reserves to a critically low level.

The Council made the decision to return to Keystone based on three factors:

1. Most (although not all) members polled by us liked the site and would have been willing to return even without the penalty.
2. If someone had offered to give us a $50,000 donation in exchange for modifying our meeting dates, we would have been willing to do so. Avoiding the Keystone penalty is a comparable situation, although there is no charity involved, to be sure.
3. The major reason put forward for not going back involved resentment towards a business entity that was viewed as taking advantage of a charitable organization. Although the resentment was understandable, the costs of acting based on this emotion appeared too high.

WHAT WILL KEEP IT FROM HAPPENING AGAIN?

The agreement for the 1999 meeting offers two important safeguards. The first is that our room commitment has been reduced to 1855 room-nights. The lowest room usage we have had in recent years has been above 2000 room-nights (the 1997 meeting at the Breakers logged 2026 room-nights, for example). The second safeguard is a clause permitting us to reduce our commitment by an additional 10% (to 1670 room-nights) anytime prior to the start of the meeting. We will, therefore, be able to look at meeting attendance in San Diego in 1998 before we decide on the number of rooms we want to guarantee.

As a Society, we also need to be aware of the factors that determine the deals that hotels make with us (see related article in this issue on registration fees and hotel rates). Meeting attendance has a direct effect on the relationship between a society and the meeting hotel and on the "perks" the hotel is prepared to offer. One of the jobs of the Strategic Planning Committee is to design the kind of meeting that members want to attend and can afford to attend. It will be by more accurately matching the needs of the members to the hotel facilities that we can make our guarantees more realistic.

IS THERE A DOWNSIDE TO RETURNING TO KEYSTONE?

Although most 1996 attendees liked Keystone, and although the meeting was financially profitable (even with the $10,000 penalty), some members have the impression that Keystone was not a successful meeting. There is worry that Keystone 1999 will be unsuccessful because Teratology Society members will avoid the site. Here are some of the anticipated problems:

1. The meeting dates are inconvenient.
	The course will be June 29-30, 1999, and the meeting July 1-4, 1999. July 5, a Monday, will be a holiday and can easily be a travel day. The problem with this timing will be for people with family traditions for the July 4 holiday. I am working with the resort to produce a family package that will make it attractive to spend the July 4 holiday at Keystone.
2. The altitude.
	There are clearly people who are susceptible to altitude, however, there are strategies by which these problems can be reduced or eliminated (including one of the teratologist's best friends, acetazolamide). In a future issue of the newsletter, I will be reviewing ways of addressing the altitude concerns.
3. Most of the rooms are one-bedroom condos.
	Objections to the condominiums center on their higher price compared to lodge rooms. The condominium unit is the predominant lodging on the property. These units are ideal for families and include a kitchen and fireplace. The difference between the condo and the Lodge room will be $15/night. For two people who share accommodations while attending the course and the meeting, this difference is $45 per person for the week. That difference buys a more spacious unit with the opportunity to save at least $5 to $10 per person per meal compared to eating in the restaurants.

QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS?

If you have questions or concerns about Keystone, it is important for me to know. Your questions need to be answered and your concerns addressed. It is easy to contact me--use any of the means of communication listed below.

Tony Scialli, Vice President
(202) 687-8259 (office)
(202) 687-4018 (fax)
(301) 629-3144 (beeper)
(301) 654-2421 (home)
Email: ascialli@juno.com

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.

MARTA Fall Meeting - October 23 - 24, 1997, Bristol-Myers Squibb, New Brunswick, New Jersey. Program to include workshops on Fetal Evaluations, Data Interpretation, and Problem Solving & Study Design. In addition, presentations on Rat Parvovirus, Primates in Reproductive Toxicology Studies, and Progress on Revision of FDA Pregnancy Categories, as well as an EPA-related Workshop on Developmental Toxicity Risk Assessment. For further information, contact Dr. Mary L. Giknis, Email: mlagiknis@msn.com, or Dr. Joseph J. Mitala at Tel: 908-704-4404; Fax: 908-704-4950; Email: jmitala@prius.jnj.com.

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.

Reproductive Toxicology Requirements for Medicinal Compounds and Assessing Risks of Drug Exposure During Pregnancy - January 12 & 13, 1998, NIH, Natcher Conference Center, Bethesda, MD. The course has been offered three times within a two year period to FDA, to train pharmacologists and medical officers in reproductive toxicology and human risk assessment for drug use in pregnancy. This is an intensive course, specifically designed to help the participant understand reproductive toxicology, particularly in those studies submitted to FDA. Space is limited. For more information, contact Sidney Stolzenberg, Ph.D., 15432 Narcissus Way, Rockville, MD 20853-1746, Tel: (301) 594-5345 (office); Email: stolzenbergs@cder.fda.gov.

International Symposium: Passive Smoking and Children: Clinical and Experimental Forums - August 24-26, 1998, University Medical Center of Essen, Essen, Germany. For further information, contact: Toxicology Laboratory, Institut fur Hygiene & Arbeitsmedizin, Univ.-Klinikum, Hufelandstr. 55, D-45147, Essen, Germany. Fax: +49 (201) 723-5956; Email: toxicol98@aol.com.