Abstract
It being a popular tradition to designate the end of each decade as a special occasion, and 2009 being the 60th year of the official establishment of The American College of Veterinary Pathologists (ACVP), it is fitting to review the more significant highlights in its development from its humble beginnings to its present highly acclaimed status in the discipline of veterinary pathology throughout the world. The early history of the organization from 1947 to its charter year, 1949, and from then to 1960, was reported in great detail by the founder of The ACVP, Dr. T.C. Jones, in an article published in 1990 (see Vet Pathol
The annual meeting and the examination for admission to the College initially were held at the University of Chicago, because of that city's central location and low cost of accommodation and as a corollary to the US Livestock Sanitary Association's Conference for Research Workers in Animal Diseases. This conference took place at the time of Thanksgiving. Although not the best time to be away from home, the time and place remained the same, in spite of strenuous objections by families of the participants, until 1969. In that year, President-elect Dr. Paul Newberne vowed to move the meeting and examination for 1970 out of Chicago. With the support of like-minded members he succeeded in having them held in December in New Orleans, which had been chosen by Dr. Bob Sauer. For about eight years thereafter, Bob was responsible for finding cities that had a hotel or convention center with facilities suitable for the conference and the examination. At some of the chosen venues the facilities for the examination were less than optimal. This was remedied when the site for the examination was moved to Iowa State University at Ames in 1978, where it has remained ever since.
For each annual meeting through 1996, a specific theme was chosen. Initially, the emphasis was on gross and microscopic pathology for the meeting and the examination. In those early years we had few pathologists who, shall we say, were regarded as experts on the pathology of specific organs or systems. To remedy this, a medical pathologist who was well known as an expert in the main topic of the meeting was invited to present a half-day seminar at the conclusion of the program. These guests proved to be excellent teachers who helped immeasurably to enhance our knowledge. Two such notables were Dr. Hans Popper and Dr. Zimmerman, experts respectively on the liver and eye.
In the days when there were relatively few members, the annual business meetings were extremely lively affairs with some heated and passionate discussions. Everyone took part and offered many and varied opinions on each subject on the agenda. One particularly memorable meeting was when we were discussing whether or not to create a separate section of the examination for clinical pathology. It seems somewhat ridiculous now that we argued back and forth as to which was correct: “veterinary clinical pathology” or “clinical veterinary pathology.” Those who were there will recall the stentorian voice of, now deceased member, Dr. Charlie Barron as he pontificated on his view, which was the one that prevailed.
As the number of members grew it became evident that the duties of the secretary were becoming too onerous for one person. Various ways to solve this matter were discussed by the Council, one of them being the hiring of a management company to take over the administrative duties, and especially those that involved the finances of the College and the organization of the annual meeting. In 1987 as President, I decided we should search for a company that might be interested; one of them was Allen Press, a Kansas City publisher that had taken over publication of the journal. It seemed to be a good choice but not being able to come to an agreement in the Council, further discussion was abandoned for that year. It continued in 1988 during the presidency of Dr. John Shadduck when negotiations began with the Talley Management Group, with whom a contract was signed. This Group became fully functional in 1990 under the presidency of Dr. Oscar Fletcher, who remarked in his presidential address, that I was the one responsible for bringing our group “kicking and screaming” to this point in its history. This was a long overdue change because the yearly increase in membership meant there was far too much work for the Secretary for whom it was a part-time job. Remember, The ACVP began with only 43 charter members of whom only two are living at this writing. The total membership now is about 1600.
Around this time too, there were concerns about the examination and how it was being conducted. For example, when I became President in 1987, I was appalled to find there was no written procedure to guide the examination committee or any of the several other committees. I then required that there must be a written standard operating procedure for every committee and office of the Council. Consideration of the above concerns during the ensuing years resulted in a consultant from the Education Department at Iowa State University being acquired. With his professional help and experience, the examination process was thoroughly investigated, including how the questions were posed and validated and how the answers were evaluated. It is probably accurate to say that the annual examination now is the most closely scrutinized among those used by veterinary specialties within the American Veterinary Medical Association.
In the 1990s, the matter of continuing competence of members was discussed and a future president, Dr. Linda Cork, was asked by 1991 President, Dr. Lance Perryman, to develop a plan for assessing such. She discussed this is an editorial in Veterinary Pathology titled “Who Cares If You Are Competent?” The days when all veterinary pathologists were engaged in more or less similar activities were fast disappearing, and the idea of an examination was shelved. It seemed that some type of continuing education in the branch of pathology in which one was involved could be useful. A lot of thought and work went into this project but somehow or other the idea died, shall we say, in utero, and has remained there. Was this a mistake? This is for the reader to answer. Perhaps this matter will be raised again.
The annual meetings have always been noted not only for the educational aspect but also for the renewal of long-time friendships with colleagues and former teachers. At the end of each meeting, we bid farewell until next year. Sadly, as one ages and eventually retires, the meetings gradually lose their appeal. You find that the advancements in knowledge and methods have left you behind and that each year you see fewer and fewer of your old friends. Eventually, you are fortunate if you see three or four people that you know.
As with all organizations these days, the advent of computerization has had a profound effect on the way we communicate and keep records. It is so much easier now for all members to keep up to date with everything that is happening by simply going online where they can read the journal, articles submitted for publication, the President's Newsletters, registration for meetings, and so on. Now we wonder how we ever managed without having all we need to know and more at our fingertips. Much of the advancement has occurred because of the professional management of our business activities and because those who have become members in the past 20 or so years are more computer-literate than those who came before.
Another major recent change has been the remarkable variety of opportunities available to members through the inevitable increase in knowledge within the wide field of biological science, and the fact that we are able to contribute so much more to research in numerous branches of the health sciences than those whose experiences are more limited. Our special and different experience with domestic, wild, and laboratory animals has also made us useful and important members as researchers in the basic biological sciences and the development of drugs for treatment of disease in man and animals. As evidence for this, look at the program for this year's annual conference and compare it to one of 20 or 30 years ago. We can now truly say that for veterinary pathologists, “the sky's the limit.”
Probably few members are aware of the impetus that increased the demand for board-certified veterinary pathologists. Initially, we were influenced by the certification procedure established in the various branches of medical practice, such as pathology, radiology, surgery, and so on. The testing for safety of drugs in development for the treatment of human disease was primitive in the 1960s by today's standards, but following disastrous side effects of some drugs, e.g., thalidomide, the Federal Government proposed establishing standard operating procedures that came to be known, in toto, as Good Laboratory Practice (GLP). The original draft of the legislation required that a veterinary pathologist reading tissues from animals in GLP toxicity studies must be board-certified. Even though the final draft of the legislation in 1978 omitted this requirement, there is no doubt that the original draft caused the demand for ACVP diplomates by the pharmaceutical companies. As the reader knows, the rest is history. Being a diplomate has a special significance for me because without that qualification I would not have been able to come from New Zealand, where I had lived since 1951, to the USA in January 1964, to take a position as a veterinary pathologist. At that time it was very difficult to obtain an entry visa with the intention of becoming a permanent resident. Only my late wife and I knew what a blessing that certification was for us. Although many other Australians and New Zealanders have followed me, I was the first among them to become an ACVP member when I passed the examination in 1961.
Finally, a few words about how the journal began. The late Dr. Leon Saunders developed the idea and proposed it to Council. After much discussion pro and con in Council meetings and at a general meeting, the idea was approved. Leon succeeded in obtaining a five-year grant from the National Institutes of Health to cover expenses. He could not find a suitable publisher in the US but was able to acquire one in Basel, Switzerland. Publication of Pathologia Veterinaria began in 1964. The name was changed to Veterinary Pathology in 1970. Having done all this preliminary work, Leon then took on the task of Editor until the grant expired, at which time Dr. Charlie Barron became Editor. Two years later the journal was in dire straits being a full year behind time. It had not been easy to convince members to publish their research papers in this journal because of its then lack of prestige. At the 1971 annual meeting, when I was a member of Council and Dr. Charlie Bridges was President, we devoted much time discussing the future of the journal. Although we had more or less concluded it was a lost cause, that day's Council meeting was adjourned without a consensus. In that meeting I had argued that we must try to save the journal and with this in mind, Dr. Bridges cornered me privately and after much cajoling and persuasion on his part, I succumbed and agreed to become the next editor but only on the condition I would be allowed to hire an experienced copy editor. That proved to be a wise move in that I was able to find a young woman who had worked for a well-known medical journal and truly “knew the ropes.” Without her I could not have succeeded in saving the journal from extinction. It remained difficult to get papers from researchers and it was annoying when members would ask why I published only papers on natural disease. There was no choice—they were the only papers I received. I gave the journal a subtitle, which stated that it was a journal of natural and experimental disease in animals. (Perhaps that helped.) The fact is the journal survived its worst moments and we overcame the one-year deficit. One thing I learned over the years was that no matter how carefully an editor tries to avoid mistakes, they will occur. Can you believe that once we published a paper about some condition in a horse and included a picture of a section of the gall bladder! Neither the reviewer nor I noticed this egregious error. I fully expected to be inundated with letters to the editor decrying our ignorance but no one said a word. That, too, is difficult to believe. Although I appealed to readers to send letters to the editor to make pertinent comments about articles, my appeals fell on deaf ears. Over the years I have found that all journals, no matter how prestigious they are, publish mistakes, sometimes quite serious ones. When I left the academic world in May of 1979 to take a position in a pharmaceutical company, I was compelled to relinquish my job as Editor after having served in that position since 1971. By that time we had published papers on a wide range of topics and also several supplements. Moreover, no longer did we need to worry about not having enough papers for the next issue.
It has been my pleasure to prepare this editorial for the journal. Admittedly, I have gone beyond 1988 in some of my remarks, and therefore ask for the readers' forbearance. Fortunately, I have had considerable help, for which I am extremely grateful, from the following colleagues who provided me with pertinent material. They are Drs. Helen Acland, Carl Alden, Jim Crissman, Linda Cork, Paul Newberne, and Don McGavin. Carl and Jim also gave me valuable advice about content and format.