v
EDITORIAL On meetings and conferences: Is bigger really better? I recently attended the annual meeting of the American Heart Association in Los Angeles, California. It was a spectacle if there ever was one, with over 20 000 attendees and a media center to which most politicians would only dream of having access. There had to have been hundreds of talks, even more posters, and even more (so it seemed) rooms in a vast Convention Center. The program book was at least an inch thick and jammed packed with the latest findings in both clinical and basic science. For those fortunate enough to be picked to speak at the meeting, you were greeted by a handler who escorted you to your own personal technician who helped you to load your presentation into the computer. The technician and the countless servers tied into the system insured that your Powerpoint presentation was loaded and sent to the appropriate room at the appropriate time on the appropriate day. Impressive is an understatement. The meeting attracts a “Who's Who” in the heart field and 10 times as many wannabe's. Is it a premier environment to learn and potentially meet the movers and shakers within the cardiovascular field? Absolutely. It can be a place to meet people/collaborators from all over the world in a way that does not happen frequently in other venues. But it can also be a bewildering race to find presentation rooms, plan your scheduling routine to see all of the talks and posters that you want to attend, and an impossible task to meet someone in the jungle of attendees. Are small conferences better? There are certainly fewer highquality talks (but that does depend upon the meeting – Gordon Conferences, for example, are smaller with the precise intent of creating an environment of quality science and opportunities for informal interactions). Small meetings are generally more intimate. You will meet people on a personal level that you will never ever meet at a big meeting. In a small meeting you are forced to eat, speak, and socialize with virtually everyone at the meeting because it is impossible to avoid them (if that is your normal practice). At a small meeting, you will have fewer state-of-the-art talks and more science at a lower level. You will, however, create more frequent friendships with new people than normally occur at large meetings. At a big meeting, I tend to meet and socialize with scientists that I already know well. For whatever reason, there are fewer social interactions that push people together to interact and develop friendships and relationships that could lead to unexpected collaborations and interactions. As an Editor of a journal, small meetings allow me the opportunity to approach scientists who have given lectures that I have found particularly exciting and invite them to write state-of-the-art articles on their
Can. J. Physiol. Pharmacol. 92: v (2014) dx.doi.org/10.1139/cjpp-2014-0081
area of expertise. I have the time to do this during informal social interactions at dinners following the seminar session, or during travel to an interesting tourist site near the conference. Big is not always better. The big conferences certainly have their advantages. But sometimes the race is won by the small and nimble. It may be noteworthy that journals are no different. Sometimes a relatively small journal like the Canadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology can hold a lot of gems that were polished to perfection in the most unlikely of places: smaller sized meetings. This month's issue was produced from just such a smaller informal but excellent meeting at The Cardiovascular Forum in Louisville Kentucky a few months ago: the International Academy of Cardiovascular Sciences North American Section Forum for Promoting Centres of Excellence and Young Investigators, held on August 2013. It may be noteworthy that journals are no different. Sometimes a relatively small journal like the Canadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology can hold a lot of gems that were polished to perfection in the most unlikely of places: smaller sized meetings. This month's issue was produced from just such a smaller, informal but excellent meeting at The Cardiovascular Forum in Louisville, Kentucky. The Forum was a 2013 North American Section meeting of the International Academy of Cardiovascular Sciences: a society that just recently has been formally affiliated with the Canadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology. The meeting attracted over 300 cardiovascular scientists from all over the world including Dr. James Willerson (President of IACS), Dr. Sumeet Chugh, Dr. David Lefer, Dr. Roberto Bolli, Dr. Katsuhiko Shimada, Dr. Hideo Kumamoto, and Dr. Naranjan S. Dhalla to name just a few. North American Section President Ben McNamara and Academy President-Elect Bohuslav Ostadal were also in attendance. However, the focus of the meeting was not on the established stars but rather the young investigators. Special awards were given during competitions for graduate students, Postdoctoral Fellows, Residents, and young professors who had their work highlighted in the meeting. Dr. Irving G. Joshua and Dr. Suresh C. Tyagi hosted the event and ensured that the meeting was a resounding success. We are pleased and proud to have papers from some of these luminary scientists and, just as importantly, from the rising stars in the field of cardiovascular science featured here in this special issue of the Canadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology. Grant N. Pierce
Published by NRC Research Press
Copyright of Canadian Journal of Physiology & Pharmacology is the property of Canadian Science Publishing and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
EDITORIAL On meetings and conferences: Is bigger really better? I recently attended the annual meeting of the American Heart Association in Los Angeles, California. It was a spectacle if there ever was one, with over 20 000 attendees and a media center to which most politicians would only dream of having access. There had to have been hundreds of talks, even more posters, and even more (so it seemed) rooms in a vast Convention Center. The program book was at least an inch thick and jammed packed with the latest findings in both clinical and basic science. For those fortunate enough to be picked to speak at the meeting, you were greeted by a handler who escorted you to your own personal technician who helped you to load your presentation into the computer. The technician and the countless servers tied into the system insured that your Powerpoint presentation was loaded and sent to the appropriate room at the appropriate time on the appropriate day. Impressive is an understatement. The meeting attracts a “Who's Who” in the heart field and 10 times as many wannabe's. Is it a premier environment to learn and potentially meet the movers and shakers within the cardiovascular field? Absolutely. It can be a place to meet people/collaborators from all over the world in a way that does not happen frequently in other venues. But it can also be a bewildering race to find presentation rooms, plan your scheduling routine to see all of the talks and posters that you want to attend, and an impossible task to meet someone in the jungle of attendees. Are small conferences better? There are certainly fewer highquality talks (but that does depend upon the meeting – Gordon Conferences, for example, are smaller with the precise intent of creating an environment of quality science and opportunities for informal interactions). Small meetings are generally more intimate. You will meet people on a personal level that you will never ever meet at a big meeting. In a small meeting you are forced to eat, speak, and socialize with virtually everyone at the meeting because it is impossible to avoid them (if that is your normal practice). At a small meeting, you will have fewer state-of-the-art talks and more science at a lower level. You will, however, create more frequent friendships with new people than normally occur at large meetings. At a big meeting, I tend to meet and socialize with scientists that I already know well. For whatever reason, there are fewer social interactions that push people together to interact and develop friendships and relationships that could lead to unexpected collaborations and interactions. As an Editor of a journal, small meetings allow me the opportunity to approach scientists who have given lectures that I have found particularly exciting and invite them to write state-of-the-art articles on their
Can. J. Physiol. Pharmacol. 92: v (2014) dx.doi.org/10.1139/cjpp-2014-0081
area of expertise. I have the time to do this during informal social interactions at dinners following the seminar session, or during travel to an interesting tourist site near the conference. Big is not always better. The big conferences certainly have their advantages. But sometimes the race is won by the small and nimble. It may be noteworthy that journals are no different. Sometimes a relatively small journal like the Canadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology can hold a lot of gems that were polished to perfection in the most unlikely of places: smaller sized meetings. This month's issue was produced from just such a smaller informal but excellent meeting at The Cardiovascular Forum in Louisville Kentucky a few months ago: the International Academy of Cardiovascular Sciences North American Section Forum for Promoting Centres of Excellence and Young Investigators, held on August 2013. It may be noteworthy that journals are no different. Sometimes a relatively small journal like the Canadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology can hold a lot of gems that were polished to perfection in the most unlikely of places: smaller sized meetings. This month's issue was produced from just such a smaller, informal but excellent meeting at The Cardiovascular Forum in Louisville, Kentucky. The Forum was a 2013 North American Section meeting of the International Academy of Cardiovascular Sciences: a society that just recently has been formally affiliated with the Canadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology. The meeting attracted over 300 cardiovascular scientists from all over the world including Dr. James Willerson (President of IACS), Dr. Sumeet Chugh, Dr. David Lefer, Dr. Roberto Bolli, Dr. Katsuhiko Shimada, Dr. Hideo Kumamoto, and Dr. Naranjan S. Dhalla to name just a few. North American Section President Ben McNamara and Academy President-Elect Bohuslav Ostadal were also in attendance. However, the focus of the meeting was not on the established stars but rather the young investigators. Special awards were given during competitions for graduate students, Postdoctoral Fellows, Residents, and young professors who had their work highlighted in the meeting. Dr. Irving G. Joshua and Dr. Suresh C. Tyagi hosted the event and ensured that the meeting was a resounding success. We are pleased and proud to have papers from some of these luminary scientists and, just as importantly, from the rising stars in the field of cardiovascular science featured here in this special issue of the Canadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology. Grant N. Pierce
Published by NRC Research Press
Copyright of Canadian Journal of Physiology & Pharmacology is the property of Canadian Science Publishing and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
