Number 2 2004
Report on the 25th International Congress of the IAP
REPORT on the XXV International Congress of the IAP
To paraphrase the Olympics, “It was the best International Congress of the IAP ever.”
Well, maybe hyperbole, but the recent hosting by the Australasian Division of the IAP, of the International Congress of the IAP was a great event. It took place in a Brisbane that had decided to turn on its best face. The weather was perfect. There were no clouds all week, until the last day when everyone was packing up to go home, when it seemed appropriate that things should finally turn grey and sad. Southbank was a splash of colour as spring presented itself ready for the meeting. There were concerts in the park, markets everywhere, and pathologists on every street carrying their identifying satchels.
The Brisbane Convention Centre was chosen to host the event for a number of reasons, one of which was the layout of the spaces between the lecture theatres. There was plenty of open space, with places to sit, to talk, and to meet with colleagues, previous, current and new. The whole venue functioned beautifully. The audio -visuals were recognised by everyone as the best and smoothest service at any meeting. The catering services worked well; food for lunches was actually quite good.
But the most spectacular thing about the whole meeting was the effort put in by all the members of the Australasian Division, and the rewards that flowed from all that effort. The number of people involved in the scientific programme was huge – from the convenors of the topics who had worked so hard for months, actually for years, to all the presenters who prepared things on time, who showed up on time, and who presented so well. The academic programme of the meeting was at such a level as to set new standards for an International Congress.
Attendance at the meeting was extraordinary. A high proportion (over 90%) of the Australian and New Zealand pathologists attended at least part of the meeting. Whilst the registration arrangements for numbers of days for members of the Division was the subject of comment, the possibility of three day registrations meant that there was a “changing of the guard” in the middle of the meeting. There were still lots of people attending the sessions at the end of the week. One very famous overseas speaker commented that it was unlike any International Congress he had previously spoken at; usually by the fourth and fifth days at previous meetings, speakers were talking to empty rooms. At the Brisbane meeting, the auditoriums were still full on the last day.
So, congratulations to all who made it happen, thank you to all who attended, and I hope everyone had as good a time as all the people I spoke to were having. The knowledge gleaned from the meeting will help in our practices for many years.
A Convenor’s view on the Congress
I have heard only very positive comments about the Breast component, and the Congress in general, which is nice but perhaps people would not tell me their negative comments! It was generally regarded as well organised with good projection. The only room which was not as good was the upstairs large room used for several well attended talks on Lymphoma and Breast in which the flat floor seating prohibited those at the back from seeing the projected slides too well (too small). Most people found it difficult to attend all the sessions they wanted to – so many concurrent sessions and some suggested that a “quarantined” morning or afternoon for recreation could have been included for the “guilt free break.”
A number of the Europeans complained about the cold lunches and I explained that was the way we usually ate at lunchtime, but clearly some missed their hot meals!
At my sessions the numbers were good – about 150 – 200 I think. (Although this was difficult to estimate in the large arena.) There were only about 50 for the proffered papers.
The slide seminar was well attended – about 130 I think. The format was generally well accepted and the quality good, but some people did say they preferred having a copy of real slides. I expect it is just a matter of time for this to become accepted and the CD technique was great for including cytology cases.
Most speakers made a big effort although a few were limited by language difficulties. My main headache was a late “pulling out” of the first speaker on the Monday due to illness – little one can do, but too late for a replacement (although I tried very hard.)
Overall we should be very proud everything went so well. I think the general cheerful and helpful demeanour of the Australians was well recognised and applauded.
30th Annual Scientific Meeting Australasian Division of the International Academy of Pathology Limited
2005 - June 3, 4, 5
PROGRAMME for the TRAINING DAY for PATHOLOGY TRAINEES
October 10 at the Brisbane Exhibition and Convention Centre
9.30 - 10.10
10.10 - 10.50
10.50 - 11.30
11.30 - 12.10
12.10 - 12.25
12.25 - 12.30
12.30 - 1.30 Lunch
1.30 - 1.35
1.35 - 2.15
2.15 - 2.4
2.45 - 3.20 Afternoon Tea
3.20 - 4.00
4.00 - 4.40
4.40 - 5.20
5.20 - 5.30
The lectures on Sunday before the Congress were attended by about
100 trainees from all States of Australia and from New Zealand. It is
almost unheard of to be able to assemble such a galaxy of International
speakers free of charge to the audience for a Sunday session. I hoped
that the registrars would be stimulated and inspired by these eminent
pathologists. Some of them assured me that they were, indeed, stimulated
and inspired. I would like to thank personally all the speakers and the
sponsors for making the session so memorable.
The Speakers were:
Jan van den Tweel: