EADV 30 Years Of Milestones

European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology

30 Years of Milestones

European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology

30 Years of Milestones

Disclaimer This book contains the contributions and recollections of many people active within EADV over the past 30 years and the Academy takes no responsibility for any inadvertent inaccuracies.

© Copyright European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology 2019

Foreword

Martin M Black

Andreas Katsambas

The European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology - EADV - has reached the venerable age of 30 years! Over that time, it has grown to become the largest organisation in Europe focusing on the specialties of Dermatology and Venereology and one of the biggest in the world after the American Academy of Dermatology. EADV has become one of the most prominent educators in these fields of specialisation. As well as producing the highly respected Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (the JEADV ), EADV runs regular focused training courses on specific areas of the specialty in different centres of Europe to supplement the training of residents and update the skills of training dermatologists. It also hosts the largest Annual Congress of Dermatology and Venereology in Europe as well as a smaller Spring Symposium that brings specialist education to wider regions of Europe. Even though these achievements are impressive by any measure, perhaps the most significant of EADV’s achie- vements has been to bring specialists from throughout the diverse countries and cultures of Europe (and even further afield) together in an organisation that actively encouraged their exchange of ideas, experiences and projects to improve care for our patients. Before the advent of the European Academy, dermatologists in Europe tended to be categorised as being “academic” or “practitioners”. EADV has broken that barrier and now each European country, through its EADV members, elects a representative to the Board of Directors who may or may not be attached to an academic institution. At Board meetings and at the annual meeting of the members (the Annual General Meeting), all dermatologists and venereologists now have an equal voice which enables them to highlight the issues, many of them common to several countries, that impinge on their ability to deliver high-quality care to their patients. Committees, Working Groups and Task Forces within EADV with multinational membership have worked together over many years focusing on various aspects of our field of practice and, by using combined resources within EADV and interacting with EU politicians, have achieved significant improvements in healthcare. Close working relationships have forged firm friendships with like-minded professionals from other countries that underlie much of the positive force generated by our Academy. This publication highlights some of the many milestones of achievement by EADV over the past 30 years and many of the individuals who have contributed to its success. For the actual anniversary itself in 2017 the editors produced a short, colourful, illustrated publication which was circulated to all EADV members and a series of video recordings of founding members and earlier officers which is available on the EADV website. The editors are extremely grateful to the many individuals who have helped to produce this text on our Academy’s history, especially Frank Powell who co-ordinated the production of the brochure and video recordings, Anne Kobza Black for her many wonderful photographs, and Alex Stratigos for his help in the final phases of the book. We are, of course, extremely grateful to the EADV staff members Catherine Cathala and Ruel Jacob.

Martin M Black and Andreas Katsambas Editors

1

Vision

EADV is the leading community to further the knowledge of health professionals and advocates in the field of Dermatology and Venereology.

Mission

We are dedicated to advancing patient care, education and research by providing a unique platform to bring people together and share ideas.

2

Contents

CHAPTER 1: HISTORY • Origins of EADV __________________________________________________________5 • Background ______________________________________________________________5 • A Venereologist’s Perspective of the Early Days of EADV ______________ 15 CHAPTER 2: MEMBERSHIP • Evolution 1987–2017 _____________________________________________________19 CHATPER 3: LEADERSHIP • Presidents _______________________________________________________________21 • Secretary Generals ______________________________________________________35 • Treasurers ______________________________________________________________ 38 • Board of Directors _ ____________________________________________________ 42 • Honorary Members _ ___________________________________________________ 49 CHAPTER 4: SCIENTIFIC MEETINGS • Congresses ______________________________________________________________ 51 • Symposia _______________________________________________________________ 79 • Fostering/EADV School Courses _______________________________________ 94 CHAPTER 5: ACTIVITIES • Committees _ _________________________________________________________ 103 • Scholarships ___________________________________________________________ 106 • Task Forces ____________________________________________________________ 107 • International Collaboration and Networking _ _______________________ 109 • Awareness Campaigns and Advocacy __________________________________ 112 • Research Fellowships and PPRC Grants _______________________________ 115 • Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (JEADV) _______________________________________________ 121 • EADV News _____________________________________________________________123 CHAPTER 7: EADV HOUSE IN BRUSSELS • EADV’s First Home _____________________________________________________125 CHAPTER 8: ORGANISATION • Administration _________________________________________________________ 131 • Changing EADV’s Statutes from Luxembourg to Lugano _ _____________132 • Lugano Headquarters __________________________________________________ 133 • Current EADV Team Structure _ _______________________________________ 134 CHAPTER 9: MOVING FORWARDS • The Future of EADV ____________________________________________________136 CHAPTER 6: PUBLICATIONS

3

Origins of EADV 1 History

4

CHAPTER 1: HISTORY

Origins of EADV

On 3 October 1987, the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) was born as a non-profit association at a signing ceremony held at the Bâtiment Jean Monnet in Luxembourg. Thus, the Academy has now passed its 30 th anniversary. However, the progress towards its launch was not always plain sailing and the gestation period lasted some four years!

Martin M Black, EADV Past-President

The account by Hans Rothenborg below gives considerable insight into the difficulties involved in the development of the EADV project. Of all the many individuals involved Hans deserves considerable credit. His early appreciation of the continuing success of the American Academy of Dermatology (AAD) and its promotion of continuous medical education (CME) led him to the view that develop- ment of CME within Europe was a goal worth pursuing. Hans had developed personal friendships with Walter Larsen and other dermatologists in the Portland, Oregon area and, ultimately, they were able to tap into advice from the AAD itself. EADV has always had good professional relationships with the AAD, and this had stemmed from these early meetings in 1983 and 1984. Hans’ account itemises the difficulties encountered in the formation of EADV and is testimony to his persistence and fortitude in driving the project to fruition. Our Academy owes him a considerable debt of gratitude!

Background

This account mostly deals with some of the very early circumstances and events which gave rise to the EADV idea. These have never been put on paper and, since EADV has now turned 30 and I am over 90, the time has come to outline the history of its formation.

Hans W Rothenborg, founding member and EADV Past-President

As some of the younger EADV members may be slightly uncertain about the history behind the Common Market (as it was then known), its institutions and offspring, I will give a brief outline as this is the framework within which we operate. The European Economic Community (EEC) was created in 1957 by the Treaty of Rome. Free exchange of services and the free movement of labour (including physicians) within the community were amongst its primary political goals. Consequently, the medical organisations and associations of the original

5

six member states (France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, West Germany and Italy) felt that they needed a united representation in Brussels to negotiate with and advise the EEC Commission. Therefore, the Union Europeénne des Médecins Spécialistes/European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS) was founded on 20 July 1958 “by the national, professional organisations of the member countries of the EEC, grouping together specialists without regard to their field, their mode of prac- tice or their legal situation”. The executive officers and headquarters were placed in Brussels and a Board consisting of one or two representatives from the medical organisations and/or associations of each of the original six member countries convened when the need arose. EADV would become a direct spin-off from the activities of the Dermato-Venereological (D-V) Section of UEMS. Quite soon specialty sections of UEMS were set up. According to Article 13 of the UEMS Statutes, their aim was: “to study the problems raised by the Treaty of Rome concerning the definition, trai- ning, qualifications and the exercise of the profession in that particular specialty.” From 1962 this included a D-V Section, which for the first 18 years was chaired by Prof Bernard Duperrat (Paris) with Dr Hubert Delune (Brussels) as Secretary General. Amongst other tasks, our section had carried out a questionnaire among European dermatologists (Questionnaire D7614) which revealed that the differences in the training of D-V specialists within the EEC member countries were, as late as 1980, to say the least, very considerable! With free movement of labour that would surely be problematic. It is important to recognise that the organisations which send delegates to UEMS and our section mostly represent practising specialists rather than academic and/or scientific associations. Thus, the primary interest of UEMS is within the fields of harmonisation of laws governing the training of phy- sicians and the practice of medicine. Although the delegates were elected both by the national, aca- demic/scientific dermatology societies and/or the D-V organisations of private practitioners, the aim and work of our section never crossed into the territory covered by the existing scientific societies. My involvement Denmark, Ireland and the UK joined the EEC in 1973, but the Danes did not send a delegate (Prof J Sondergaard) to the D-V Section meetings until its 13 th meeting, held in Cologne, West Germany in November 1978. French was the official language of the organisation since its inception and its mostly French and Belgian old-timers felt that this made paperwork more precise and easier to deal with! Their view was not shared by the new members, but their request for the addition of English as an official language met with little understanding. I presume this had something to do with the fact that Prof Sondergaard declined to go to its meetings. 14 th D-V Section meeting in The Hague on 13 October 1979 In the meantime, as I had become Chairman of the Danish Dermatological Society, I offered to go ins- tead to the 14 th meeting as the only Danish delegate. I do not remember too much of the proceedings except that in order to “put Denmark on the map” I suggested that the following meeting could be held in Copenhagen. This was immediately accepted, partly I think because most of the other partici- pants had already done their bit. I think they were delighted to have a break. Setting up a satisfactory committee meeting, after all, does take some time! 15 th D-V Section meeting in Copenhagen on 27 September 1980 Ten delegates representing eight EEC countries attended. We were lucky in being allowed to have our meeting in the beautiful Board rooms of the Danish Medical Association. Their offices are located in one of the few remaining, rambling Copenhagen ‘Town Houses’, where in former times wealthy landowners took up residence during ‘the Season’. With an atmosphere of the television drama series “Upstairs, Downstairs” and all that! For instance, in the library there is a large fireplace, where the former owners could roast chestnuts and drink champagne in the evenings, after having been to the nearby Royal Theatre.

6

CHAPTER 1 : HISTORY

The dinner for the delegates was held in the equally beautiful Horticultural Gardens in Frederiksberg. The weather was superb and the atmosphere could not have been better. There was a pressing need to harmonise the specialist training of the day within the EEC and for information. In a letter dated 4 June 1980 (UEMS/6675) – ie, before the Copenhagen meeting - we had been informed by the main UEMS office in Brussels that the EEC Standing Advisory Committee on Medical Training (ACMT), established in the early 1960s, intended to hold fact-finding hearings in Brussels with two experts from each of the medical specialties, “without forgetting those disciplines which do not exist in all the nine (six original plus three new) countries”, to get up-to-date facts about specialist training in the EEC countries and input from the all the sections about their ideas for future improvements. The first hearing (Ophthalmology) had already taken place on 11 January 1981. In this connection we had a long discussion during our business meeting of the answers to a recent, parallel ACMT questionnaire about D-V specialist training, which had been sent to our section delegates. The Advisory Committees (there were several) of the EEC Commission would soon begin to work on this and related issues. Before the meeting I had asked Dr Thais Hattel to join me as a Danish delegate, because I felt I could not on my own assume responsibility for outlining the Danish position. At the time Dr Hattel was Chairman of the second of the two Danish D-V organisations (DDO), which mainly deals with practi- cal matters relating to private practice. It was moved and agreed, that from now on both French and English would be official languages of the D-V Section. It was also mentioned and discussed that in several EEC countries there was concern of an imminent overproduction of D-V specialists. Before the meeting in Copenhagen our veteran Chairman, Prof Duperrat, had let it be known that he wished to retire and, since the Secretary General, Dr Hubert Delune, had died, elections were held and Dr Duncan Catterall (UK) became the new Chairman. Having been nominated by the two British delegates, I was elected Secretary General and Dr Peter Bakker (NL) Treasurer. Dr Catterall and I were also mandated to represent our section at the ACMT hearings mentioned above. How and why did the idea of a European Academy arise? In preparation for the Brussels hearing, our section was asked by ACMT to answer a number of supple- mentary questions about the current training of future dermato-venereologists in the EEC countries; maybe, as it turned out, because they did not feel comfortable with our answers to former, similar ques- tionnaires. The answers to the new questionnaire were collected by the national delegates, tabulated by me and sent in advance to Brussels. In September 1981 it became our turn to go for hearings in Brussels. As Dr Catterall was away on a lecture tour in Australia, he was not able to attend so he asked me to represent our section. However, Dr Catterall wanted me to present and endorse his firm view, “...that all doctors wishing to specialise should have adequate experience in general medicine before turning to full-time training for a period of approximately four years in the specialty of their choice.” The results of the above-mentioned questionnaires and the section delegates supported his view. The hearing in Brussels This consisted of two meetings: a preparatory session on 21 September 1981, where I must admit I felt a bit overwhelmed, sitting there confronted by a panel consisting of several representatives from the head office of UEMS (headed by Dr P Poyaud), plus an impressive Board with 10 delegates from the national medical associations of each EEC member country. However, now that Dr Catterall was away, I was backed by two of our French Board members: Prof Philippe Lauret (Rouen) and Dr H Payenneville, the only remaining member from the Board of the original D-V Section.

7

The day after, on 22 September 1981, we had the real hearing in one of the massive, grey concrete buildings of the EEC Commission. The panel was the same as the day before, plus the ACMT, with delegates from most of health ministries of the EEC countries. We were three representatives against their 20, which felt very unbalanced. As mandated, I presented again our agreed position on the training of D-V specialists. The atmosphere in the meeting room was not unfriendly but neither was it enthusiastic. As mentioned in my report in the minutes of the 1982 D-V Section meeting in Como, although both the ACMT and UEMS had understanding and sympathy for our views about the duration and extent of training, they felt that they might be considered too drastic and difficult to implement in some of the EEC countries at that time. But our position would be duly noted and recorded by the official rapporteur, Dr Brearley (UK). Maybe not the most helpful attitude for the necessary harmonisation. According to UEMS rules, specialty section meetings were meant to be held at least once yearly, so we should have had a meeting in the autumn of 1981. However, our next host, Prof Marco Gandola, found it difficult to make the necessary arrangements until the spring of 1982. Since our Chairman indicated that he did not think there were any pressing issues, an exceptional 18-month interval was allowed. 16 th D-V section meeting in Como on 24 April 1982 At this time we had been joined by a delegate from Greece, Dr Nicholas Parisis. I vividly recall our business lunch, with everybody sitting in a pavement restaurant close to the lovely shores of Lake Como. And I particularly recall, my wife, Guðrún’s and my amazement later that day, when she found out that her dinner partner, the British venereology delegate, Dr Willie Harris, now owned and lived in the very same house on the outskirts of London, in which we had stayed for 12 months and where our daughter was born, during my DPH course in 1962/63. Dr Harris burst out: “There is more to this than meets the eye! I must tell my wife – she is Irish!” I could only reply: “What about mine – she is Icelandic!” Not a bad start for a long-lasting friendship. In Como, our business meeting discussions centred on the somewhat reserved reception of our posi- tion on specialist training by the ACMT. We put this to the vote again and our former decision was unanimously reconfirmed. During the discussions of this point it also became apparent that, since the last meeting (Copenhagen 1980), changes had been made in a number of the member countries, so that four years of specialist training was in fact now required by the majority of the EEC member countries. Things were looking up! The West German delegate, Prof Kurt Meinicke, reported an increasing “awareness” that some parts of our specialties were at risk of being eroded away by other, bordering disciplines, for example, the exa- mination and treatment of collagen and allergological diseases, phlebology and dermato-pathology. He further voiced the concern that there was an imminent overproduction of D-V specialists in his country. Furthermore, we were told that in the Netherlands it was difficult to find enough suitable training posts for future specialists, whereas the French delegate mentioned that there were increasing diffi- culties in establishing new D-V specialist practices in France. In his closing remarks, our Chairman, Dr Catterall, stated that in his view, ”the most important cur- rent issues were the need to harmonise the training of the medical specialists within the EEC and the threat to the future of D-V by the great excess of specialists presently in training.” The quest for back- ground information continued to find ways for future action. It was decided to ask our delegates and their local organisations to establish the national definitions of our specialty and describe in which fields dermato-venereologists were presently active, for example, sexually transmitted diseases inclu- ding hepatitis, allergology, mycology and dermato-pathology. The answers were to be discussed at the subsequent meeting in Athens in 1983. The aim was to create an up-to-date, comprehensive list of traditional work areas for our specialty. In short, up to this point the work of the D-V Section had revealed that:

8

CHAPTER 1 : HISTORY

• In the near future our colleagues from within the EEC could start moving around freely, although the duration and content of their training varied considerably • We could only expect a very limited influence on lawmakers, health departments, universities and academics on the education of medical students and specialists • There seemed to be a risk for overproduction of D-V specialists, and parts of our specialties risked being eroded away by bordering disciplines. This was certainly something to ponder. So, we did. The DDO Chairman, Dr Hattel, himself a private practitioner, had joined me as a Danish delegate to the D-V Section meeting in Copenhagen in 1980, but he only attended this one meeting. For personal rea- sons he was excused at the subsequent Como Meeting and he stepped down as Chairman from his own organisation and as its delegate in 1983. However, just before doing so, he sent me a letter on 27 June 1983 in which he asked me to put on the agenda for the next D-V Section meeting in Athens his ideas for improving “the future competence of medical specialists in private practice.” His suggestions were: a) That some of the problems, encountered at the time, for our specialties, might perhaps be addressed if we adopted a system by which European specialists, in order to maintain their specialist status, were obliged to accumulate a certain number of credit points for attending Continuing Medical Education (CME) every five years, similar to the system in the United States. b) That a European Centre for Medical Education might be established, which could be responsible for providing teaching materials to practitioners. Evaluation of their performance might then be done by correspondence, similar to what was done by the “Blue Journal” ( Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology - JAAD ). As asked, I enclosed copies of Dr Hattel’s letter with the agenda for the Athens meeting sent to our delegates. However, in my cover letter dated 11 August 1983, I also gave my own, somewhat different proposal, which I thought might improve the situation of our specialties: “That we use our D-V Section as a basis for the establishment of a European Academy of Dermatology- Venereology, whose object should be to oversee and control CME along the same lines as the AAD” … “and perhaps eventually also create its own inter-European courses”. This proposal was based on my experiences from attending Arthur Rook’s Biology of the Skin courses for dermatologists in Cambridge, as well as my participation in many AADmeetings and my personal involvement in launching the yearly, very successful CME courses for the Danish practising dermatologists-venereologists in 1969. 17 th D-V Section meeting in Athens on 24 September 1983 My forwarded proposal was dealt with under point 4) on the agenda: Training programmes for der- mato-venereologists (CME). The idea of founding a European Academy was very well received and discussed at some length and “There was a general agreement that CME for established dermato-venereologists as such was very desirable and well within the terms of reference for the D-V Section.” As I recall it, Prof Emiliano Panconesi, our Italian delegate jumped up and exclaimed enthusiastically that this was the best sug- gestion he had heard in all the years he had been on the D-V Section and that he would on the spot undertake to organise the first congress of the new Academy in his home town of Florence. As we later found out, he was admirably equipped to do this, as he and his American wife Diana had consi- derable experience of organising meetings for the Italian Academy of Dermatology. As it was felt that we needed to know the extent of existing CME within the EEC, all delegates promised to report as soon as possible on what the situation was in their own country, for example, who held courses, how often, for howmany days and how they were financed. A full list of questions to be answe- red was circulated and the answers, which were sent to me, were then tabulated and put on the agenda at the next D-V Section meeting. At the end of the Athens meeting, Dr Catterall stepped down as Chairman having served three years. A new Chairman, Prof Kurt Meinicke, was elected, and he undertook to get legal advice concerning the

9

legal aspects for creating a non-profit, inter-European professional association, including where it could be situated and registered. Not unnaturally, it turned out that Prof Meinicke thought it would be nice if we could have the headquarters of a future EADV in his hometown of Munich. In the end that maybe proved unfortunate, as we found out that this idea was not really agreeable to his local colleagues. What about the American Academy of Dermatology (AAD)? As I was going to the 42 nd AAD meeting in Chicago in December 1983, I thought that would be a good chance find out what the position of the AADmight be, if a new European “Sister Academy” appeared on the scene. That would be both pertinent and polite. I had already been a member of the AAD for many years and had, as mentioned, been to many of their meetings. So, I contacted one of my Portland, Oregon friends, Dr Walter Larsen, former AAD Secretary-Treasurer and at the time an AAD Board member, to ask if he could set up some sort of advisory “consultation” while I was in Chicago. A meeting was arranged between the AAD’s Executive Director, Bradford W Claxton, Dr Larsen and me. For support, I asked a Danish colleague in full-time private practice, Dr Niels Veien, to come along. He was also a longstanding AAD member, known and respected and fluent in American-English. His American wife, Karen, used to help correct my English in important letters and documents for UEMS. Our American counterparts promised us full co-operation if and when the European Academy came into being. We would also be able to draw upon the AAD’s expertise and experience, both with regards to the organisation and recognition of meetings. We were advised not to expand too quickly and to concentrate on CME in the beginning. If we would submit our future meeting programmes to the CME Review Committee for recognition in advance, AAD members would get their CME credits if they attended our meetings. We were also advised that by supplying quality CME, we might expect a slowly growing influence and respect, such as had indeed happened for the AAD! I asked for and it was promised, that all our D-V Section delegates should be sent programmes for the next AAD mee- ting, so they might get an impression of the extensive CME activity of the AAD. 18 th D-V Section meeting in Brussels on 8 September 1984 We had an almost full-day discussion of the survey of existing CME in the EEC, which we had com- missioned in Athens. It showed quite clearly that although in some countries there was already an established, regular and well-developed CME tradition, in others it was scant and underfinanced and in several EEC countries there was nothing. In conclusion there was a unanimous decision that this proved, that there was indeed a place for “our” European Academy. All the delegates then undertook to ask their own parent organisation: a) Whether they would accept and co-operate with our plans for the new Academy b) Whether they would be willing to give us financial support for the first few years for the necessary groundwork, either a fixed sum or a per capita amount. I then gave a report of the meeting I had had with the AAD officials. As the contact I had made with our American colleagues was found to be very useful and ought to be developed, I was asked to arrange a repeat performance with a fuller representation from our side. So, shortly after the Brussels meeting I wrote to Brad Claxton to ask if we might have one more consultation at the upcoming AAD meeting. The answer was affirmative. So, we had a second mee- ting with them in December 1984, in Washington DC, during the AAD’s 43 rd annual meeting. The AAD representatives were the Chairman of the International Committee, Dr John Epstein; the Editor of the “Blue Journal”, Dr J Graham Smith; the Secretary-Treasurer-elect, Stephen Webster; and the Executive Director, Brad Claxton. From our side were Prof Meinicke, Prof Panconesi, Dr Parisis, Dr Michel Delune and me. All promises made the previous year were reiterated. Furthermore, symbo- lic of the positive attitude of our US negotiating partners, they all offered to come at their own cost to our first meeting to give lectures!

10

CHAPTER 1 : HISTORY

19 th D-V Section meeting in Munich (Grünwald) on 7 September 1985 Delegates from all nine member countries were present. Dr Derek Freedman (Dublin) had been invited as an observer by the Chairman, Prof Meinicke, who reported his concern over the situation in West Germany with 1600 practising D-V practitioners, the pressure from overlapping specialists with the risk that we might lose Venereology and Allergology and a complaint to UEMS from plastic surgeons who felt that we performed too many operations! With this in mind, his opinion was that the sooner we formed the Academy the better! Prof Meinicke also reported the results of his groundwork for establishing the European Academy: a) There were at present no legal provisions for a true inter-European union or company b) Non-profit status was only possible if we got recognition from a local tax authority – which meant that EADV must have a ‘home’ c) That he had worked out a set of preliminary statutes for the new Academy (in German!) in colla- boration with his legal advisers. This last point gave rise to a prolonged discussion where the French delegates moved that EADV members must also be members of at least one of their own, local or national specialist organisations, to avoid competition with EADV. A two-year term of office for executive officers was suggested with staggering for the Chairman and Secretary General. These two motions were carried and would be included in the revised statutes. These were then distributed and provisionally accepted, to be confir- med at a subsequent meeting. Dr Josée Reiffers-Mettelock suggested that if Munich proved to be too complicated, we should perhaps consider registering EADV in Luxembourg with its large experience of international affairs. She also felt sure that Luxembourg could offer the necessary statutory framework. Next, Prof Meinicke gave his report of our meeting with AAD colleagues in Washington. After that the usual question about the language problems came up, since many colleagues had scant expe- rience with English. Could simultaneous translation not be considered? Answer: the cost would be prohibitive! Dr Reiffers-Mettelock gave her opinion that we should use English only, explaining that she had recently, without any problems whatsoever, arranged a conference in her hometown with English as the official and only language. The Secretary General reported that our enquiry has shown that all organisations sending delegates to our D-V Section were willing to co-operate with our plans in creating an Academy and would give us support during its initial phase of CHF5 per active member per year from 1 January 1986. The Secretary General strongly recommended that a decision on founding the EADV should be taken NOW – during our Grünwald meeting – but no decision was taken. Finally, various suggestions of a name for the new Academy were discussed. It should include both our two specialties, to avoid losing our claim for ‘sexually transmitted diseases’, which many years ago were dropped by the AAD. 20 th D-V Section meeting in Madrid on 10–12 October 1986 Shortly before the Madrid meeting I received an official letter from Dr Rüdiger Frits in which he informed us that, as of 1 June 1986, he had been elected Chairman of Berufsverband der Deutschen Dermatologen (BDD) and that he had been appointed delegate to our D-V Section, together with Prof H W Kreysel from Deutsche Dermatologische Gesellschaft (DDG). This meant that Kurt Meinicke did not any more represent the West German organisations sending delegates to our section. Consequently, and in accordance with UEMS’ rules of order, he would have to step down as chairman and retire from our committee. I was given the unpleasant task of informing him about this unhappy state of affairs, before the start of our meeting.

11

Prof Panconesi was nominated and elected new Chairman - the natural choice, as he was already well under way with the preliminary work on the 1 st EADV Congress. At Prof Meinicke’s insistence, Prof Panconesi immediately took over from the former Chairman, who then left. To avoid further linguistic discussions, it was reconfirmed that only English and French would be official languages of the D-V Section! It was thenmoved and unanimously carried to separate completely the affairs of the European Academy from those of the D-V Section and refer all matters and discussions pertaining to EADV to a separate session. Dr Reiffers-Mettelock undertook to organise the next D-V Section meeting in Luxembourg. In the weeks following the Madrid meeting, since Prof Meinicke had now retired from the D-V Section, we decided to take advantage of Dr Reiffers-Mettelock’s earlier suggestion and asked her if she could help pave the way for EADV to be registered in Luxembourg. Fortunately, it turned out, that the preli- minary statutes worked out in Münich were by and large quite satisfactory and the legal registration of EADV in Munich had never taken place. This facilitated moving the EADV registration to Luxembourg. In consultation with the new Chairman, Prof Panconesi, Dr Reiffers-Mettelock was subsequently also asked if she could help find “an experienced, well-known, energetic lawyer” who could assist inmaking the necessary modifications to the statutes and with the registration formalities in Luxembourg. There was some urgency, as Prof Panconesi needed everything to be above board in order to get the support necessary for our first congress. In the months leading up to the 1987 meeting in Luxembourg, I found out that in spite of Dr Reiffers- Mettelock’s rosy view of the ease with which we could prepare the registration of EADV in her home- town, the local authorities were a bit difficult to deal with. There were questions to be answered, papers to fill out and documents which needed the signature of our Chairman, Prof Panconesi. Since we had decided to separate completely the affairs of the D-V Section and the future EADV, both he and I now held double assignments: he as Chairman and I as Secretary General of both organisations. Dr Michel Delune took care of the finances as temporary EADV Treasurer. Not everything could be done by correspondence. Several sometimes express visits to Luxembourg had to be made, to confer with Maître René Diederich, the local lawyer recommended to us. One visit espe- cially stands out, where Dr Delune (son of Hugo Delune) picked me up at Brussels Airport and drove me, in the dead of night, at breakneck speed in his large Mercedes to Luxembourg. We had to meet with René Diederich early the next morning to sign some important papers. Delune only slowed the car temporarily, when his radar detector on the front panel blipped to tell him that there was a speed control ahead of us! We made it alive and were in time to avoid being caught in yet another time-dependent snag. I also had to undertake quite a few urgent but fascinating trips to the Panconesis in Florence to fina- lise papers necessary for registration in Luxembourg and make plans for the founding session. During one of these visits I was taken up to their lovely old farmhouse in Fiesole, where I was told that if one had to weed the flowerbeds it must be done with the utmost care, to avoid unearthing some old Etruscan artefact or the like. These were everywhere. If that happened, it was mandatory to call in the archaeologists and everything would grind to a halt for months! All in all, in the period between the Madrid meeting and founding ceremony in Luxembourg 12 months later, it was not always easy for me to find time to tend to my own practice and make a living. But it was exciting to watch things slowly fall into place. Founding of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Finally, on 3 October 1987, two meetings were held in the Bâtiment Jean Monnet, Luxembourg: Morning session: The 21 delegates from the UEMS D-V Section, representing 11 European nations, signed the revised sta- tutes and papers which established the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology. Mâitre Réne

12

CHAPTER 1 : HISTORY

Diederich was present to see that everything was correct and to certify our signatures. The two West German delegates, Dr Fritz, representing BDD, and Prof Kreysel from DDG were excused, since their organisations did not approve of the idea of the formation of the Academy. The first EADV Board was elected: President: Emiliano Panconesi Vice-President: Philippe Lauret Secretary General: Hans W Rothenborg Treasurer: Michel Delune Members: Nicholas Parisis, Willie Harris, Peter Bakker, José Camarasa, António Cabral de Ascensão, Josée Reiffers-Mettelock and Derek Freedman Afternoon session: 21 st (UEMS) D-V Section meeting. The number of countries sending delegates had now risen to 12 with Portugal as the latest arrival. All delegates were present, including the two West Germans. Prof Camarasa was elected recorder of the meeting to assist the Secretary General. The Chairman, Prof Panconesi, reported on his activities in the past year, and informed us that he had received full co-operation from his predecessor in taking over his chair. He also explained that he had come to the conclusion that it would perhaps be better for the new academy that we had now founded, if we modified our former decision: to sever completely the connection with UEMS. His view was duly noted, but no action was taken on this point. Prof Panconesi then anounced that, although he had served as Chairman of the D-V Section for only one year, he wanted to step down now that he had been elected EADV President to be able to concentrate on the organisation of its first Congress. In my cover letter sent out with the agenda for this D-V Section meeting, I had also mentioned that after seven years as its Secretary General, I also wanted to step down although I still had another year before my term expired. Furthermore, that same morning I had been elected Secretary General of the new EADV and did not feel I could do both. Continuity would be secured as the Treasurer, Dr Bakker remained in office. Thus, Dr Imrich Sarkany became new Chairman of the D-V Section and Prof Camarasa its Secretary General. Recollections from the first few years Working as EADV Secretary General was in many ways different than that for UEMS. Prof Panconesi and I more or less divided the work between us, so that he and his staff were mostly busy with setting up the first EADV Congress while I was primarily responsible for straightening out the remaining formalities concerning the structure of our organisation. Nothing important took place, of course, without Prof Panconesi’s agreement. Hence the many travels to Florence. Initially I mainly had to deal through lawyers with tax authorities and with legal issues trying to get the Statutes and our Academy properly registered. There were also a lot of faxes back and forth with Diana Panconesi at Centro Servizi Segreteria, which acted as the local congress organiser. For practical rea- sons she frequently acted as intermediary between her husband and me, especially when the telephone was used. Whenever there were questions we needed to ask each other about the upcoming congress, newmembers, possible supporters or EADV’s framework, the fax machine inmy office started humming away as an added entertainment for my patients. No internet at the time! Mrs Panconesi always said: “It is not possible today to organise a congress without a fax machine.” How times change! Eventually, a lot of my time before the first EADV Congress had to be devoted to its promotion. Although I used every opportunity to inform of our progress, I felt that some of my Danish colleagues were slightly sceptical with regards to the much talked-about Academy. Would it ever materialise?

13

But they were nonetheless supportive, and many of them still hold very low two or three figure membership numbers, showing that they joined early. Together with my wife, members of the Board and whoever else I could get to volunteer, we tried to get a stand in many of the most important congresses in Europe and the US. I got hold of a set of transportable, folding fixtures with which we could quickly arrange a nice, small exhibition, from which we handed out materials about EADV, its set-up, our plans and its future congresses. It was really quite fun, put us in contact with a multitude of colleagues and took us all over the place over the next half-dozen years. In the end we felt that if everything else failed, we could always try our luck as travelling salesmen! I particularly remember our time in West Berlin at the 1987 World Congress of Dermatology, Prof Constantin Orfanos was kind enough to let us have a stand from which my wife and I could promote EADV. One evening during our stay, Prof Harald Gollnick took my wife and I out to show us a charac- teristic West Berlin sight: a deserted railway bridge under which empty tracks led into East Berlin. His opinion seemed to be, that no trains would ever use these rails again. Little did we know that only two years later the wall would come down and Berlin would open up again. So why has EADV been so successful? Part of the explanation, I think, was perhaps pure luck! Our first EADV Congress happened to take place just two months before the Berlin wall came down, and Prof Panconesi had very wisely invited some well-known speakers, eg Steve Katz (USA) and quite a few prominent East European colleagues to give lectures or be participants. Foreign exchange was scarce for them, so I suspect he used some of the proceeds of the event to make their participation possible. For many it was their first and a most welcome visit to ‘the West’ and since the congress was professionally very sound and socially very pleasant (after all – this was Florence!), I think that EADV became their future “first choice”. As indeed for many others. Another reason undoubtedly is that, until we got under way, there were scores of international congresses with scientific content for colleagues active and interested in D-V research, but not nearly enough in the way of CME and certainly no pan-European meetings dedicated to giving CME courses for D-V practitioners. This meant that there was a pent-up need for large-scale meetings in Europe where practitioners could go to be brought up to date, without having to travel across the Atlantic. Furthermore, it was apparently attractive to our peers to come and give talks, when the audience was so large. This was demonstrated clearly, when Prof Kristian Thestrup-Pedersen, who was responsible for putting together the scientific programme for the 3 rd EADV Congress in Copenhagen in 1993, sent out 500 invitations to prominent colleagues to come, at their own expense, to give one or more lec- tures to us. All we could offer in return was free registration and a ticket to the President’s dinner. 495 of those invited said yes and only five declined due to prior engagements! That convinced us that EADV might not be such a bad idea after all! Finally, I had an unexpected experience on the last evening of the very successful 1 st EADV Congress in Florence: a dinner had been given for speakers, chairmen, other contributors and the EADV Board members, who were, by the way, all founding members. It was a lovely Italian night, mild with a silky, dark blue sky. Very romantic! I was standing just outside the restaurant, not far from the Ponte Vecchio, on the banks of the River Arno. Prof Otto Braun Falco (Munich), who was the driving force behind the annual “Fortbildungswoche” (CME) for D-V practitioners in Munich, came up to me. “We should have thought of this a long time ago”, he said to me, a little reluctantly I would imagine. I took that to mean, that he and his scientific colleagues should have thought of putting on the kind of pan-European CME courses for D-V practitioners, which we had now done. I could only answer: “Yes, you should - but you didn’t. We did!” And indeed, that was it – EADV was put together by a group of people, mostly representing private practitioners, with the aim of giving their colleagues and themselves an added chance to meet, exchange information, become friends and keep abreast of developments in their chosen field.

Rothenborg, H.W. The EADV story: How it came to be. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology & Venereology, 1992 vol.1: ix–xiv

14

CHAPTER 1 : HISTORY

A Venereologist’s Perspective of the Early Days of EADV

Michael Waugh, retired Consultant Venereologist from Leeds General Infirmary, UK and an EADV founder member, writes about his career and early involvement with the Academy.

Michael Waugh

I was lucky as a young doctor to be trained in dermatology by the internationally known and inspira- tional dermatologist Darrell Wilkinson and then to spend a year in 1968 training at St John’s Hospital for Diseases of the Skin in London where the Institute of Dermatology was centred. But I had also been attracted to venereology and had accepted a junior post at the West London Hospital, a part of the Charing Cross Hospital Group. I rapidly went up the ladder there but did a weekly session in dermatology at the new Charing Cross Hospital. In 1974 I was appointed to the specialist venereology post at Leeds General Infirmary where the incu- mbent had died suddenly. It was a busy and potentially hazardous post at this teaching hospital in Yorkshire. Over 40 years later I am still content and happy in my adopted home. Early years in Leeds were spent building up an internationally known department. In 1978, I hosted both the British specialist society, the Medical Society for the Study of Venereal Diseases (MSSVD), and then the International Union against Venereal Diseases and Treponematoses (IUVDT), since 1997 renamed as IUSTI (International Union against Sexually Transmitted Infections). When you are in your 30s you think you can do everything! By the mid-1980s we had HIV/AIDS to contend with in its myriad presentations but as yet no effec- tive treatment. I was elected Honorary Secretary of MSSVD and as I was shown to run that well, then Secretary General of IUVDT in 1984. So, I already had many international connections. In 1989 I became MSSVD President and in 1995 IUVDT/IUSTI President. As the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS), which met in Brussels in the mid-1980s, nee- ded two representatives in venereology from the United Kingdom, my knowledge of French was considered to be useful. So, I found myself as deputy to the primary representative Willie Harris. I had many other obligations at the time including being seconded three days a week in 1989 to the AIDS Unit, Department of Health, London. It is not unfair to state that AIDS made British venereology. We had more resources allocated to us, better accommodation, a higher profile and plenty of really good young trainees. About 25% of male venereology was dermatological in presentation. I remained throughout my professional career in a tiny minority within the UK who wished for a unifying speciality of derma- to-venereology. But in all my European visits on ward rounds in places such as Uppsala, Vienna, and Budapest it was easy for me because of my early dermatology training.

15

In Brussels on UEMS duties, I was made to feel welcome by Dr Ray Bettley and Dr Imrich Sarkany and, in particular, by Dr Peter Bakker from The Hague who had been one of our stalwart Dutch sup- porters and a regular attendee at MSSVD meetings in London. I was made an Honorary Fellow of the Dutch Dermatology and Venereology Association (Nederlandse Vereniging voor Dermatologie en Venereologie), as well as given honorary memberships or fellowships of corresponding dermatology societies in Germany, Austria, Slovakia, Hungary and Romania, as well as EADV. In Brussels there was certainly a feeling from the mainland of Europe that more should be done for the postgraduate education of practising dermatologists and not just academics. In the UK we pro- bably did not know how lucky we were at the time with thriving postgraduate societies in dermato- logy and venereology. I can well remember in Madrid in October 1986 Emiliano Panconesi (Florence) speaking passionately on the need for better postgraduate education. Thus, very rapidly the need for an Academy was suggested and initiated. Hans Rothenborg (Copenhagen) was certainly a most effi- cient and diplomatic Secretary General of the new Academy from its earliest days. In early October 1987 all the early founders of EADV met up in Luxembourg and signed assent to all this, on a proud autumnal Saturday. Our first conference was held in the autumn of 1989 in Florence, a fitting city to the aspirations of Emiliano Paconesi, our first President (1987–89), ably helped by his American wife Diana. I had my aspirations in venereology where I reached the heights and never had any wish to reach high office in EADV, though I had long involvement with the Ethics Committee being its Secretary from 2006 and its Chairman for 8 years. I enjoyed my time immensely watching people and their vanities and on the Ethics Committee often hearing matters best left to the confessional, something that a venereologist hears all the time! I hope through my teaching at regular EADV conferences many an aspiring dermato-venereologist will have learned something of my feelings of humanity for those with a sexually transmitted infec- tion without which one could not work effectively. Each human for all their quirks is unique! Marking the beginnings of the Academy we now know today Martin Black concludes: So, the first EADV Congress in Florence was a great success, and more than 3,000 delegates attended it. Through his generosity and energy Prof Panconesi was able to harness excellent speakers and promote friendly participation by all. The gamble to launch EADV had paid off. EADV was on its way! Following the signing of the formal EADV Statutes on 3 October 1987, EADV consisted of only 21 founding members! Subsequently in 1989 an amendment was made, opening ordinary membership to colleagues from all over Europe who were specialists in their own national specialist societies. Many, including myself, joined EADV immediately after attending the 1 st Congress in Florence. After that first Congress it was decided to launch further congresses every other year. The second one took place in Athens under the presidency of John Stratigos in October 1991. The second EADV Congress exceeded all expectations, with more than 4,000 participants. The Annual General Meeting and Board decided to admit four new member nations (Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland) and introduced a set of rules which allowed more European nations to obtain Board representation. Approval was given for the creation of an Associate Membership (non-voting) category for industrial firms whose activities were related to our specialities. An Executive Committee of 5-7 members was established to take care of important or urgent business between the Annual Board meetings. A standing Scientific Programming Committee with one member from each country represented on the

16