Dear ISC members
Having served the ISC for many years, as an officer, as Vice-president and now as President, I have seen the field change over this time.
Founded in 1937, the ISC was the only one for a long time. Its meetings and courses, and particularly its official journal, Chronobiology International, embraced and encouraged studies of all aspects of this new discipline – Chronobiology.
Over the following years the field expanded and many new societies were founded. Now, 70 years later, the ISC is facing a completely different world compared to that which existed at the time of its foundation. In AD 2007, Chronobiology has been fully accepted as a discipline and basic mechanisms are known down to the molecular level. Medical and social applications have been accepted by the community. Yet, while much attention was given to some aspects, other branches of the field are still struggling for life. A major impact on the activity of the ISC came from changes in research interests, motivated partly by the scientific intellectual yearn to explore and understand, and partly by the need to apply to favoured and preferred research funding sources. The intense "focal" and "reductionist" approach to Chronobiology, coupled with the fact that the older ISC generation has retired or approaches retirement, resulted in declining membership and, in the last few years, a decrease in ISC activities.
In nature all biological processes exhibit evolutionary trends and so does scientific thinking. Recent genetic studies begin to emphasize the idea that genes appear to operate in a complex network; they interact and overlap with one another and with other components in ways not yet fully understood. Thus while the "focal" and "reductionist" research has yielded vast important and contributing information, its beneficial importance could not be evaluated unless it is studied as part of a network or in the whole organism. A special issue of Biological Rhythm Research on chronobiology and ecology clearly demonstrates the need for integration of data from one level to a higher one; “Do Chronobiologists still remember Nature?” was the subtitle. Should we as a Society focus more on these aspects of the field, so providing a forum for those issues who are, otherwise, often overlooked?
Based on the above considerations, a group of ISC members who contributed in the past to many ISC activities joined with some of the last ISC board members in deciding to answer affirmatively the question posed above, and to resume and enhance the activity and functions of the ISC. It was gratifying to realize that this approach was shared by other members of ISC and many new and young chronobiologists.
Maybe this discussion should have been started earlier. However, when I took over the Presidency the position of the ISC in relation to the issues raised above was unclear. We are now convinced that with your help, advice and participation we can reshape the Society and strengthen its role in our scientific community.
With my best wishes,
Wop Rietveld
