The Chambers Era THE EDITOR: David
W. Chambers
In his own words, Dr. Chambers reflects on board service and attendance at more than fifty ACD board meetings—1994 through 2020.
In the early days there were about ten of us around the table and the meetings were pretty personal. Jean and I recall the going out to dinner in a very “local” establishment at the first board meeting in New Orleans and the whole board line dancing. Now the board meetings have 30 or more participants, and we need to pass around a microphone. The social events are larger and more elegant; yet, we have maintained the “ACD family spirit.”
E
ach president has personalized his or her term in office well beyond pounding the gavel at the right moment and keeping Robert’s Rules from tangling us up. There were lunches with the Naval Academy cadets, river cruises, meetings in the presidents’ homes and the Museum of Dentistry. We even shared a bus breaking down in the mountains on a CE program at Sun Valley. Those who are interested can consult the record of the Board’s deliberations and contributions to the profession. The strongest recollection is a quarter century of friendships with literally hundreds of the most interesting and caring professionals.
I vividly recall the first peer-reviewed manuscript as Editor. It was a summary of some emerging evidence that caries is a reversible process. I published it over the strenuous objection of a couple of reviewers who opined that the author didn’t know anything about dentistry. I wish I could have been in their offices when they saw that the article had been written by 14 | ACD News | Winter 2020
Harald Löe, the Director of NIDCR. The journal has been unique in laying out issues that affect the way dentistry is practiced and how oral health works in the country. It has sometimes been controversial, but the format is to achieve balance with multiple points of view in each issue rather than looking for lots of balanced and generally bland papers about safe topics. We have taken positions on managed care, social media, and many aspects of ethics. The peer review process in the journal is something to be proud of. In medical publications the consistency is generally around .20 to .30 on a .00 to 1.00 scale. JACD has always been between .60 and .80, partially because we use six reviewers and especially engage non-researchers. JACD is the only journal in the health fields to have regularly published its consistency among reviewers in the journal. One thing I found out over the years is that regardless of how strongly various people hold their views, there are always others with good reason to enlarge the picture. The fault to be avoided
is not insisting that we all speak our minds honestly and listen respectfully. For the first nine years of my tenure as Editor, the journal was composed and designed in-house using desk-top publishing. It worked, but probably did not save money because of the staff time involved. Beginning in 2004, and continuing until today, we have used the services of Annette Krammer who combines the talents of a creative and careful designer with a deep understanding of what the College stands for. She crafted a consistent image of accessible professionalism and I wish to thank her publicly for her devotion to duty. Now it is time to turn the page to our next century of service. No doubt, communication styles and distribution platforms will be different but, the need to communicate will remain crucially important. It is said that most people do not listen with the intent to understand but rather the intent to reply. Effective verbal communication is a critical skill in life, but it pales in comparison to the ability to listen while others do the same.
