Foreword – European Neurological Review, 2011;6(2):82-82

Welcome to the latest edition of European Neurological Review. As usual, this edition covers a wide range of the neurological disorders that we, neurologists in Europe, see in our clinics on a daily basis and study in our research labs throughout our careers. The specific topics for this edition include the pathogenesis and prediction of Alzheimer’s disease, stroke recovery, multimodal computed tomography in stroke, multiple sclerosis from the perspectives of specialist nurses, healthcare professionals and patients, dystonia, neuropathic pain, neuroimaging, as well as an insightful Parkinson’s disease supplement to accompany it. This issue therefore provides much content of interest for all readers.
European Neurological Review would like to take this opportunity to thank all contributing parties, organisations and individuals, and most specifically the Editorial Board for their continuing expert guidance and the opinion leading authors, for their precious time and for providing insightful discussion of their topics.
A very important question currently faces our neurology community in Europe and it relates to the potential unification of the European Neurological Society (ENS) and the European Federation of Neurological Societies (EFNS). It is the wish of most European neurologists to have one instead of two societies in Europe, to take care of our scientific and political needs. So far, some of us are members of the ENS or, via their regional neurological society, the EFNS. Several eminent neurologists from France, Italy, Germany, the UK and other countries founded the ENS, to discuss clinical problems and neuroscience. Only later did they adopt a similar teaching programme to that previously established by the EFNS, which considered itself a bridge between Eastern and Western European countries.
Meanwhile, many of us attend the annual congress of either the ENS or the EFNS, or we attend both annual meetings, which is not only costly but also in some ways redundant since the content of the meetings is rather similar. In addition, many renowned speakers are active for both societies. We share common goals, which include excellence in science, discussion of cutting-edge research and good educational programmes. Furthermore, the mission of both societies is to strengthen neurology in Europe and to attract young neurologists to our specialty.
Thus, the time has come to reconsider whether it is better to have two societies with two annual meetings or merge and combine all efforts in one society that could be named the European Academy of Neurology. As the incoming President of the ENS, I am in favour of combining the societies and I am happy that delegations, formed of three members from each society, are currently working hard towards unification. We should support and encourage these colleagues and hope their significant, combined wisdom results in a strong document for the proposed union.
With this new society established, we will be a better partner to the World Federation of Neurology, the American Academy of Neurology and the Asian countries. These stronger partnerships will mean that we can exchange research and educational programmes and take benefit from all continents. I am convinced that we shall reach that goal and we shall be proud to become members of the European Academy of Neurology. ■