The night before last, many of us who had previously been part of Wellsphere received almost identical emails from Dr. Rutledge, and from what I’ve been able to gather, each one seemed to contain an invitation to chat on the phone. I replied to the email (as detailed in my previous post) and offered a phone number in exchange, in case he really did want to talk to someone.

My phone rang later in the evening, and a male voice I didn’t recognize asked for me. I wasn’t able to catch the phone on time, but I suspected it might be Dr. Rutledge since that sort of thing is rather unusual here. I sent him another email, asking him to let me know if he had been the caller. He called me back again in just a few minutes.

At that time, we had an extended conversation. I would like to summarize what was said … and in all justice, I need to try to do it without any personal slant or opinion. I’m going to try VERY hard to simply “tell it the way it happened” as well as possible, without adding any of my own impressions, I’ll do that in a later post, since I still do have my own opinion of this entire drama.

One note of caution … I’m certain that I’m going to have to paraphrase, since I don’t have any sort of “eidetic” memory. I do promise, however, to be as faithful to the spirit of what was said as possible.

Dr. Rutledge called me, and said that he thought it would be good if we could chat one on one, because he had taken my comments¹ to heart, and he wanted to explain what his (and Wellsphere’s) intentions had been.

He said that he was confused by the “feeding frenzy” which was taking place across the medical blogosphere and in Twitter. He explained that they did not set out to create the site with the intention of selling it, but that their intentions – previously, and currently – have always been to provide a well based, helpful platform. He assured me that he has always done everything from a sense of good will, and that they (all of them at Wellsphere) were united in these benign intentions.

Dr. Rutledge mentioned several times that each invitation which had been sent out to various bloggers had been hand chosen by himself (most often,) or someone else in Wellsphere. He said that they only chose those which were considered to be the best blogs among those researched, because they wanted to provide the best platform for the bloggers, and for the readers.

He went on to explain that they didn’t sell it with the intention of making money from other people’s work². According to Dr. Rutledge, they’re a small crew, working on a shoestring budget, and the only way to continue was to join with a larger group. He said that he thought that Wellsphere would now be able to offer more than it had in the past.

Regarding the concerns¹ I’ve brought up on this blog, and in comments on other blogs, Dr. Rutledge told me that they had labeled all of their bloggers according to their level of knowledge, and placed them in the appropriate groups regarding their area of concern. He requested that I find an example of what caused my concern, and that I should forward it to him. He expressed no knowledge of any mavens giving anyone irresponsible answers, or answers which were above their own level of competence.

Dr. Rutledge reminded me that they have honored all requests to remove user content and information, although according to the EULA’s fine print, they were not required to do so.

A fellow blogger expressed concern that the IP material they have removed would not really be gone, and could later be used without their consent. I asked Dr. Rutledge about the IP material, and was told that all of the material had been removed from their server, and no longer existed there. He also added that whatever someone else, without his knowledge or consent, did at a later time, was out of his control.

Finally, he explained that he felt personally hurt by the charges of having been disingenuous, of having misrepresented himself and Wellsphere, and that people would actually believe the things that they were writing.

This is only a brief overview of the conversation, which lasted for a fairly long time. Dr. Rutledge repeated many of the above points in various ways, but the above summary is as faithful I am able to make it, keeping in mind that I’m only able to relay the points that I remember. I have invited him to correct anything which he feels does not properly represent his words.

1) Regarding Wellsphere’s “mavens” being encouraged to answer medical questions

I would like to repeat my invitation to Dr. Rutledge: he should correct me if I’ve misrepresented any of his statements. It would be far more helpful than relying on my old, cranky moof-memory. Apologies to all. I guess I’m not quite ready for the big time with my reporting skills, eh? ;o)

Well, I know I said I’d write about what’s happening … and I’d like to, really … however, all of the plans I wrote about are now up in the air. The first change – we most likely will not be moving into the barn, even after all of that work was done … and the second change – I didn’t have the surgery for the fistula and port as I was supposed to in mid-December, after all. I’ve been waiting for the dust to settle so that I would actually have something to share when I post, but solid details seem to be very elusive right now. Bear with me, please.

There is something else that I can share with you though …

When my kids were homeschooling, I did everything I could to get them to spend time reading. I had one who wasn’t very interested, another one who wouldn’t read any fictions … but loved encyclopedias (!!!), and the other two devoured all of the books I could throw at them. Doug and I were both interested in Science Fiction and Fantasy, and we had a lot of books of that genre in the house. One of our favorite authors was a gentleman named Piers Anthony. He wrote nearly thirty entertaining, and often hilarious, novels about a magical place he called Xanth. He’s also written many other books, and I can assure you that I never read one I didn’t like.

Xanth is a magical place that is actually shaped just like Florida! It does have some remarkable differences, however. If you click on the map to the right, you’ll see a larger version of Xanth. Not only is there an east/west gap across the land, if you look closely, you’ll see that the little island to the south is called “Centaur Isle”. Xanth is a land of magic, interesting characters with special “talents”, and even more puns than you’d hear at a comedians’ convention.

The series was as entertaining for kids as it was for adults, and my daughter Deneen fell in love with Xanth, and tore through each book as soon as it hit the shelves. Earlier this year when Dena and I were visiting, she told me that she had “met” Mr. Anthony online, and that she was communicating with him. I was delighted for her! Imagine striking up a friendship with your favorite author!

Yesterday, Dena messaged me on Skype, and chatted for a few minutes before we exchanged the following:

…

Dena: I’d like to be the first to let you know that Doris (you) have been invited to “live” in Xanth

Moof: wOOt! I’d love that!

Dena: [Piers Anthony] TOLD me that it would be a little [while,] but that you are going to go and live in Xanth. Hes going to make you a nice little chunk of land with a HUGE garden and your talent….always seeing the truth.

Moof: You’re kidding me.

Dena: Nope.

Moof: Are you serious?

Dena: I can send you the part of the letter where he told me he would.

I will put Doris in Xanth, with the talent of always seeing the truth. It will be several years before that Xanth novel sees print, however..

Merry Christmas Moof!

…

.
Wow! Now that’s a Christmas gift I’ll never forget! :o)

.

Those of you who like to become involved in discussions on different subjects should know about Dr. Maurice Bernstein’s Bioethics Discussion Blog. He always has something interesting to think about and comment on.

I’m slowly going through his archives, one subject at a time … feeling a bit like a kid in a candy shop.

All of the discussions I’ve found so far have been very civil and respectful, although some have been quite lively.

The latest discussion is a real tweaky one: race. Dr. Bernstein has imported the discussion from his Bioethics web site onto his blog, and included all of the emails which the article had originally generated. Opposing opinions … deeply held beliefs … all put into black and white for the interested reader – ( no pun intended … 0.o … ) – and he’s inviting people to add their thoughts to the subject.

If you’ve never been over to see Dr. Bernstein, take a look. Wait until you have time to give it more than a casual glance, so that you can get an idea of what he has over there. I admit that I envy Dr. Bernstein his blog … it’s an absolute wealth of intellectually stimulating subjects. Whenever I visit with him, I always feel as if I’m about to engage in a delightful debate with an old friend.

What?! You mean Charlie didn’t part the Red Sea with a rifle? Okay, I admit – when it comes to graphic art, I’d best keep my day job. Give me a little credit though … at least I got the fingers to look like they were in front of the gun! ;-)

During a December 2005 discussion between Dr. Crippen from NHS Blog Doctor, Dr. Rangel from Rangel MD and myself, Dr. Crippen made the following statement:

At the risk of throwing a real hot potato in, the gun crimes and killing sprees in the USA are due to your gun laws; no more, no less. All that nonsense the gun lobby puts out about the Second Amendment giving them the right to keep assault weapons in the glove compartment is because most of them are too illiterate to read the first half of the sentence. This is not about respect for life, or euthanasia, or Roe & Wade, it is about the stupidity of allowing anyone who pleases free access to guns.

My own reply was as follows:

I agree with Dr.Crippen that the gun question is indeed a “hot potato,” and perhaps more than this particular thread needs, since it’s already quite “loaded.” Dr. Crippen, why don’t you share with us just what it is you think about “all that nonsense the gun lobby puts out” in a post on your blog, and I’ll be delighted to come visit with you and carry on a discussion from the perspective of an average US citizen who believes in the Second Amendment, and who also hunts. I can bring the pizza, and you could provide the tea.

Well Dr. Crippen … here I am with the pizza! I do hope you remembered the tea, we’re going to need something to wash it all down with. Actually, a pint might be even nicer … :o)

Since I’ve never heard the gun lobby’s nonsense about “assault weapons” in “glove compartments,” I’m really at a loss on how to answer that charge. Concealed carry is illegal throughout the entire US, with the possible exception of Vermont. In order to have a loaded, concealed gun, you need a permit, which is not an easy thing to acquire in any state. Carrying loaded guns in cars is another story altogether. When we hunt, we have to have the rilfes out in the open, and the rounds locked in the trunk (the boot.) It would be difficult to really make a study of gun laws here, because each state has its own details. I’m not really interested in getting into those details, because that’s beyond the scope of this discussion. What I’d like to say is far more simple …

I don’t belong to the NRA, and I’ve never been active politically for the sake of the 2nd Amendment, however, if I felt that my right to own a firearm were threatened, I would step up to the plate. I sincerely believe that one of the reasons the crime rate is so low in our area is because it’s common knowledge that all of these Yankee farmers are hunters, and that they all have guns in their homes. A criminal will think twice before breaking into a home owned by someone who is armed, and a capable marksman.

Think the following scenario through: let’s say that the state of Illinois decides that they want an unarmed citizenry. Through whatever means, they inform the residents that all gun owners are to turn in their weapons, or face prosecution.

Now, just who do you think is going to obey this mandate?

The criminal? Think again …

The law abiding citizen, the very one who would never use his gun for anything illegal, will be the one who turns it in.

Suddenly, the playing field has changed – the criminal, who is not about to turn his weapons in, now realizes that Mr. John Doe Legal has willingly disarmed himself. What an advantage! Now only the criminal has a distance weapon – unless, that is, if Mr. Doe takes up knife throwing.

If you disarm the honest citizenry, you raise the armed criminal to a superior position of power. There are no longer any serious deterrents keeping those with evil intent from preying upon the innocent.

On a personal note, I live in an ancient house … it was here before the US was a nation, and before Maine split away from Massachusetts. It’s in truly deplorable shape, and I have no means whatsoever of locking doors or windows. We’re out in the country, and my husband works nights. However, I can still lay down at night and go to sleep, because I know that I am able to defend myself, and when my children were small, I knew that I was capable of protecting them. Anyone who breaks into here would place his life in serious danger. I do not recommend it.

And as far as guns for sport – my husband and I have been hunters as long as we’ve been together. It took me a very long while to balance my sympathy for the deer, or the moose, with a bit of common sense … but I was finally able to realize that the only differences between my own putting meat in the freezer, and buying it at the store were 1) cost, and 2) esthetics. The meat I buy in the grocery case was no less alive at one time … than the meat I can provide by hunting. The major difference is that I did the work myself, and that I’m not seeing it disguised, nicely wrapped in clear, sanitary looking pastic – which makes it so easy for people to forget just what it is they’re buying.

If anything, it’s made me appreciate the life the creature all the more. I now know what the cost was behind my freezer full of venison. Being a soft hearted city girl, that took some major “getting over,” and I still have to fight a lump in my throat when I see a creature die.

All of that said, although hunting and target practicing are the only ways we ever really use our guns, we do know how to use them, and we are able to protect ourselves. If the government instituted gun control, many of us who are law abiding citizens would become instant criminals out of fear for our lives, and the rest of us would become easy targets for the real criminals who are just lurking in the wings, waiting for the bleeding liberals to force a peaceful citizenry to disarm.

And finally – I hate platitudes, but I just can’t help myself, I’m going to have to pull this one out, because being a platitude doesn’t make it any less true: guns do not kill people, people kill people. If somehow, you manage to remove all guns from everyone … including the criminals … those who want to kill people will just use a different means. Pipe bombs … ricin … they will find a way. That is the ugly truth. Banning guns will not solve that problem – it will just remove one more means of defense from an increasingly defenseless populace.

Addendum – March 4, 2006:

Through William at Amazing Facts … thank you, William!

Brady Gun Control Campaign All Wet, Say Nation’s Top Cops

3/2/2006 5:30:00 PM

To: State Desk, Legal Reporter

Contact: Richard Pearson of Illinois State Rifle Association, 815-635-3198 Web: http://www.isra.org

SPRINGFIELD, Ill., March 2 /U.S. Newswire/ — The following was released today by the Illinois State Rifle Association (ISRA):

The very foundations of the gun control movement were rocked today by the results of a survey taken by the National Association of Chiefs of Police (NACOP). In a nutshell, the survey shows that the nation’s top law enforcement officers believe that average citizens can be trusted to responsibly own firearms; that criminals ignore gun control laws; and that concealed carry laws reduce crime.

These revelations come as a stark contrast to gun control movement propaganda that asserts that police officials feel that our streets would be safer if law-abiding citizens were disarmed.

Specifically, the survey revealed that 93 percent of chiefs and sheriffs felt that citizens should be able to purchase firearms for sport and self defense; 73 percent opposed so-called “one gun a month” laws; 96 percent believed that criminals ignore gun control laws and; 63 percent supported laws that allow citizens to carry defensive firearms as a means to control crime.

“These survey results are important and timely for the law- abiding Illinois firearm owner,” said ISRA Executive Director Richard Pearson. “The General Assembly is currently considering HB2414 which would ban most of the guns owned by law-abiding citizens in Illinois. The legislature is also considering legislation that would shut down most of the lawful gun shops in the state. The supposed justification for these two bills is that they would result in a safer society. Well, based on the chiefs’ survey, it would appear that the gun control movement is standing all alone on that assertion.”

“I hope that the Illinois General Assembly is paying close attention to what our top cops have to say,” continued Pearson. “It’s time for the legislature to stop trying to find ways to harass the law-abiding gun owner and start finding ways to keep criminals in jail and off our streets.

—

Since 1903, the ISRA has been the state’s leading advocate of safe, lawful and responsible firearms ownership.

http://www.usnewswire.com/

Concordia Discors

I’ve replaced my HTML Conversations pages with a blog called Concordia Discors, which means “Harmonious Discord” in Latin. Clicking on the Conversations tab still brings you to an index, but clicking on the individual conversations will bring you to the conversation itself in the new blog.

I will continue to add “discussions” to the new blog, and hope to use it as an open forum. Those who have a taste for civil discussions in a variety of subjects should consider joining. :)