Any Email news worth reading?

[rev ronin]

Peers,

 

I am getting sick, sick, sick of all the pointless 'free' emails I get purporting to update me on things medical.  I'm going through and unsubscribing from all of them, pretty much:  They're clickbait (don't tell you anything unless you click through to a web page which displays ads), political (how will XYZ politician affect ACA), commercial (BRAND NEW [super expensive, experimental, non-reimbursed, and costs as much as Connecticut] treatment shows promise!), require scripts be turned on in your browser to get to the destination web page, or require you to login when reading the email from a mobile device.

 

Is there anything out there?  At all?  If not, anyone want to start one?  I would seriously pay a few bucks a month for something that actually did all of this:

* No 'business of medicine'.  Zero. Zip. Nada.  I don't CARE about Medicaid expansion, or the ACA, or blah blah blah blah... I just want 100% MEDICINE, no politics.

* Good old fashioned journalism.  Not "Click here for updated breast cancer screening guidelines" but "USPSTF comes out against mammograms in women 40-50 without family history of breast cancer"  Where I KNOW that each sentence that follows is in declining importance order.

* Info IN THE EMAIL, or, at most a simple webpage that doesn't need scripts or logins, and is easily viewed (i.e., no ads) from any mobile device.  Back before the Web, there used to be these things called 'digests' where summaries of papers, events, and whatnot were sent out in email--that is, the actual content was in the actual email.  No pictures, so it would still only be a few K long, but with glorious amounts of real text written by and for people who actually knew how to read.

* No sponsored/paid/placed content.  Just real news, not product placement disguised as news.

 

Does anything like this exist?  If not, anyone want to create it?

[GetMeOuttaThisMess]

Primary Care/EM Medical Abstracts is somewhat similar to what you're looking for.  30 abstracts per month as I recall.  Quick, to the point, and if interested, there is a an audio commentary from the review team each month which may poo-poo the study findings based on faulty statistical analysis and such.  This is where I get my up to date data from primarily, in addition to USPSTF (these guys tend to lean toward the USPSTF recommendations per my observations).  One perfect example is my annual tantrum about strep and why do we give a hoot?  One of the founders was part of the panel that wrote a response to the recommendation of f/u cultures on negative RST.  When you follow their train of thought and logic it makes perfect sense that this is a waste of time and money.  Same for pre-op labs.  They also have a pet peeve about pharma studies that compare to placebo versus cheaper generic meds, i.e.-latest greatest gazillion dollar ACEI/ARB versus generic beta-blocker of your choice.  There's also an essay review at the end on a topic of discussion for each month.  It also includes minimum 4 Cat. I CME hours/month and potentially more depending on what level of service you select.

 

I got hooked on them back in the early 90's based on one of my old ED doc's passing along his new "CD's".  Before then, they were on something called cassette tapes.  Never knew them to have 8 tracks.

[rpackelly]

cleveland Clinic IM daily brief.....every weekday morning.

[GetMeOuttaThisMess]

Oops, missed primary point. You were asking about emails.

[rev ronin]

Oops, missed primary point. You were asking about emails.

If I had a longer commute, I would be interested in audio. :-)  I don't mind the accidental threadjack.

[CAAdmission]

I can email you a picture of me with a rose clenched in my teeth if you want.