Matt Berkley
@mattberkley.bsky.social
Sentientism, food policy for desired/anticipated consumption patterns, plant-based for climate, consumption behaviour, history and reporting of global goals, framing.
Pinned
Matt Berkley
@mattberkley.bsky.social
· Jan 20
A proposal for
Animal welfare including human health
Climate
Environment
Biodiversity
Economy
Governments provide free nutritional supplements (eg B12, DHA, EPA) and/or mandate fortification of foods
- to improve health and reduce cravings when people reduce/eliminate animal products from diet.
Animal welfare including human health
Climate
Environment
Biodiversity
Economy
Governments provide free nutritional supplements (eg B12, DHA, EPA) and/or mandate fortification of foods
- to improve health and reduce cravings when people reduce/eliminate animal products from diet.
Reposted by Matt Berkley
The Israeli army killed Gaza civilians in a free-for-all, say ...
... Israeli soldiers who served there.
... Israeli soldiers who served there.
November 10, 2025 at 9:21 AM
The Israeli army killed Gaza civilians in a free-for-all, say ...
... Israeli soldiers who served there.
... Israeli soldiers who served there.
Reposted by Matt Berkley
[email protected]'s powerful call to all MPs & Peers to attend the National Emergency Briefing on the #climate & #nature crisis at Central Hall Westminster, from 9am 27th November.
Enter your postcode to see if your MP is attending on your behalf: www.nebriefing.org
#NEB2025 #TimeToStepUp
Enter your postcode to see if your MP is attending on your behalf: www.nebriefing.org
#NEB2025 #TimeToStepUp
November 10, 2025 at 5:45 PM
[email protected]'s powerful call to all MPs & Peers to attend the National Emergency Briefing on the #climate & #nature crisis at Central Hall Westminster, from 9am 27th November.
Enter your postcode to see if your MP is attending on your behalf: www.nebriefing.org
#NEB2025 #TimeToStepUp
Enter your postcode to see if your MP is attending on your behalf: www.nebriefing.org
#NEB2025 #TimeToStepUp
Reposted by Matt Berkley
Is there perhaps a significant difference between
1) which news sources people trust
(which might be unknowing)
and
2) which sources they say they trust, in surveys
(which might be influenced by, say, wanting a source to look bad or to maintain a self-image of loyalty to a political outlook)?
1) which news sources people trust
(which might be unknowing)
and
2) which sources they say they trust, in surveys
(which might be influenced by, say, wanting a source to look bad or to maintain a self-image of loyalty to a political outlook)?
November 10, 2025 at 1:58 PM
Is there perhaps a significant difference between
1) which news sources people trust
(which might be unknowing)
and
2) which sources they say they trust, in surveys
(which might be influenced by, say, wanting a source to look bad or to maintain a self-image of loyalty to a political outlook)?
1) which news sources people trust
(which might be unknowing)
and
2) which sources they say they trust, in surveys
(which might be influenced by, say, wanting a source to look bad or to maintain a self-image of loyalty to a political outlook)?
Irresponsible.
FAO yet again fails to mention diet shifts & their key role:
"About 15 million deaths could be avoided each year & agricultural emissions could drop by 15% if people worldwide shift to healthier, predominantly plant-based diets" apnews.com/article/plan...
On FAO, see for instance shorturl.at/bIHBT
"About 15 million deaths could be avoided each year & agricultural emissions could drop by 15% if people worldwide shift to healthier, predominantly plant-based diets" apnews.com/article/plan...
On FAO, see for instance shorturl.at/bIHBT
Food, climate and the future - it’s all connected!
Discover 5 science-backed solutions that can help transform agrifood systems to withstand climate shocks and tackle the climate crisis.
🔗 fao.org/interactive/...
#AgrifoodSystems #COP30
Discover 5 science-backed solutions that can help transform agrifood systems to withstand climate shocks and tackle the climate crisis.
🔗 fao.org/interactive/...
#AgrifoodSystems #COP30
November 10, 2025 at 12:33 PM
Irresponsible.
Reposted by Matt Berkley
So one important task, it seems to me, is consideration of what to advise researchers to do about citing.
Obviously, take reasonable care to avoid citing claims thoughtlessly - a question is what kinds of rules/guidance might help.
Obviously, take reasonable care to avoid citing claims thoughtlessly - a question is what kinds of rules/guidance might help.
November 9, 2025 at 11:20 AM
So one important task, it seems to me, is consideration of what to advise researchers to do about citing.
Obviously, take reasonable care to avoid citing claims thoughtlessly - a question is what kinds of rules/guidance might help.
Obviously, take reasonable care to avoid citing claims thoughtlessly - a question is what kinds of rules/guidance might help.
Reposted by Matt Berkley
Let's reject the UK Government's misleading frame "Net Zero" and call it
"Territorial* Net Zero".
The fact that countries report TNZ to the UN doesn't mean the UK has to focus on what may (soon?) be only half its contributions to greenhouse gases, misleading on progress.
* or similar. Domestic?
"Territorial* Net Zero".
The fact that countries report TNZ to the UN doesn't mean the UK has to focus on what may (soon?) be only half its contributions to greenhouse gases, misleading on progress.
* or similar. Domestic?
November 8, 2025 at 10:03 AM
Let's reject the UK Government's misleading frame "Net Zero" and call it
"Territorial* Net Zero".
The fact that countries report TNZ to the UN doesn't mean the UK has to focus on what may (soon?) be only half its contributions to greenhouse gases, misleading on progress.
* or similar. Domestic?
"Territorial* Net Zero".
The fact that countries report TNZ to the UN doesn't mean the UK has to focus on what may (soon?) be only half its contributions to greenhouse gases, misleading on progress.
* or similar. Domestic?
Reposted by Matt Berkley
The Stockholm Declaration seems very good but omits a key, immediate issue:
In fields where evidence suggests a high proportion of seriously flawed papers, what should scientists and others do and say as regards trusting, citing and/or building on previous research?
bsky.app/profile/matt...
In fields where evidence suggests a high proportion of seriously flawed papers, what should scientists and others do and say as regards trusting, citing and/or building on previous research?
bsky.app/profile/matt...
So one important task, it seems to me, is consideration of what to advise researchers to do about citing.
Obviously, take reasonable care to avoid citing claims thoughtlessly - a question is what kinds of rules/guidance might help.
Obviously, take reasonable care to avoid citing claims thoughtlessly - a question is what kinds of rules/guidance might help.
November 10, 2025 at 12:57 AM
The Stockholm Declaration seems very good but omits a key, immediate issue:
In fields where evidence suggests a high proportion of seriously flawed papers, what should scientists and others do and say as regards trusting, citing and/or building on previous research?
bsky.app/profile/matt...
In fields where evidence suggests a high proportion of seriously flawed papers, what should scientists and others do and say as regards trusting, citing and/or building on previous research?
bsky.app/profile/matt...
Reposted by Matt Berkley
Bernhard Sabel writes in the Financial Times:
"Politicians and the media...should also be careful not to cast suspicion on science itself, something that could cause unforeseeable damage even greater than the status quo.
Yes, it could do that. But if 5-15% of papers are fake ...
"Politicians and the media...should also be careful not to cast suspicion on science itself, something that could cause unforeseeable damage even greater than the status quo.
Yes, it could do that. But if 5-15% of papers are fake ...
November 10, 2025 at 1:31 AM
Bernhard Sabel writes in the Financial Times:
"Politicians and the media...should also be careful not to cast suspicion on science itself, something that could cause unforeseeable damage even greater than the status quo.
Yes, it could do that. But if 5-15% of papers are fake ...
"Politicians and the media...should also be careful not to cast suspicion on science itself, something that could cause unforeseeable damage even greater than the status quo.
Yes, it could do that. But if 5-15% of papers are fake ...
In 2014-15 the BBC received detailed complaints that it falsely claimed the UN Millennium Declaration target on children's survival, among other targets, had an easier 1990 baseline.
It continued.
No-one resigned.
web.archive.org/web/20240226...
web.archive.org/web/20240303...
It continued.
No-one resigned.
web.archive.org/web/20240226...
web.archive.org/web/20240303...
web.archive.org
November 9, 2025 at 8:19 PM
In 2014-15 the BBC received detailed complaints that it falsely claimed the UN Millennium Declaration target on children's survival, among other targets, had an easier 1990 baseline.
It continued.
No-one resigned.
web.archive.org/web/20240226...
web.archive.org/web/20240303...
It continued.
No-one resigned.
web.archive.org/web/20240226...
web.archive.org/web/20240303...
Reposted by Matt Berkley
Let's say
"Cleaner energy"
and
"Cleaner technology"
except in cases where
the facts about,
and/or
the absence of needs for,
mining, processing, manufacture, transport, maintenance, heating of buildings, disposal and so on
really do justify the word "clean".
"Cleaner energy"
and
"Cleaner technology"
except in cases where
the facts about,
and/or
the absence of needs for,
mining, processing, manufacture, transport, maintenance, heating of buildings, disposal and so on
really do justify the word "clean".
November 8, 2025 at 10:47 AM
Let's say
"Cleaner energy"
and
"Cleaner technology"
except in cases where
the facts about,
and/or
the absence of needs for,
mining, processing, manufacture, transport, maintenance, heating of buildings, disposal and so on
really do justify the word "clean".
"Cleaner energy"
and
"Cleaner technology"
except in cases where
the facts about,
and/or
the absence of needs for,
mining, processing, manufacture, transport, maintenance, heating of buildings, disposal and so on
really do justify the word "clean".
Reposted by Matt Berkley
So the New York Times article is wrong on global emissions, and temperature rise rate.
A third error: its claim on projections from "current policies" is based on a source from 2024 - not Trump's policies or other backtracking by countries and corporations.
And the correction notice misleads.
A third error: its claim on projections from "current policies" is based on a source from 2024 - not Trump's policies or other backtracking by countries and corporations.
And the correction notice misleads.
November 9, 2025 at 10:59 AM
Reposted by Matt Berkley
Yes. I once wrote a systematic review of analytical choices in the study of infectious diseases in cancer care. The title mentions AMR and cancer. It is now cited 25 times, almost all citations being «AMR is a big problem in cancer care (ref)», a conclusion that cannot be inferred from what I wrote.
November 9, 2025 at 12:29 PM
Yes. I once wrote a systematic review of analytical choices in the study of infectious diseases in cancer care. The title mentions AMR and cancer. It is now cited 25 times, almost all citations being «AMR is a big problem in cancer care (ref)», a conclusion that cannot be inferred from what I wrote.
Reposted by Matt Berkley
Scence sleuths/critics tend to concentrate on the *supply* of seriously flawed papers.
I'm wondering what can be done about the demand, which could affect the supply in a good way.
Some demand for bad work comes from funders, some from citation practices.
I'm wondering what can be done about the demand, which could affect the supply in a good way.
Some demand for bad work comes from funders, some from citation practices.
November 9, 2025 at 11:02 AM
Scence sleuths/critics tend to concentrate on the *supply* of seriously flawed papers.
I'm wondering what can be done about the demand, which could affect the supply in a good way.
Some demand for bad work comes from funders, some from citation practices.
I'm wondering what can be done about the demand, which could affect the supply in a good way.
Some demand for bad work comes from funders, some from citation practices.
Reposted by Matt Berkley
I'm thinking more of a set of findings endorsed by statisticians/methodologists etc with "we are unable to find any serious flaws here, so this is worth citing" rather than examples.
November 9, 2025 at 10:48 AM
I'm thinking more of a set of findings endorsed by statisticians/methodologists etc with "we are unable to find any serious flaws here, so this is worth citing" rather than examples.
Reposted by Matt Berkley
In a field where evidence suggests that a high proportion of papers have serious flaws, a database of "potentially important" papers which appear *not* to have serious flaws might be useful, as well as identifying those that do.
November 9, 2025 at 10:36 AM
In a field where evidence suggests that a high proportion of papers have serious flaws, a database of "potentially important" papers which appear *not* to have serious flaws might be useful, as well as identifying those that do.
Reposted by Matt Berkley
So the New York Times' inferences that these are "mistakes" and so on are less plausible.
Because of the obvious pattern, I don't believe the reporters thought these were all or mostly "mistakes" and so on.
And yet the article and headlines present the inferences as fact.
Because of the obvious pattern, I don't believe the reporters thought these were all or mostly "mistakes" and so on.
And yet the article and headlines present the inferences as fact.
February 22, 2025 at 6:11 PM
So the New York Times' inferences that these are "mistakes" and so on are less plausible.
Because of the obvious pattern, I don't believe the reporters thought these were all or mostly "mistakes" and so on.
And yet the article and headlines present the inferences as fact.
Because of the obvious pattern, I don't believe the reporters thought these were all or mostly "mistakes" and so on.
And yet the article and headlines present the inferences as fact.
Reposted by Matt Berkley
The New York Times claims the "mistakes" by "DOGE" are part of a "pattern of recklessness".
In fact on their own, the misrepresentations/falsehoods from "DOGE" described in the article clearly form a pattern of exaggerating its purported achievements.
In fact on their own, the misrepresentations/falsehoods from "DOGE" described in the article clearly form a pattern of exaggerating its purported achievements.
February 22, 2025 at 5:53 PM
The New York Times claims the "mistakes" by "DOGE" are part of a "pattern of recklessness".
In fact on their own, the misrepresentations/falsehoods from "DOGE" described in the article clearly form a pattern of exaggerating its purported achievements.
In fact on their own, the misrepresentations/falsehoods from "DOGE" described in the article clearly form a pattern of exaggerating its purported achievements.
Reposted by Matt Berkley
I think we're both going in the same direction.
I agree in general, and news organisations should be getting input from lawyers to help journalists and editors.
Where there are breaking stories, it may I think be appropriate to say the writer isn't yet clear on legality.
I agree in general, and news organisations should be getting input from lawyers to help journalists and editors.
Where there are breaking stories, it may I think be appropriate to say the writer isn't yet clear on legality.
February 25, 2025 at 12:21 PM
I think we're both going in the same direction.
I agree in general, and news organisations should be getting input from lawyers to help journalists and editors.
Where there are breaking stories, it may I think be appropriate to say the writer isn't yet clear on legality.
I agree in general, and news organisations should be getting input from lawyers to help journalists and editors.
Where there are breaking stories, it may I think be appropriate to say the writer isn't yet clear on legality.
Reposted by Matt Berkley
Also emissions and other effects from the military.
October 21, 2025 at 11:56 AM
Also emissions and other effects from the military.
Reposted by Matt Berkley
Yes, it's important for people to understand climate effects of outsourcing to other countries (including both emissions and lost forests).
Also material footprint (end of article)
www.escoe.ac.uk/the-uks-hidd...
and pollution/habitat destruction effects of outsourced manufacturing/farming.
Also material footprint (end of article)
www.escoe.ac.uk/the-uks-hidd...
and pollution/habitat destruction effects of outsourced manufacturing/farming.
The UK’s hidden carbon footprint - ESCoE
Accounting for environmental impacts in trade By Anne Owen, Lena Killian and Rutger Hoekstra When […]
www.escoe.ac.uk
October 21, 2025 at 9:19 AM
Yes, it's important for people to understand climate effects of outsourcing to other countries (including both emissions and lost forests).
Also material footprint (end of article)
www.escoe.ac.uk/the-uks-hidd...
and pollution/habitat destruction effects of outsourced manufacturing/farming.
Also material footprint (end of article)
www.escoe.ac.uk/the-uks-hidd...
and pollution/habitat destruction effects of outsourced manufacturing/farming.
Reposted by Matt Berkley
Thank you for this. Could it be argued that the UK Government is failing in its duties by allowing UK companies to finance climate-damaging projects abroad?
November 7, 2025 at 10:25 AM
Thank you for this. Could it be argued that the UK Government is failing in its duties by allowing UK companies to finance climate-damaging projects abroad?
Reposted by Matt Berkley
The New York Times didn't provide evidence of the current trajectory, despite what it claimed.
bsky.app/profile/matt...
bsky.app/profile/matt...
So the New York Times article is wrong on global emissions, and temperature rise rate.
A third error: its claim on projections from "current policies" is based on a source from 2024 - not Trump's policies or other backtracking by countries and corporations.
And the correction notice misleads.
A third error: its claim on projections from "current policies" is based on a source from 2024 - not Trump's policies or other backtracking by countries and corporations.
And the correction notice misleads.
November 7, 2025 at 8:52 PM
The New York Times didn't provide evidence of the current trajectory, despite what it claimed.
bsky.app/profile/matt...
bsky.app/profile/matt...
Reposted by Matt Berkley
It might be useful for funders to state where the money is coming from to replace what the US government had previously supplied - ie what the new money would otherwise have been spent on.
After Trump ordered the US to withdraw from the Paris Climate Agreement, Bloomberg Philanthropies and other U.S. climate funders announced that they will “ensure the United States meets its global climate obligations.”
www.reuters.com/sustainabili...
www.reuters.com/sustainabili...
Bloomberg philanthropy to cover U.S. climate dues after Paris withdrawal
Former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's philanthropy and other U.S. funders said on Thursday they will cover U.S. financial obligations to the UN climate framework after President Donald Trump called for the U.S. to withdraw - for a second time - from the Paris climate agreement.
www.reuters.com
January 24, 2025 at 9:27 PM
It might be useful for funders to state where the money is coming from to replace what the US government had previously supplied - ie what the new money would otherwise have been spent on.
Reposted by Matt Berkley
Work out what seems more useful for you to do, by finding out what others are doing, and by taking time to think.
February 1, 2025 at 5:22 PM
Work out what seems more useful for you to do, by finding out what others are doing, and by taking time to think.
Reposted by Matt Berkley
Errors to avoid when searching for studies for systematic reviews onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/...
February 22, 2024 at 10:22 AM
Errors to avoid when searching for studies for systematic reviews onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/...