BBC News BrazilCovid: study that served as basis for app TrateCov has flaws in methodology
BBC News Brazil reached out to Dutch microbiologist Elisabeth Bik and the editors of Science Feedback to analyze the study that served as the basis for the application TrateCov, developed by Brazil’s Ministry of Health. They found several flaws in the study. For instance, the number of participants in the study showed some discrepancies and the study was peer-reviewed in just one day, a questionably brief period of time...
PolitiFactNo, study didn’t prove that masks have negative effects on 68% of children
“This Instagram post is a great example of how not to use data. The post says masks to reduce the spread of COVID have "major negative impacts" on 68% of children. The claim’s source is a report out of Germany based on online submissions of childrens’ reactions to wearing masks. (...) Without standards on capturing data on how the children reacted, and without a matched group of children who didn’t wear masks, there’s no way to say that the masks caused the children’s reactions. The result is a jumble of numbers, not valid data. This Instagram post recycled a claim made in early January. The fact-checkers at Health Feedback debunked that one a few days later (hat tip to Health Feedback for their work on this.)”
France 24 - The ObserversNo, the dry swabs in this video of a Covid-19 test are not ‘alive’
"A video where a woman unravels the fibre from several Covid-19 dry swabs and claims that the material is “alive” and made of “Morgellons”, a filament associated with an unproven medical condition, has garnered tens of thousands of views on both Facebook and YouTube since early January. These claims are false – the synthetic fibre of the dry swabs is not “alive” and has no connection with Morgellons disease.(...) "According to Dr. Flora Teoh, a science editor at Health Feedback, a not-for-profit organisation that fact-checks scientific and health-related content, Morgellons disease is “controversial and poorly understood". "
The Royal SocietyGlobal trends in wildfire and its impacts
"The decline in global average area burned has indeed been misused to support false claims (cf. Climate Feedback fact-check) numerous times. There is strong evidence that the increase in fire activity we are seeing in many forested regions is indeed linked to climate change."
STATThe coronavirus ‘infodemic’ is real. We rated the websites responsible for it
“To lend their narratives an air of legitimacy, sites sometimes turn to shoddy scientific research. The research, which had not been peer reviewed, claimed to have found similar proteins in the new virus and HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. According to health fact-checker Health Feedback, the researchers failed to recognize that the same protein sequences could be found in a variety of organisms.”
Nieman ReportsUsing Rapid-Response Expertise to Strengthen 2020 Campaign Coverage
"The good news is that a growing number of nonpartisan organizations are recruiting policy-neutral academic experts to strengthen journalism. Climate Feedback and Health Feedback use on-call academics to quickly highlight hype or spin in news reports and warn reporters against repeating misstatements of fact."
France 24Climate change in the era of fake news
"Most fake news, however, comes from climate sceptics who spread false claims on social media. Sometimes they are easy to decipher, but with climate change being so complicated it’s hard to cut through the barrage of misinformation. So how can one navigate climate news in the era of fake news? In this episode of Down to Earth, we look into why climate change has become the perfect target of fake news, and what you can do to protect yourself against it."
The Washington PostAnti-vaxxers are spreading conspiracy theories on Facebook, and the company is struggling to stop them
"A recent study from the Credibility Coalition and Health Feedback, a group of scientists who evaluate the accuracy of health media coverage, found the majority of the most-clicked health stories on Facebook in 2018 were fake or contained a significant amount of misleading information. The study looked at the top 100 health stories with the most engagements on social media, and it had a network of experts assess their credibility. The study found less than half were “highly credible.”
EpocaEm 2018, Quatro das dez Postagens que mais Viralizaram sobre Saude (em ingles) nao eram Confiaveis
"Estudo publicado no último dia 28 pelo site Health Feedback, que reúne uma rede de cientistas dispostos a combater a desinformação digital em suas respectivas áreas de conhecimento, concluiu que, dos dez artigos de saúde que mais viralizaram em inglês no ano passado, quatro tinham “credibilidade baixa” ou “nenhuma credibilidade”."
yle.fiValheenpaljastaja: Terveyshuuhaa kukoistaa netissä – näin opit tunnistamaan sen
“Such a good appreciation of expertise is a bit forgotten today,” says Ohukainen. - I do not defend any blind authority, but it is worth remembering that some people produce or process health information for their work. For the most part, they are well-meaning people without secret motives or conspiracies." translated from Finnish: "– Sellainen terve asiantuntijuuden arvostus on vähän ehkä unohtunut nykypäivänä, Ohukainen sanoo. – En puolusta mitään sokeaa auktoriteettiuskoa, mutta kannattaa muistaa, että jotkut tuottavat tai käsittelevät terveystietoa työkseen. Suurimmaksi osaksi he ovat hyvää tarkoittavia ihmisiä vailla salaisia motiiveja tai salaliittoja."