"The sort of mental health intervention you see in five years may look nothing like — or very different from — the ones that you see now.”

– @mirandawolpert.bsky.social in @mikepeeljourno.bsky.social's superb FT Big Read on the new, exciting, digital generation of #mentalhealth treatments 🕹️⬇️

"...we find hope in the power of science [...] that unlocks the potential to change things for the better. Science that brings people together in shared understanding of the world around us and our place in it."

✍️ Julia Gillard, Chair of @wellcometrust.bsky.social | #science #globalhealth

"The systems that connect scientists with politicians are not working well" – great insight for those with
#sciencepolicy interest from this @natureportfolio.bsky.social survey looking at the gap where top research doesn't always lead to changes in government policy ⬇️

www.nature.com/articles/d41...

At @wellcometrust.bsky.social we've funded human challenge trials, also known as human infection studies, for a number of years.

🎧 An episode of our podcast, When Science Finds a Way, explains more about these studies with insight from researchers & volunteers: wellcome.org/news-and-rep...

This is one of the best articles on human challenge trials – aka deliberate infection for medical research – that I've read.

Enjoyable & informative from @dylanmatt.bsky.social for @vox.com on his experience volunteering to receive malaria(!), and expert insight on the potential of these trials ⬇️

We're definitely blessed with high-quality journalists specialising in science & health – many have adapted well to reaching new audiences.

I'd be interested in learning more about what/who respondents have in mind when asked about trust in journalists and what it reveals about public perception.

Working where science & media cross, this is fascinating.

It's dispiriting yet unsurprising to see this. But isn't it interesting (reassuring) that scientists are seen as non-divisive, when their key routes to capture public attention are through those 'divisive' media & social media? #scicomm

Hello to everyone on Bluesky 👋

We’re a global charitable foundation. We believe science and research are essential to solving the world’s health challenges – and everyone should benefit from them.

Find out more about us ⤵️
wellcome.org/what-we-do?u...

Extraordinary research published in @natureportfolio.bsky.social by the Human Cell Atlas, a project aiming to map all 37 trillion cells in the human body...!

"When complete, it could transform the ways we diagnose, monitor and treat diseases" – Katrina Gold @wellcometrust.bsky.social to BBC ⬇️

The current user experience on X is awful. Somehow they can still find new ways make it worse than it has been for the last few years.

The old trending list passively showed the main topics people were discussing / making fun of. Something similar here would improve my experience, personally.

Wellcome have now signed up for anyone in need of a science and #globalhealth research fix. Follow us here ➡️ @wellcometrust.bsky.social

And for the Wellcome Collection, our wonderful, free museum exploring the past, present and future of health ➡️ @wellcomecollection.bsky.social

I saw that @skyfeed.xyz have put together a feed of most popular posts from the last 24hrs. I’m trying it out for now – bsky.app/profile/did:...

Totally agree, the trend function has been broken for ages. A shame as part of the appeal of social media to me is to gather around ‘moments.’ That seems a little harder to foster here. Hopefully that’s down to it still being box fresh and there’ll eventually be a way to surface top posts / topics.

To come back to the notion of 'trending,' I would love to know if anyone has solved it? The Discovery feed doesn't feel quite right to me and I'd like the opportunity to see some of the more popular posts, the hot topics, or (dare I say) the memes. A chronological timeline feels too transient...

And speaking of brands, or any organisation, verification is less obvious here, which is a worry.

It may feel light and trustworthy now, but what happens when there's 2x, 3x the users...? When malicious actors arrive? Tying your handle to your domain, like @npr.org, looks like a really smart idea.

It feels close and personal here, likely because brands haven't shifted en masse. It will be a true crossroads for this site when they do. If they integrate well, keep that human aspect and help their customers, then it could succeed. If they don't then it could quickly 'enshittify' or feel cringe.

To follow-on, when news orgs start reporting on what an individual, brand or organisation posts on here (think screenshot shared on the News at 10), Bluesky will quickly gain legitimacy and 'win' vs Threads. I think that could easily provide a snowball effect in driving people away from X.

It's like Bluesky is where news is shared or discussed. Twitter's 'town hall' factor meant – for better or worse – it was a place where news *happened*.

Without a central 'trending' feed here, the experience is more fleeting. You can feel connected to communities but it feels a bit too sheltered.

First impressions: there's lots to like about Bluesky, it looks and sounds a bit like 'old' Twitter. But for me, it misses that town hall factor & instead feels like a collection of soapboxes.

I'm curious to hear how others are finding it? And in the meantime, I'll share some more thoughts below 🧵