103
In his evidence to the Science and Technology Committee during the early weeks of the...
Conclusion
In his evidence to the Science and Technology Committee during the early weeks of the pandemic, on 25 March, the Editor of the Lancet expressed concern that mathematical modelling was playing too influential a role in UK scientific advice.157 The prominence of modelling and projections was, and still remains, an important part of the UK’s response to covid-19. Models can be useful and informative to policymakers, but they come with limitations. As Professor Neil Ferguson told the Science and Technology Committee in June 2020, “Models can only be as reliable as the data that is feeding into them.”158 However, we know that—especially in the early stages of the pandemic—there was an acute shortage of good data.159 There was also a limited understanding of the virus early in the pandemic. Key questions, such as the length of immunity conferred by infection, were unknown and hampered accurate modelling.160
Government Response
Acknowledged
Government Response
Acknowledged
HM Government
Acknowledged
In future an approach of greater questioning and challenge should characterise the development of policy. Ministers should have the confidence to follow a scientific approach themselves—being prepared to take a more robust approach to questioning and challenging the advice given. The government and SAGE should also facilitate strong external and structured challenge to scientific advice, including from experts in countries around the world, and a wider range of disciplines.
Source
Inquiry
Coronavirus: lessons learnt
Report
Sixth Report - Coronavirus: lessons learned to date
12 Oct 2021
HC 92
Addressee Bodies
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
Timeline
Recommendation age
4.6 yrs
Report published
12 Oct 2021