It has been made clear to us that policy decisions throughout the coronavirus pandemic have not been based solely on medical and epidemiological science, but rather have been developed with a wide range of inputs that include scientific research and opinion. Nevertheless, as indicated by the Government Chief Scientific Adviser, while the scientific analysis informing the Government’s interventions has enjoyed a great level of public exposure, the analysis and advice outside of SAGE (including economic and social considerations) have been “less visible”. It is disappointing that the Treasury had “not done a specific prediction or forecast of the restrictions” implemented, or those not pursued, but rather provided an “ongoing analysis” of economic factors, despite SAGE indicating that social and economic impacts should factor into such decisions. It is understandable that that these analyses are subject to significant uncertainty, however by analogy the epidemiological modelling published by SAGE, too, is uncertain and should not to be interpreted as a strict predictor of what will happen. The Government should, as a matter of urgency, publish the advice it has received on the potential indirect covid-19 impacts (e.g. economic, social and other health impacts) of the interventions it has undertaken, alongside the evidence base for that advice and should continue to commission such research.