Read on Twitter
So WHO just called for an independent inquiry in the global covid response. I've written about its IHR review committee here: https://duckofminerva.com/2020/05/the-world-health-organization-already-has-a-review-mechanism-heres-how-it-works-and-how-it-can-be-better.html and I discussed the requirements for a UK Inquiry here: https://twitter.com/DrJRMoon/status/1272257538193580033?s=19 but here's a quick summary thread.
Politics: This is absolutely imperative - this panel and its subsequent report are going to be highly politicised and there is absolutely no escaping that. The only way this panel will be able to navigate this political landscape is by recognising as such.
Politics (cont): what this means is that nobody - especially those associated with WHO or the panel - should ask for this process to be "apolitical." Not only will doing so be counterproductive but it will actually hide so many of the factors that have affected the pandemic.
Evidence & Expertise: If this panel is filled with just medics and public/global health experts, the findings will be limited to just those area. What is needed is a variety of expertises from anthropology, political science, sociology, economics, primary care, nursing, etc.
E&E (cont): Importantly this will make the findings more relevant and broader ranging, while the diversity of the expertises will give the report credibility to a variety of actors. This diversity of credibility means that the recommendations are more likely to be implemented.
Communication: This loops back to evidence and politics but this panel needs to be aware that the report is *not* the end of this process but merely the beginning. This panel's report is going to be absolutely landmark and the communication needs to be on point.
All of this is lessons learned from lessons learned docs, for more information on the study see my PhD here: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/336150922_Knowledge_Accumulation_from_Disease_Outbreak_Response
