The @CommonsSTC has (incredibly impressively) released a report today on the "use of science advice" in the Covid-19 pandemic ... This thread offers some comments on the report @EScAPE_Covid19

Important to understand the novelty -- not just the disease - but also of the related science advisory mechanisms

Prior to Covid-19, SAGE - the UK top line science advisory mechanism in the UK -- has only been activated 8 times in total & 3 times for a public health emergency

In the UK, as in most places, science advisory mechanisms were being designed and implemented as they were being relied on, example of Joint Biosecurity Centre below

This makes it difficult to secure robust, legitimate, trusted advice, to put it mildly

A useful & idealized graphic of UK science advice in the pandemic reveals two things missing
SAGE --> Cabinet & Prime Minister (of course this happened, not least via media)
Decision makers--> SAGE, GCSA, CMO (otherwise how do the experts know what advice is needed)

As the pandemic evolved so too did structures of science advice (note these figs adapted from @instituteforgov)

But, reality is even more complicated & missing is "shadow" science advice (eg, @IndependentSage) & official advisors advocating on their own (eg, via media)

These recommendations are eminently sensible, to
publish advice
delineate roles of advice in decision making
clarify institutional purposes of advisory bodies