ABSTRACT
The book closes by reflecting on its central aim: to make sense of what went wrong at the science–policy interface during Covid-19 and to offer tools for doing better next time. Rather than delivering a final verdict, the authors distil the key lessons from their analysis of scientific orthodoxy – how to detect it, counteract it, and prevent it from closing down legitimate options in a crisis. They emphasize the need for methodological pluralism, openness to dissent, clarity about when science should direct policy, and attention to fairness across contexts. The conclusion invites readers to carry forward these principles into future emergencies.
