I’d add: The other key distinguishing thing about the JIC report (beyond the simple, crucial fact of its authoritative authorship) is its methodology. It is not a scientific report. It is >a risk analysis<. This means that rather than being fixated on what can be proved, it is most interested in what should be worried about and what we are exposed to, and of course as part of that what the worst case scenario is. This makes it much more useful to governments and populations than a scientific report.