yes, member kimmy! You've stayed out of this thread long enough to allow the multiple waldo azzWhoopin's you took to be buried... would you like the waldo to resurrect them! I'm keen to have you to extend upon your SquirrelChops and, in particular, have you elaborate further on trends and their relevance to studies presented!
Funny but no. the Shade Man is 100% right here. He provided a real cite: The Atlantic, a well-respected, left-leaning source. For you to dismiss this as a "go-fetch link" just smacks of intellectual dishonesty.
a go-fetch link is simply one dropped without offering anything from it; typically personal comment speaking to some particular point within the link, one ideally quoted. It's exactly what member SelfIso did twice (each time simply pasting 4 links without including any personal comment or related quotation from the links... same for member Shady, who simply pasted in one of the same links SelfIso initially provided and stated "Important Read". Of course, this is the way of the lazyAzz who can't be bothered to actually read/do research/articulate points of interest/concern/relevance/etc..
Since the waldo's time is apparently too precious to waste on respectable sources like The Atlantic, the kimmo will parse key portions of it:
The Atlantic article explains that, in short, the WHO's information is only as good as the regimes that it depends on for information, and in the case of dogshit regimes like the PRC, the information coming from the WHO is pretty near worthless. For China to have told WHO in mid January that there was no evidence of human-to-human transmission is simply a bald-faced lie. The WHO reliance on statements like that from member organizations is a structural deficiency of WHO. And for Canada to take that statement from WHO as a factual basis for the formulation of public policy is sheer idiocy.
being the blowhard you are, you wouldn't take the effort/time to understand that the WHO has WHO field personnel in China... from the earliest days. As much as you want to blindly, lock-step, parrot the false narrative, the WHO scientists aren't public policy extensions of any country, blindly relaying propaganda statements from a government. Of course, you can't bother to take the time to read my detailed response to member Shady... the detailed rebuff of his most "complex analysis" where he states nothing more than "Important Read".
I won't bother to repeat
my rebuff here again... you haven't the intellectual honesty to review it properly or the wherewithal to understand it anyway!