Thanks for the update, I haven't looked at it for a while, these were my bookmarked sources from that time: https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3904054 https

Thanks for the update, I haven't looked at it for a while, these were my bookmarked sources from that time: https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3904054 https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3904054 https://news.yahoo.com/taiwan-accuses-failing-heed-warning-143800176.html https://news.yahoo.com/taiwan-accuses-failing-heed-warning-1... 'The officials said doctors in Taiwan had learned from their colleagues in mainland China that medical staff were falling ill from the as-yet unnamed coronavirus, a sign of human-to-human transmission that Taiwan says it passed on to the WHO and Chinese authorities on December 31. However, the WHO did not communicate the information with other nations.' So I guess it comes down to semantics; whether a mention of atypical cases and request for confirmation is effectively a warning - or not. Whatever the interpretation, it seems like the lack of response from the WHO to that email indicates the WHO were in the dark at the time, or not willing to share what they had. If the former then the email could be said to have formed a warning of some kind. >https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/18/caught-in-a-superpower-struggle-the-inside-story-of-the-whos-response-to-coronavirus https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/18/caught-in-a-su... I love how The Guardian tries to twist the facts in the service of an anti Trump screed. Personally I feel the report from Reuters was far more balanced (it doesn't even mention Trump) https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-taiwan-idUSKCN21T0BA https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-taiwan... (curious about the downvotes btw...)