And again falls afoul of ignoring that terms such as Public Health Emergency of International Concern have defined meanings. A good deal has to be already known before the standards for such a declaration are satisfied, so the claim that the date on which an official statement of a defined state's existence should be taken as the first point at which the matter was of concern, or was known of, fails.
As for the rest of this, it is difficult to discern an argument in your comments. You seem to be asserting that the present administration had no knowledge of what impended at the end of January, and further seem to assert that this is the fault of the World Health Organization rather than that of the people who are currently making a murderous botch of things. From this follows your conclusion that there was something risky about declaring a ban on Chinese entering the United States at the end of January, and contrive to do it in a manner suggesting praise --- for surely to say something is done prematurely is to say it is a worthy action at heart, and someone who, in ignorance, grasps up what eventually will be the worthy and necessary action, is generally accounted as praiseworthy, as having gifted instincts. After which you make the incontestable assertions people are discommoded by illness, and that when people seeking a scapegoat for national failings trump up a controversy, argument will persist.
Best to close on something we both a agree on....
"For the Snark was a boojum, you see."