We can't trust the WHO

This is what I just can't get past: Regardless of "how" this whole thing started (bats, wet markets, poor laboratory procedures, whatever) in the very beginning there had to be SOME NUMBER of sick people BEFORE the WHO got involved, right? How many? I don't know - how many people have to get sick before the WHO takes notice? A thousand? A hundred? For argument's sake, let's say it's as little as a few dozen, okay? So even at the very first moment the WHO got involved, how could they POSSIBLY have said, "There's no evidence of human-to-human transmission?" If 2 or 3 dozen people suddenly fall ill with symptoms nearly identical to the flu (only more severe) and that number is literally growing by the hour, doubling or tripling daily, is there any other logical assumption besides human-to-human transmission? To say otherwise they HAD to be either STUPID or LYING, and I really don't think all those disease experts at the WHO are stupid. Corrupt and unethical - yes. Stupid - no.