The spread of the new coronavirus has nothing to do with temperature latitude

as summer approaches, it is hoped that hot weather will slow the spread of the new coronary pneumonia epidemic, just as we have experienced in the past. But such a wish is likely to fall through. A recent Canadian study showed that temperature and latitude had nothing to do with the spread of the new coronavirus, and public health interventions such as limiting population aggregation and maintaining social alienation played an active role in curbing the spread of the epidemic.For the study, researchers at the University of Toronto looked at more than 370,000 confirmed cases of neo-crown pneumonia in 144 countries and territories around the world, including Australia, the United States and Canada. Case data for China, Italy, Iran and South Korea are excluded due to the outbreak period. Using weighted random effect regression analysis, they analyzed the association between neo-coronavirus transmission and latitude, temperature, humidity, school hearing, crowd aggregation, and social alienation measures.The researchers found little or no correlation between latitude and temperature and the spread of the new coronary pneumonia outbreak, and a weak correlation between humidity and the spread of the outbreak. This suggests that hot weather has no effect on the progress of the new coronary pneumonia pandemic. In contrast, public health interventions that limit population aggregation, school closures, and social alienation are closely related to the spread of the epidemic, and multivarivation model studies have shown that these interventions are effective in limiting the spread of the epidemic.The researchers say hot weather does not slow the spread of the outbreak, and that public health interventions are the only effective ones at the moment, and the more public health interventions a region implements, the greater the impact on the outbreak. They say the findings are of direct practical significance because many countries and regions are considering relaxing or eliminating certain public health interventions, which suggest that governments and public health authorities carefully weigh the economic impact of these measures against public health benefits when making decisions.The findings were published in the Journal of the Canadian Medical Association. (Science and Technology Daily)