Study looks at how altitude relates to prevalence and impact of COVID-19
By
John Roach, AccuWeather staff writer
Published Jun 2, 2020 4:42 PM EDT
With states opening up in an attempt to return to a somewhat normal life as well as protests going on in response to the death of George Floyd, COVID-19 still poses a threat.
A recent peer-reviewed study on residents of Tibet and high-altitude regions of Bolivia and Ecuador has other researchers intrigued about a possible link between the coronavirus and altitude. What it means, however, for people living in the United States is a little cloudy.
Researchers from Australia, Bolivia, Canada, and Switzerland analyzed the epidemiologic data of COVID-19 cases in high-altitude inhabitants and compared them to data from lowland residents to see if the former were “less susceptible" to developing "severe adverse effect[s] in acute SARS-CoV-2 virus infection.”
They concluded the analysis “clearly indicates a decrease of prevalence and impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection” in populations living at an altitude of 3,000 meters (9,842 feet) or more. SARS-CoV-2, also known as the new coronavirus, is the contagion that causes COVID-19.
“The reason for decreased severity of the global COVID-19 outbreak at high altitude could relate to both environmental and physiological factors,” the researchers wrote. “Indeed, a high-altitude environment is characterized by drastic changes in temperature between night and day, air dryness, and high levels of ultraviolet (UV) light radiation," the researchers continued. "UV radiation at high altitude may act as a natural sanitizer. In relation to SARS-CoV-2, while complete disinfection cannot be achieved by UVA and UVB, these radiations should shorten the half-life of any given virus.”
Those environmental benefits, the researchers hypothesize, combine with an ability to cope with hypoxia (low levels of oxygen in the blood) that exists in those populations living at high altitudes, according to The Washington Post.
CLICK HERE FOR THE FREE ACCUWEATHER APP
The high-altitude study adds to previous work on the effects of UV radiation on the coronavirus. Researchers at Chengdu University of Information Technology in China analyzed the monthly average temperature, specific humidity and downward short-wave ultraviolet radiation in each Chinese province during the early days of the coronavirus outbreak.
The researchers in China reported that the strength of solar radiation may have an effect on how the virus spreads. Places where solar radiation remained below a certain level saw more effective spread, according to their findings. Meanwhile, higher-elevation locations, which see stronger amounts of UV rays due to their altitude, along with places that have drier climates, and therefore fewer clouds in the sky to diminish solar radiation, saw less transmission.
This newer high-altitude study has one real-world limitation, however, as the researchers themselves note: “World-wide about 120 towns and cities are located over 3,000” meters, or 9,842 feet.
The top three states in the U.S. with the highest mean elevations are Colorado (6,800 feet), Wyoming (6,700 feet) and Utah (6,100 feet). Colorado is the only state to have a city at an elevation of 9,842 feet or more and those locations are not highly populated. Alma, Colorado, about 90 miles southwest of Denver, is the country’s highest-altitude incorporated municipality with an elevation of 10,355 feet and its population in 2017 was 298.
With gymnasiums closed because of the spread of the new coronavirus, Andrea Lenneman of Denver runs a flight of stairs outside Mile High Stadium in Denver. (AP Photo/David Zalubowski)
So the question is whether high elevation in general would lead to a decrease in the prevalence and impact of the coronavirus, or is 3,000 meters (or so) the magic number?
Current coronavirus data doesn’t make the answer any clearer. The top 15 metro areas that have had the highest cumulative case rates since the start of the outbreak include Gallup, New Mexico, (elevation: 6,467), at number two; and Show Low, Arizona, (elevation: 6,345) at number nine, according to The New York Times. Others on the list with elevations of more than 1,000 feet include No. 3 Sioux City, Iowa, (1,201); No. 5 Grand Island, Nebraska, (1,860); and No. 15 Yakima, Washington (1,066).
Some high-elevation cities have low coronavirus case rates, such as Laramie, Wyoming, with an elevation of 7,165 and an estimated 66 cases per 100,000 people. But mile-high Denver, Colorado, with an elevation of 5,280 feet, has an estimated 833 cases per 100,000, based on The New York Times data.
One expert, commenting on the report in The Washington Post noted the virus “doesn’t care about altitude” -- a reminder reinforced by AccuWeather Founder and CEO Dr. Joel N. Myers. “The virus needs people, it survives in people,” he said. “It doesn’t survive very long in the air, on surfaces or anywhere else.”
Here is a select sampling of the current estimated cases per 100,000 people in various states, according to The New York Times data. Colorado, Wyoming and Utah are the top three states in the U.S. with the highest mean elevation, but clearly other factors affect the transmission of the virus.
New York: 1,935
New Jersey: 1,806
Massachusetts: 1,407
Connecticut: 1,184
Louisiana: 870
Pennsylvania: 599
Colorado: 458
Utah: 307
Washington: 296
California: 288
Nevada: 282
Arizona: 276
Idaho: 160
Wyoming: 156
Oregon: 101
Montana: 49
Keep checking back on AccuWeather.com and stay tuned to the AccuWeather Network on DirecTV, Frontier and Verizon Fios.
Report a Typo
News / Health
Study looks at how altitude relates to prevalence and impact of COVID-19
By John Roach, AccuWeather staff writer
Published Jun 2, 2020 4:42 PM EDT
With states opening up in an attempt to return to a somewhat normal life as well as protests going on in response to the death of George Floyd, COVID-19 still poses a threat.
A recent peer-reviewed study on residents of Tibet and high-altitude regions of Bolivia and Ecuador has other researchers intrigued about a possible link between the coronavirus and altitude. What it means, however, for people living in the United States is a little cloudy.
Researchers from Australia, Bolivia, Canada, and Switzerland analyzed the epidemiologic data of COVID-19 cases in high-altitude inhabitants and compared them to data from lowland residents to see if the former were “less susceptible" to developing "severe adverse effect[s] in acute SARS-CoV-2 virus infection.”
They concluded the analysis “clearly indicates a decrease of prevalence and impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection” in populations living at an altitude of 3,000 meters (9,842 feet) or more. SARS-CoV-2, also known as the new coronavirus, is the contagion that causes COVID-19.
“The reason for decreased severity of the global COVID-19 outbreak at high altitude could relate to both environmental and physiological factors,” the researchers wrote. “Indeed, a high-altitude environment is characterized by drastic changes in temperature between night and day, air dryness, and high levels of ultraviolet (UV) light radiation," the researchers continued. "UV radiation at high altitude may act as a natural sanitizer. In relation to SARS-CoV-2, while complete disinfection cannot be achieved by UVA and UVB, these radiations should shorten the half-life of any given virus.”
Those environmental benefits, the researchers hypothesize, combine with an ability to cope with hypoxia (low levels of oxygen in the blood) that exists in those populations living at high altitudes, according to The Washington Post.
CLICK HERE FOR THE FREE ACCUWEATHER APP
The high-altitude study adds to previous work on the effects of UV radiation on the coronavirus. Researchers at Chengdu University of Information Technology in China analyzed the monthly average temperature, specific humidity and downward short-wave ultraviolet radiation in each Chinese province during the early days of the coronavirus outbreak.
The researchers in China reported that the strength of solar radiation may have an effect on how the virus spreads. Places where solar radiation remained below a certain level saw more effective spread, according to their findings. Meanwhile, higher-elevation locations, which see stronger amounts of UV rays due to their altitude, along with places that have drier climates, and therefore fewer clouds in the sky to diminish solar radiation, saw less transmission.
This newer high-altitude study has one real-world limitation, however, as the researchers themselves note: “World-wide about 120 towns and cities are located over 3,000” meters, or 9,842 feet.
The top three states in the U.S. with the highest mean elevations are Colorado (6,800 feet), Wyoming (6,700 feet) and Utah (6,100 feet). Colorado is the only state to have a city at an elevation of 9,842 feet or more and those locations are not highly populated. Alma, Colorado, about 90 miles southwest of Denver, is the country’s highest-altitude incorporated municipality with an elevation of 10,355 feet and its population in 2017 was 298.
With gymnasiums closed because of the spread of the new coronavirus, Andrea Lenneman of Denver runs a flight of stairs outside Mile High Stadium in Denver. (AP Photo/David Zalubowski)
So the question is whether high elevation in general would lead to a decrease in the prevalence and impact of the coronavirus, or is 3,000 meters (or so) the magic number?
Current coronavirus data doesn’t make the answer any clearer. The top 15 metro areas that have had the highest cumulative case rates since the start of the outbreak include Gallup, New Mexico, (elevation: 6,467), at number two; and Show Low, Arizona, (elevation: 6,345) at number nine, according to The New York Times. Others on the list with elevations of more than 1,000 feet include No. 3 Sioux City, Iowa, (1,201); No. 5 Grand Island, Nebraska, (1,860); and No. 15 Yakima, Washington (1,066).
Some high-elevation cities have low coronavirus case rates, such as Laramie, Wyoming, with an elevation of 7,165 and an estimated 66 cases per 100,000 people. But mile-high Denver, Colorado, with an elevation of 5,280 feet, has an estimated 833 cases per 100,000, based on The New York Times data.
One expert, commenting on the report in The Washington Post noted the virus “doesn’t care about altitude” -- a reminder reinforced by AccuWeather Founder and CEO Dr. Joel N. Myers. “The virus needs people, it survives in people,” he said. “It doesn’t survive very long in the air, on surfaces or anywhere else.”
Here is a select sampling of the current estimated cases per 100,000 people in various states, according to The New York Times data. Colorado, Wyoming and Utah are the top three states in the U.S. with the highest mean elevation, but clearly other factors affect the transmission of the virus.
New York: 1,935
New Jersey: 1,806
Massachusetts: 1,407
Connecticut: 1,184
Louisiana: 870
Pennsylvania: 599
Colorado: 458
Utah: 307
Washington: 296
California: 288
Nevada: 282
Arizona: 276
Idaho: 160
Wyoming: 156
Oregon: 101
Montana: 49
Keep checking back on AccuWeather.com and stay tuned to the AccuWeather Network on DirecTV, Frontier and Verizon Fios.
Report a Typo