This is why we always have to know the situation behind the rough statistics. Singapore is an excellent example in which to pose that question. They have done all the right things it seems in governance against the virus, but have they failed, and is climate irrelevant?
First off I don't think climate is irrelevant, but if a nation/state such as this with a great many people visiting on business, and other important matters from outside have had contact in other climates and other nations the inevitable chance of virus introduction will occur, and become part of the statistics. From what I recall, however the low death rate has been due to the diligence in follow up and subsequent care dispensed. The introduction to a favorable climate in this perusal can't be underestimated.
Now skipping on to my earlier euphoric report am now back to earth with the news that a nearby family was exposed to a returning cruise line employee relative apparently now stricken with the coronavirus. If he was tested negative when returning home to Bali why in the Hell was he not still placed in controlled quarantine for 14 days to provide a viable medical once over given his notoriously terrible prior work exposure? This bullshit non-existence of any rational government control of such a potentially eruptive problem is beyond comprehension!
This fits in really well with Spicy's post from the Yale study (
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.04.20053058v1) Singapore, and for that matter cruise ships, all have a much more "indoor" society and hence, according to the study, are much more infectious. Makes perfect sense to me. Live in a bamboo hut in Bali and be happy and healthy!!!
