So let's have a look at what they found.

In the first study, researchers from Harvard University plotted the most polluted places in the United States onto this onto the first map.

The areas with the highest particulate pollution are in red.

The second map shows deaths from covert 19 and what you consume just make out a correlation there.

In fact, people living in the most polluted areas are indeed 15% more likely to die from Corona virus than those living in places where pollution is only slightly lower now to a separate study which to which was looking at Italy.

And it looked at the regions where Corona virus was proving most deadly eso across Italy as a whole, 4.5% of those known to have court Covic, 19 died from it.

This was towards the end of March, but in long body and in Amelia, Romania, the race of fatality was far higher.

Around 12% in those areas with higher death rates are among the most polluted in Europe.

So again there is a correlation.

But can we know for sure if there is a link?

Gretchen Goldman is from the Union of Concerned Scientists, which advocates for science based policy.

Joining us live now?

Can we?

Is it just simply too early?

Or do you think we can categorically state that there was a link between death rates and air pollution?

When it comes to Corona virus?

It is early research, but this is compelling evidence that suggests that air pollution may be playing a role in what makes cove it more deadly.

And so this is not to be dismissed.

I think it's important research that we need to keep looking at and keep expanding what we know, and given that it's a respiratory diseases it is it pretty?

Is it pretty obvious that if the Pollux, if the air quality is worse, it will impact our our lungs more our capability to breathe?

What's what's your understanding of this?

It isn't surprising because we know that the diseases that are affected by air pollution are the same diseases that make cove it worse for people.

These air underlying conditions, like respiratory illness like cardiovascular issues on, so it's not surprising.

But, ah, this is alarming to see this much of an effect as we're seeing from the Harvard study.

What about we're looking specifically, These two studies are looking at three US and also Italy.

What about other countries with high pollution rates?

I'm thinking, specifically, places like India is there have what's the research saying?

They're so far?

Has there been a chance to have a look at that?

Yet?

I haven't seen research come out of India yet, but I am very concerned about how this will play out in countries with AH, high air pollution rates and other risk factors.

I think there is potential for air pollution to be an exacerbating factor in many of these places.

Where do you think when it comes down further down the line is the as scientists.

As you study this more, where do you think we'll end up with with these findings?

I look forward to seeing it bruv.

Broken down by demographics, Does it affect, ah, age or race differently?

Do we see it differently in different places?

And I hope decision makers use this information Ah, both in the short term to decide where resource is should go to fight this disease to limit its impacts.

Ah, and in the long term, to reduce air pollution.

So people are at less risk of dying from this new virus.

Is it too early to say whether it's the whether the virus, whether it's carried on polluted particles in the air or whether it's the pollution that then damages our internal internal organs?

And then that's adds to the things disease having such a devastating impact, it's likely there's a few mechanisms happening.

Ah, one of them is that air pollution causes inflammation.

We know that it causes inflammation in the lungs, potentially in the cardiovascular system.

And when you have information that makes it harder for you to fight disease like cove it and we're seeing Cove it patients also are.

It is harder to fight it when your lungs are experiencing inflammation, have a pre existing condition or another irritant, and so it seems like it's a deadly combination, and we don't have that much time, but just briefly, if you would win when it comes to gathering collecting this data, what is it that use as scientists need from the governments.

I think we need data to be collected quickly and systematically.

We need to make sure that testing is done in a fair and systematic way.

Ah, that helps us get at good data sets to be able to study this.

And, ah, the sooner that can happen the better, of course.