So are Angola and Mozambique your baseline for unhealthy equatorial regions the Portuguese tried to settle? Would Mexico and Peru be much healthier than Brazil or Macao or East Timor? Hmm even leaving the Americas aside, what would it have taken for the Portuguese to plant a population in the Cape, which is a "Mediterranean" climate after all.
When one looks at the mortality rates of Europeans in various colonies (fortunately the Catholic church tended to keep very good records of births and deaths) the trend is that where the largest number of Portuguese settlers went between were areas of high mortality, due to mostly tropical disease. During the 14th and 15th centuries many Portuguese men went to Africa and Asia and met an early death due to disease. Angola and Mozambique were not nearly as important during this period, Goa, Malaca and Macau tended to be.
However, by the 17th century Brazil became the leading place of settlement for the Portuguese, and here too the natural growth rate of the European population was much lower than it would have been in more temperate regions. Early settlement was focused in the sugar growing areas of northeastern Brazil, especially Bahia. Settlers were also sent to Maranhao and Para. By the 18th century, Portuguese settlement had reached Amazonia.
The trend of higher mortality rates of Europeans in tropical regions was not one unique to the Portuguese. During the 17th century ten times as many people from the British Isles settled in the West Indies as they did in New England. However, due to New England's cold winters killing off diseases, this meant that the settler population in New England grew, whereas the white population in the West Indies actually declined. Even in Virginia, the growth rate was lower and in the Southern Colonies the natural growth rate was around 0% until the late 18th century, mostly due to the settlement of marshy lowlands which were a breeding place for disease carriers.
Just as in New England, in New France, an even smaller number of settlers was able to achieve a very high natural growth rate due to a healthy climate. In fact, their numbers doubled every generation (every 25 years). Dutch South Africa too experienced the same phenomenon of a very high natural growth rate of its European population due to the dry Mediterranean climate around the Cape of Good Hope and the arid climate to the north.
Another factor in the settler colonies with high rates of natural growth was the settlement pattern where abundant land meant settlers lived in homesteads isolated from one another, rather than in the clustered found even in rural Europe. This pattern of settlement quickly proved important in limiting the spread of disease. Also, the abundance of land in these colonies, reduced the importance of dowries and made people have far more children than their counterparts in Europe. It also meant that without having to worry about dowries, marriages took place much sooner than in Europe.
Only by the mid-18th century when the Portuguese were challenging the Spanish along the Plate River would they settle areas which led to a high rate of natural growth. The settlements in Santa Catarina, Parana and Rio Grande do Sul also enjoyed a very high rate of natural growth, similar to those found in the British, French and Dutch colonies mentioned above. As for Mexico and Peru, the highlands with drier cooler climates would have most certainly been better for the prevention of disease. Also, the more arid regions of northern Mexico did tend to have higher rates of natural growth than the tropical lowlands of Northeastern Brazil.
As for Angola, it is noted that over hundreds of settlers arrived in Luanda in the late 16th century and early 17th even orphan girls. However, the death rate here was so high that the white population was below replacement level. This phenomenon would last until the mid-19th century. However, if one looks at the Brazilians from Pernambuco settled in Mocamedes (today Namibe) in Southern Angola in 1849, their population enjoyed a natural growth rate of 2.5% per year. The same can be said of the 295 people from Madeira settled in the highlands of southern Angola (Huila) in 1881, they had a natural growth rate of 2.7% per year early on.