问题描述：
英语翻译
Leaders of poor countries appear to be completely unaware of the global connections between the health of their populations and the security and stability required to ensure that they do not fall prey to unforeseen health catastrophes.The dearth of strong and transparent leadership among the world's poorest nations augurs poorly for the health of those nations,and of the world.
Meanwhile,the rich countries also continue to think about pandemics in a very linear and scientific way,which fails to account for the comprehensive economic and political chaos that would accompany a major pandemic.The World Health Organization (WHO),Centers for Disease Control,and,for that matter,the Gates Foundation and other donors,are concentrating their efforts on vaccines and,in the case of the WHO,antiviral stockpiles for a possible outbreak of avian flu.Plans are also being developed for isolation and quarantine,running through scenarios for stopping air traffic and the like.Unfortunately,it's unlikely that the pathogens will be as responsive to our efforts as we hope they will be,leading to widespread chaos,morbidity and mortality.
At a time when oil shocks have the ability to globally increase food insecurity,it may be worthwhile to consider how a pandemic could push people living on the edge into poverty and starvation.With food production suffering greatly,the urban centers that are dependent on daily imports of food could rapidly fall victim.If this sounds a bit like Jared Diamond's arguments in Collapse,it's intentional.The world is interconnected,but poor countries are hanging by a thread,and it's a thread that could quickly break if a pandemic hits hard enough.
Adding to the threat,it may well be that the worst pandemics on the planet are not emerging,but have simply been with us so long that we've grown accustomed to their presence and therefore have done little to address them.Women across sub-Saharan Africa continue to stand a 1 percent chance of dying in childbirth--is that a pandemic?Five hundred thousand kids die from measles every year.Africans suffer from an astonishing estimated 300 million episodes of malaria annually,with a death toll of one million.And now throughout the developing world silent killers like heart disease and diabetes are taking hold.
In the best of cases,pursuing a business-as-usual approach,the wealthy countries may get lucky:the spread of contagion may be stopped at borders and when it crosses,advanced,expensive treatment may be available.But no matter what,the economic and potential political destabilization that would result would cross these borders and be felt in everyone's bank accounts.The moral implications of continuing to adopt a merely defensive stance will guarantee that developing countries will suffer millions dead and may also cultivate the pathogens for future pandemics that will evade the best weapons the richer countries can throw at them.
Some might see the call for health improvement in poor nations in order to save our own skins as either a Machiavellian ploy to help poor people or a sad and ironic commentary on the state of humankind.Whatever the case,rich nations must begin taking health systems for the poor seriously because:new bugs and the resurgence of old ones are likely to emerge where people are sickest or treatment is inconsistent; when pandemics strike,they'll do the most harm to those without health services; and when sicknesses like a new strain of influenza inevitably come,the health personnel in these settings will be much-better equipped to identify and contain them.
还有 这些 小弟分不多
Leaders of poor countries appear to be completely unaware of the global connections between the health of their populations and the security and stability required to ensure that they do not fall prey to unforeseen health catastrophes.The dearth of strong and transparent leadership among the world's poorest nations augurs poorly for the health of those nations,and of the world.
Meanwhile,the rich countries also continue to think about pandemics in a very linear and scientific way,which fails to account for the comprehensive economic and political chaos that would accompany a major pandemic.The World Health Organization (WHO),Centers for Disease Control,and,for that matter,the Gates Foundation and other donors,are concentrating their efforts on vaccines and,in the case of the WHO,antiviral stockpiles for a possible outbreak of avian flu.Plans are also being developed for isolation and quarantine,running through scenarios for stopping air traffic and the like.Unfortunately,it's unlikely that the pathogens will be as responsive to our efforts as we hope they will be,leading to widespread chaos,morbidity and mortality.
At a time when oil shocks have the ability to globally increase food insecurity,it may be worthwhile to consider how a pandemic could push people living on the edge into poverty and starvation.With food production suffering greatly,the urban centers that are dependent on daily imports of food could rapidly fall victim.If this sounds a bit like Jared Diamond's arguments in Collapse,it's intentional.The world is interconnected,but poor countries are hanging by a thread,and it's a thread that could quickly break if a pandemic hits hard enough.
Adding to the threat,it may well be that the worst pandemics on the planet are not emerging,but have simply been with us so long that we've grown accustomed to their presence and therefore have done little to address them.Women across sub-Saharan Africa continue to stand a 1 percent chance of dying in childbirth--is that a pandemic?Five hundred thousand kids die from measles every year.Africans suffer from an astonishing estimated 300 million episodes of malaria annually,with a death toll of one million.And now throughout the developing world silent killers like heart disease and diabetes are taking hold.
In the best of cases,pursuing a business-as-usual approach,the wealthy countries may get lucky:the spread of contagion may be stopped at borders and when it crosses,advanced,expensive treatment may be available.But no matter what,the economic and potential political destabilization that would result would cross these borders and be felt in everyone's bank accounts.The moral implications of continuing to adopt a merely defensive stance will guarantee that developing countries will suffer millions dead and may also cultivate the pathogens for future pandemics that will evade the best weapons the richer countries can throw at them.
Some might see the call for health improvement in poor nations in order to save our own skins as either a Machiavellian ploy to help poor people or a sad and ironic commentary on the state of humankind.Whatever the case,rich nations must begin taking health systems for the poor seriously because:new bugs and the resurgence of old ones are likely to emerge where people are sickest or treatment is inconsistent; when pandemics strike,they'll do the most harm to those without health services; and when sicknesses like a new strain of influenza inevitably come,the health personnel in these settings will be much-better equipped to identify and contain them.
还有 这些 小弟分不多
问题解答：
我来补答展开全文阅读