问题描述：
英语翻译
This is perhaps most troubling in the context of pandemics because just as environmental catastrophes can spur epidemics,and potentially pandemics,pandemics can quickly take down economies and,potentially,countries.In the wake of avian flu,Southeast Asian economies experienced an enormous economic downturn; tourists have been writing me and asking whether it's safe to go to Brazil in light of the dengue epidemic; the economic,social and political cost of AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa remains to be calculated.Thus,there is a vicious cycle:pandemics can encourage chaos and breakdowns of basic systems,particularly in the poorest and poorly governed nations,and these breakdowns can in turn create better conditions for more disease to emerge.Case in point:during the chaos in Kenya at the turn of this year,60 percent of patients on antiretroviral therapy and 35 percent of patients on TB drugs were lost to follow-up.It is likely that all those patients stopped their treatment midcourse and are now potentially cultivating resistant strains of both infections.
Policy makers are looking at the direct health consequences of pandemics (Who is sick?How do we treat them?) rather than the indirect health consequences (What other services will fail?What will happen to the food supply?).Had SARS hit anywhere in sub-Saharan Africa,where ventilators and surgical masks are a rare commodity,death rates would have been higher than in Asia.Today the response systems being put in place are to protect the wealthy with vaccines and antivirals,but do not treat those most likely to suffer.Thus,we are preparing for the next pandemic rather than doing everything in our power to prevent it.
Foundations and governments can't seem to get their heads around the fact that no disease can be treated in a vacuum:all efforts must be part of an integrated response,otherwise dollars are sure to be poorly spent.The worst-hit area on the planet for health-systems failure remains sub-Saharan Africa,where governments spend paltry amounts on health,the poor are frequently required to pay for services and there's an uncanny history of serious illnesses evolving.HIV is widely recognized today as having its roots in central Africa; resistant malaria parasites are commonplace; and bizarre outbreaks such as Ebola appear from time to time.When sexually transmitted infections go untreated and open sores ensue,the possibility for transmission increases exponentially,and that transmission doesn't stop at borders.
While epidemics get the press--the recent dengue outbreak in Brazil for example--pandemics tend to quietly work their way through populations,doing enormous harm never garnering the resources or the media attention.That's not to say that rich nations shouldn't be concerned about these epidemics,but there is an uncomfortably consistent trend in global public health to place attention on those subjects and diseases that may not pose the greatest threat to human welfare.
连着上面的 请一起翻译
This is perhaps most troubling in the context of pandemics because just as environmental catastrophes can spur epidemics,and potentially pandemics,pandemics can quickly take down economies and,potentially,countries.In the wake of avian flu,Southeast Asian economies experienced an enormous economic downturn; tourists have been writing me and asking whether it's safe to go to Brazil in light of the dengue epidemic; the economic,social and political cost of AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa remains to be calculated.Thus,there is a vicious cycle:pandemics can encourage chaos and breakdowns of basic systems,particularly in the poorest and poorly governed nations,and these breakdowns can in turn create better conditions for more disease to emerge.Case in point:during the chaos in Kenya at the turn of this year,60 percent of patients on antiretroviral therapy and 35 percent of patients on TB drugs were lost to follow-up.It is likely that all those patients stopped their treatment midcourse and are now potentially cultivating resistant strains of both infections.
Policy makers are looking at the direct health consequences of pandemics (Who is sick?How do we treat them?) rather than the indirect health consequences (What other services will fail?What will happen to the food supply?).Had SARS hit anywhere in sub-Saharan Africa,where ventilators and surgical masks are a rare commodity,death rates would have been higher than in Asia.Today the response systems being put in place are to protect the wealthy with vaccines and antivirals,but do not treat those most likely to suffer.Thus,we are preparing for the next pandemic rather than doing everything in our power to prevent it.
Foundations and governments can't seem to get their heads around the fact that no disease can be treated in a vacuum:all efforts must be part of an integrated response,otherwise dollars are sure to be poorly spent.The worst-hit area on the planet for health-systems failure remains sub-Saharan Africa,where governments spend paltry amounts on health,the poor are frequently required to pay for services and there's an uncanny history of serious illnesses evolving.HIV is widely recognized today as having its roots in central Africa; resistant malaria parasites are commonplace; and bizarre outbreaks such as Ebola appear from time to time.When sexually transmitted infections go untreated and open sores ensue,the possibility for transmission increases exponentially,and that transmission doesn't stop at borders.
While epidemics get the press--the recent dengue outbreak in Brazil for example--pandemics tend to quietly work their way through populations,doing enormous harm never garnering the resources or the media attention.That's not to say that rich nations shouldn't be concerned about these epidemics,but there is an uncomfortably consistent trend in global public health to place attention on those subjects and diseases that may not pose the greatest threat to human welfare.
连着上面的 请一起翻译
问题解答：
我来补答展开全文阅读