A、Advancing vaccines for rare diseases. B、Assessing the loss caused by epidemics. C、Funding medical researches on epidemics D、De

W: Good evening. One of the sobering lessons of the Ebola crisis was how ill-prepared the world was for such a deadly disease. But it is more terrifying to notice today the world is facing a worrying outbreak of Zika virus, adding to a growing list of diseases that includes SARS and bird flu. [1-1] What should we do with this issue? Now we have Mr. Pike, a governmental official from Public Health Bureau with us.
M: Thank you, hostess. This is the new normal. [1-2] New infectious diseases are becoming more common. When a new outbreak occurs, fear spreads even more rapidly than the virus. Politicians respond, rationally or not, with travel bans or trade blocks. Airlines ground flights. Travelers cancel trips.
W: Can you give us some numbers to illustrate the huge damage and economic loss that Ebola and SARS have caused?
M: Epidemics have devastating effects on the world economy and predicting these losses is hard, but a recent report on global health risks puts the expected economic losses from potential epidemics at around $60 billion a year.
W: I assume the loss in monetary term is not the most important issue though.
M: I couldn’t agree more. [2] America’s National Academy of Medicine suggests that just $4. 5 billion a year devoted to preparing for pandemics would make the world a lot safer.
W: What can we do with the money?
M: [3] Strengthen public-health systems, improve co-ordination in an emergency and fund neglected areas of research, things like that. And I think many of the investments to prepare for pandemics would bring broader benefits in some other fields too.
W: For example?
M: For example, stronger public-health systems would help fight such diseases as tuberculosis, which reduces global GDP by $12 billion a year, and malaria, which takes an even bigger toll.
W: But where should we put the priority of such investments and how can we guarantee this hard-earned money will be well spent?
M: [4] The priority should be to advance vaccines for diseases that are rare today, which scientists know could easily become pandemics in the future: Lassa fever, say, Crimean Congo fever or Marburg.
W: I have never heard of them at all. But I should admit that if there is slightly a chance for them to spread out in the future, the result could be fatal for mankind if we are not fully prepared today. So that is why we should pay attention to them now, right?
M: Exactly. And better sharing of data would help. More important is funding and a review of who has liability if firms rush vaccines or drugs to market. The initial development and early-stage testing of vaccines for the most likely future pandemics would cost roughly $150 million each. [5] Drug firms have little incentive to invest in a vaccine that may never be used.
W: I have to say that for these firms even later-stage testing when a pandemic breaks out is tricky. To encourage drug firms to play their full part during an emergency, governments need to set out how they will share the burden.
M: You are absolutely right.
   1. What is this interview mainly about?
   2. According to America’s National Academy of Medicine, how much money is needed a year to prepare for pandemics?
   3. According to the interviewee, what can we do with the money devoted to preparing for pandemics?
   4. Where should we put the priority of investments in preparation of pandemics?
   5. What does the interviewee say about drag firms developing vaccines for pandemics?