一、外刊阅读：小猫钓鱼

Bill Gates once released a swarm of mosquitoes on a crowd to make a point about malaria

Published Tue, Nov 28 201711:01 AM ESTUpdated Tue, Nov 28 20174:15 PM

EST

1
 A. compelling B. devastating C. afflicted D.infectious E. progress

F. impact G. spread H. effective I. declined J. cause K. miracle

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates released a swarm of mosquitoes on an unsuspecting audience at

a TED conference in 2009.

“There’s no reason only poor people should have the experience,” the billionaire said, before
adding that the mosquitoes were not (31) ______.

Gates was making the (32) ______ point that, even if an issue like malaria doesn’t directly
affect you, you should still care. At that time, he noted, more money had been invested into
researching hair loss drugs because, when it comes to baldness, “rich men are (33) ______.”

Malaria, meanwhile, is present mostly in poor, tropical areas of the world, where it can be (34)
______.

With this memorable demonstration, Gates won over his listeners by using a number of (35)
______ presentation tactics, including a visual aid, a direct interaction with the audience and even
humor. “Baldness is a terrible thing,” he joked.

A year later, he gave another presentation at TED on the future of the world’s energy, and he
recalled how well the 2009 audience had responded. He even replicated the experiment, this time
with fireflies to serve as an example of a “gimmicky solution” to the energy crisis. The audience
laughed and, later, gave him a standing ovation.

He’s no Steve Jobs, but, especially more recently in his career, Gates has won a reputation as a
great presenter.

Since 2009, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has made real (36) ______ in its fight against
malaria. Gates wrote a blog post in 2016 highlighting the (37) ______ of their philanthropic efforts.
Citing a report from The New England Journal of Medicine, he said, “The malaria death rate in sub-
Saharan Africa has (38) ______ by a stunning 57 percent since 2000.”

“With almost 500,000 children still dying of malaria every year, we obviously have a long way
to go. But cutting the death rate by more than half is a(n) (39) ______. It’s one of the greatest success
stories in the history of global health,” he wrote.

2
 The Gates’ new mission is fighting the neurodegenerative disease Alzheimer’s. Earlier this
month, Gates announced that he will invest $100 million in researching its (40) ______ and
developing an effective treatment.（377）

二、参考答案：DACBH EFIKJ

三、原文链接：

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/28/bill-gates-released-swarming-mosquitoes-to-make-a-point-about-
malaria.html

四、核心词汇：

compelling devastating afflicted infectious progress

impact spread effective declined cause miracle

（1）拓展变形

1.afflict（拓展 conflict inflict）

3
 afflicted

afflicting

affliction

afflictions

afflicts

2.cause

causation

causative

caused

causes

causing

3.compel

compelled

compelling

compellingly

compels

4.decline

declined

declines

declining

4
5.devastate

devastated

devastates

devastating

devastatingly

devastation

devastations

6.effective(延伸：efffect, influence impact)

effectively

effectiveness

ineffective

ineffectively

ineffectiveness

ineffectivenesses

7.impact

impacted

impacting

impacts

8.infect

5
 infected

infecting

infection

infections

infectious

infectiously

infectiousness

infective

infects

noninfectious

reinfect

reinfected

reinfecting

reinfection

reinfections

reinfects

uninfected

9.miracle

miracles

10.progress

progressed

6
 progresses

progressing

progression

progressions

progressive

progressively

progressives

11.spread

spreadable

spreader

spreaders

spreading

spreads

（二）重点讲解 1：

1.afflict

英 [əˈflɪkt]

美 [əˈflɪkt]

v. to affect sb/sth in an unpleasant or harmful way

折磨;使痛苦

Some are being afflicted with the novel coronavirus.

有些人正遭受新冠肺炎的痛苦。

7
2.形近意近

plague/afflict/inflict 【使受痛苦】

（1）plague v. 折磨，使苦恼

〔辨析〕

指糟糕的事情（如病痛、问题等）在很长一段时间内不断困扰某个人、组织、地区等，通常
用被动语态。

Mask shortages continued to plague that area.

口罩短缺继续困扰该地区。

（2）afflict

v. [正式]使痛苦，折磨

指疾病、战争、贫困等让某人、某地区等饱受折磨，常用被动语态。

About 20% of that country's population is afflicted by water shortage.

那个国家 20%左右的居民饱受缺水之苦。

（3）inflict

英 [ɪnˈflɪkt] 美 [ɪnˈflɪkt]

v.to make sb/sth suffer sth unpleasant

使遭受打击;使吃苦头

派生词： infliction n.

inflict yourself/sb on sb 不请自来；打扰 

指使人、机构、地区等遭受不愉快的事。

You still had to pay the rent despite all of the damage inflicted by the coronavirus

尽管新冠肺炎造成了各种损失，你们依然得交租。

8
3.词根记忆：

flict= to strike 打击

变形加前缀：
1.afflict v. 使苦恼；折磨

af 加强 + flict 打击 → 一再打击 → 折磨

afflictionn. 苦恼；苦难

2.conflict n., v. 冲突

con 共同 + flict 打击 → 两边打斗 → 冲突

3.inflict v. 使…遭受

in 使… + flict 打击 → 使受打击 → 使…遭受

infliction n. 痛苦；负担

（二）重点讲解 2：

1.compel

英 [kəmˈpel]

美 [kəmˈpel]

v.to force sb to do sth; to make sth necessary 强迫；迫使；使必须 

(not used in the progressive tenses 不用于进行时) 

to cause a particular reaction 引起（反应） 

2.形近意近

force/compel 【迫使】
(1) force v. 迫使，强迫
指通过威胁等迫使他人做不愿做的事情，或指局势、事件等使某人必须做某事。
The director of Health Committee was forced to resign for mismanagement.
卫生委员会主任因管理不善被迫辞职。

(2) compel v. [正式]强迫，逼迫

多指人、局势、规定等迫使某人做某事；也指觉得必须去做某事，常因为这么做是正确的。

9
The novel coronavirus compelled us to cancel the get-together.
新冠肺炎使我们不得不放弃聚会。

3.词根记忆
pel, puls= to drive, to push 驱动；推

Compel v. 强迫

com 加强 + pel 驱动；推 → 不断推 → 强迫

compulsion n. 强制

com 加强 + puls 驱动；推 + ion 表动作 → 强行推动 → 强制

compulsoryadj. 强制性的

com 加强 + puls 驱动；推 + ory …的 → 强制性的

dispel v. 驱散（烟雾等）

dis 分散 + pel 驱动；推 → 推开 → 驱散

expel v. 开除

ex 出 + pel 驱动；推 → 推出去 → 开除

expulsion n. 驱逐

ex 出 + puls 驱动；推 + ion 表名词 → 驱逐

五．原文翻译：

Bill Gates once released a swarm of mosquitoes on a crowd to make a point about malaria

10
 Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates released a swarm of mosquitoes on an unsuspecting audience at
a TED conference in 2009.

微软联合创始人比尔·盖茨在 2009 年的 TED 大会上向一群毫无怀疑的观众释放了一大批蚊子。

“There’s no reason only poor people should have the experience,” the billionaire said, before
adding that the mosquitoes were not infectious.

这位亿万富翁说：“没有理由只让穷人有体验。”他补充说，蚊子没有传染性。

Gates was making the compelling point that, even if an issue like malaria doesn’t

directly affect you, you should still care. At that time, he noted, more money had been

invested into researching hair loss drugs because, when it comes to baldness, “rich

men are afflicted.”

盖茨提出了一个令人信服的观点：即使像疟疾这样的问题没有直接影响到您，您仍然应该关
心。他指出，当时，人们投入了更多的资金来研究脱发药物，因为在秃顶方面，“富人遭受
了折磨”。

Malaria, meanwhile, is present mostly in poor, tropical areas of the world, where it can be
devastating.

同时，疟疾主要存在于世界上贫穷的热带地区，这可能是毁灭性的。

With this memorable demonstration, Gates won over his listeners by using a number
of effective presentation tactics, including a visual aid, a direct interaction with the audience and
even humor. “Baldness is a terrible thing,” he joked.

通过这次令人难忘的演示，盖茨通过使用多种有效的演讲策略赢得了听众的好评，包括视觉
辅助，与观众的直接互动甚至幽默。 “秃头是一件可怕的事情，”他开玩笑说。

A year later, he gave another presentation at TED on the future of the world’s energy, and he
recalled how well the 2009 audience had responded. He even replicated the experiment, this time
with fireflies to serve as an example of a “gimmicky solution” to the energy crisis. The audience
laughed and, later, gave him a standing ovation.

11
一年后，他在 TED 上做了另一个关于世界能源未来的演讲，他回忆了 2009 年听众的反应如
何。他甚至重复了实验，这次用萤火虫做为能源危机“花哨的解决方案”的例子。观众笑了
起来，后来对他起立鼓掌。

He’s no Steve Jobs, but, especially more recently in his career, Gates has won a reputation as a
great presenter.

他不是史蒂夫·乔布斯，但尤其是在最近的职业生涯中，盖茨赢得了出色的主持人的声誉。

Since 2009, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has made real progress in its fight against
malaria. Gates wrote a blog post in 2016 highlighting the impact of their philanthropic efforts. Citing
a report from The New England Journal of Medicine, he said, “The malaria death rate in sub-Saharan
Africa has declined by a stunning 57 percent since 2000.”

自 2009 年以来，比尔和梅琳达·盖茨基金会在抗击疟疾方面取得了真正的进展。盖茨在 2016

年发表了一篇博客文章，重点介绍了慈善事业的影响。他引用《新英格兰医学杂志》的报告
说：“自 2000 年以来，撒哈拉以南非洲的疟疾死亡率已下降了惊人的 57％。”

“With almost 500,000 children still dying of malaria every year, we obviously have a long way
to go. But cutting the death rate by more than half is a miracle. It’s one of the greatest success stories
in the history of global health,” he wrote.

“每年仍有近 50 万儿童死于疟疾，显然，我们还有很长的路要走。但是将死亡率降低一半以
上是一个奇迹。这是全球卫生史上最伟大的成功案例之一，”他写道。

The Gates’ new mission is fighting the neurodegenerative disease Alzheimer’s. Earlier this
month, Gates announced that he will invest $100 million in researching its cause and developing an
effective treatment.

盖茨的新使命是与神经退行性疾病阿尔茨海默氏症作斗争。本月初，盖茨宣布他将投资 1 亿
美元用于研究其病因并开发有效的治疗方法。
（ https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/28/bill-gates-released-swarming-mosquitoes-to-make-a-point-
about-malaria.html）

12
六、拓展阅读
比尔盖茨关于病毒威胁的演讲

Backgroud:
"Ebola threatens everything that makes us human," says Bruce Aylward of the World Health Organization.
And when the Ebola epidemic exploded in 2014, it caused a worldwide panic. But humanity can beat Ebola
-- and Aylward shows four strategies that show how we are succeeding. The fight against Ebola is not yet
won, he says, but it can be.
世界卫生组织的布鲁斯·艾尔沃德说：“埃博拉病毒威胁着使我们成为人类的一切。”埃博拉
疫情在 2014 年爆发时，引起了世界范围的恐慌。但是人类可以击败埃博拉病毒-艾伦沃德展
示了四种策略来展示我们如何取得成功。他说，与埃博拉的斗争尚未获胜，但是可以。

The next outbreak? We're not ready

下一场疫情什么时候爆发，我们还没有准备好

When I was a kid, the disaster we worried about most was a nuclear war. That's why we had a barrel like
this down in our basement, filled with cans of food and water. When the nuclear attack came, we were
supposed to go downstairs, hunker down, and eat out of that barrel. 

Today the greatest risk of global catastrophe doesn't look like this. Instead, it looks like this. If anything
kills over 10 million people in the next few decades, it's most likely to be a highly infectious virus rather
than a war. Not missiles, but microbes. Now, part of the reason for this is that we've invested a huge amount
in nuclear deterrents. But we've actually invested very little in a system to stop an epidemic. We're not
ready for the next epidemic. 
Let's look at Ebola. I'm sure all of you read about it in the newspaper, lots of tough challenges. I followed it
carefully through the case analysis tools we use to track polio eradication. And as you look at what went
on, the problem wasn't that there was a system that didn't work well enough, the problem was that we didn't
have a system at all. In fact, there's some pretty obvious key missing pieces. 
We didn't have a group of epidemiologists ready to go, who would have gone, seen what the disease was,
seen how far it had spread. The case reports came in on paper. It was very delayed before they were put

13
online and they were extremely inaccurate. We didn't have a medical team ready to go. We didn't have a
way of preparing people. Now, Médecins Sans Frontières did a great job orchestrating volunteers. But even
so, we were far slower than we should have been getting the thousands of workers into these
countries. And a large epidemic would require us to have hundreds of thousands of workers. There was no
one there to look at treatment approaches. No one to look at the diagnostics. No one to figure out what tools
should be used. As an example, we could have taken the blood of survivors, processed it, and put that
plasma back in people to protect them. But that was never tried. 
So there was a lot that was missing. And these things are really a global failure. The WHO is funded to
monitor epidemics, but not to do these things I talked about. Now, in the movies it's quite different. There's
a group of handsome epidemiologists ready to go, they move in, they save the day, but that's just pure
Hollywood. 
The failure to prepare could allow the next epidemic to be dramatically more devastating than Ebola Let's
look at the progression of Ebola over this year. About 10,000 people died,  and nearly all were in the three
West African countries. There's three reasons why it didn't spread more. The first is that there was a lot of
heroic work by the health workers. They found the people and they prevented more infections. The second
is the nature of the virus. Ebola does not spread through the air. And by the time you're contagious, most
people are so sick that they're bedridden. Third, it didn't get into many urban areas. And that was just
luck. If it had gotten into a lot more urban areas, the case numbers would have been much larger. 
So next time, we might not be so lucky. You can have a virus where people feel well enough while they're
infectious that they get on a plane or they go to a market. The source of the virus could be a natural
epidemic like Ebola, or it could be bioterrorism. So there are things that would literally make things a
thousand times worse. 
In fact, let's look at a model of a virus spread through the air, like the Spanish Flu back in 1918. So here's
what would happen: It would spread throughout the world very, very quickly. And you can see over 30
million people died from that epidemic. So this is a serious problem. We should be concerned. 
But in fact, we can build a really good response system. We have the benefits of all the science and
technology that we talk about here. We've got cell phones to get information from the public and get
information out to them. We have satellite maps where we can see where people are and where they're
moving. We have advances in biology that should dramatically change the turnaround time to look at a
pathogen and be able to make drugs and vaccines that fit for that pathogen. So we can have tools, but those
tools need to be put into an overall global health system. And we need preparedness. 
The best lessons, I think, on how to get prepared are again, what we do for war. For soldiers, we have full-
time, waiting to go. We have reserves that can scale us up to large numbers. NATO has a mobile unit that
can deploy very rapidly. NATO does a lot of war games to check, are people well trained? Do they
understand about fuel and logistics and the same radio frequencies? So they are absolutely ready to go. So
those are the kinds of things we need to deal with an epidemic. 
What are the key pieces? First, we need strong health systems in poor countries. That's where mothers can
give birth safely, kids can get all their vaccines. But, also where we'll see the outbreak very early on. We
need a medical reserve corps: lots of people who've got the training and background who are ready to go,
with the expertise. And then we need to pair those medical people with the military. taking advantage of the
military's ability to move fast, do logistics and secure areas. We need to do simulations, germ games, not
war games, so that we see where the holes are. The last time a germ game was done in the United
States was back in 2001, and it didn't go so well. So far the score is germs: 1, people: 0. Finally, we need
lots of advanced R&D in areas of vaccines and diagnostics. There are some big breakthroughs, like the

14
Adeno-associated virus, that could work very, very quickly. 
Now I don't have an exact budget for what this would cost, but I'm quite sure it's very modest compared to
the potential harm. The World Bank estimates that if we have a worldwide flu epidemic, global wealth will
go down by over three trillion dollars and we'd have millions and millions of deaths. These investments
offer significant benefits beyond just being ready for the epidemic. The primary healthcare, the
R&D, those things would reduce global health equity and make the world more just as well as more
safe. 
So I think this should absolutely be a priority. There's no need to panic. We don't have to hoard cans of
spaghetti or go down into the basement. But we need to get going, because time is not on our side. 
In fact, if there's one positive thing that can come out of the Ebola epidemic, it's that it can serve as an early
warning, a wake-up call, to get ready. If we start now, we can be ready for the next epidemic. 
Thank you. (1435 words)

15