2019年CATTI三級筆譯實務練習題：中國醫(yī)療改革

第一篇

漢譯英

醫(yī)療改革

過去二十年來，所有的工業(yè)國都實施過某種形式的醫(yī)療改革，美國也不例外。就在幾年前，美國掀起了一場轟轟烈烈的關于醫(yī)療改革的公眾辯論。最終，這場辯論重新確認美國應繼續(xù)保留原有的基本上以市場為導向的醫(yī)療體制。美國的醫(yī)療體制未曾進行過自上而下的改革，而是在強大的市場推動下經歷了一些深刻的自我變革。私營醫(yī)療保健市場的水分，是依靠市揚、而不是政府的作用來擠掉的。

如今，美國的醫(yī)療費用似乎再次呈上漲趨勢。與此同時，和其他國家的病患一樣，美國的病患對于他們醫(yī)療保健計劃中所受到的種種限制也越來越怨聲載道。讓政府來領導醫(yī)療改革的話題又一次被提起。

然而，政府所主導的醫(yī)療改革如果僅僅意味著加大對醫(yī)療市場的限制的話，那我們可要三思而后行了。其實，更為明智的做法是制定一些對消費者更為有利的政策，改善市場的運作。這個觀點是基于我們公司在全球醫(yī)療系統(tǒng)中數十年來的經驗而提出來的。這些經驗給了我們獨特的視角，來判斷醫(yī)療改革中正確和錯誤的做法。我們認為，強加層層規(guī)定和限制的做法是錯誤的。很多國家都曾經采取過這種改革方式，但這樣的改革總是以失敗告終：因為它們既沒能降低醫(yī)療成本，也無法給患者提供優(yōu)質的治療。醫(yī)藥的發(fā)展速度實在是太快了，任何政府機構或老師委員會都無法跟上。唯一能跟上這一發(fā)展速度的只有開放、信息充分而又有競爭力的市場。這一經驗教訓既適用于美國，同樣也適用于所有正在籌劃醫(yī)療改革的國家。政府想做卻又無法做到的事情，自由的市場可以做到。

進行醫(yī)療改革的正確途徑是建立一套靈活的、以市場為導向的醫(yī)療體制。在這套體制下，消費者既享有權利也承擔義務.而且還能自由地做出選擇。如果患者只是被動地接受醫(yī)療服務，這樣的醫(yī)療體制根本就是行不通的。相反，如果患者能充分了解藥物質量、醫(yī)療費用以及最新的治療方法，然后再根據這些情況自由選擇醫(yī)療方案，這樣的體制才是可行的。

當然，醫(yī)療改革絕不能單純只受價格因素的驅動。相反，我們應該尋求新的途徑來資助醫(yī)療保健事業(yè)，使所有的患者都能享受最好的醫(yī)療服務。理想的改革方式不僅能使個人和家庭受益，而且還能鼓勵醫(yī)療創(chuàng)新，使得整個醫(yī)療體制的運行效率更高，成效更大，最終使患者獲益更多。

選擇怎樣的改革路線與我們每個人息息相關。我們正處在一個科學發(fā)展的黃金時代，而生物醫(yī)學又是目前最具探索前景的一個科學領域。我們不僅可以期待找到治愈各種急、慢性疾病的藥物，還可以期待研制出各種療法，幫助人們過上更有意義、更有價值的生活。過去，關節(jié)炎和心血管疾病的患者很有可能致殘;而現在，新型的藥物可以使他們繼續(xù)活動自如?？挂钟羲幒涂咕癫∷幍寞熜岣吡?，能緩解人們精神方面的疾病，使患者在社會上正常、快樂地生活。簡單地說，生物醫(yī)學給我們帶來的希望就是，它能使人們更長壽、更健康。

現在還有待解決的問題就是新藥開發(fā)的步伐有多快、范圍有多廣，以及需要多長時間才能讓那些有需要的患者從中受益。

因此，下個世紀制藥業(yè)所面臨的政策環(huán)境將會決定生物醫(yī)學領域是否會出現新一波的突破。改革后的政策環(huán)境會保護知識產權嗎?會允許市場自由定價嗎?會為建立強大的科研基地而提供支持嗎?改革后的醫(yī)療體制是有助于培養(yǎng)創(chuàng)新意識，還是會抑制創(chuàng)新?這樣的醫(yī)療體制是為消費者提供更多的信息和選擇，還是用苛刻的規(guī)則和條例限制他們的信息來源和選擇權?對于美國和世界上其它國家來說，關于醫(yī)療體制的爭論絕沒有結束。而對我們所有人來說，醫(yī)療體制改革的風險比以往任何時候都要大。

參考譯文

Healthcare Reform

During the past two decades, all of the industrialized nations have enacted some form of healthcare reform. America is no exception. Just a few years ago, the U. S. was consumed by a vigorous public debate about healthcare. In the end, the debate reaffirmed that the U. S. would retain its essentially market-based system. Instead of reform imposed from the top down. the American healthcare system underwent some rather profound self-reform, driven by powerful market forces. The market - not the government - managed to wring inflation out of the private healthcare market. Today, it appears that U. S. healthcare costs are again on the rise. At the same time, American patients - like patients elsewhere - are becoming more vocal about the restrictions many face in their healthcare plans. Talk of government-led reform is once again in the air. We must think twice, though, before embarking on "reform" if that means imposing further restrictions on our healthcare markets. The more sensible course is to introduce policies that make the market work better - that is, to the advantage of consumers. I base this argument on our company's decades of experience in healthcare systems around the world, which has given us a unique global perspective on the right and wrong way to reform healthcare. The wrong way is to impose layer after layer of regulation and restrictions. We have seen this approach tried in many countries, and we have always see it fail - fail to hold down costs, and fail to provide the best quality care. Medicine is changing at so rapid a pace that no government agency or expert commission can keep up with it. Only an open, informed and competitive market can do that.

This lesson holds true for the U. S. and for all countries contemplating healthcare reform. Free markets do what governments mean to do - but can't.

The right approach is to foster a flexible, market-based system in which consumers have rights, responsibilities, and choices. Healthcare systems do not work if patients are treated as passive recipients of services: they do work if consumers are well-informed about quality, costs, and new treatments, and are free to act responsibly on that knowledge. Of course, reform should never be driven purely by cost considerations. Instead, we ought to devise new ways of funding healthcare that will make it possible for all patients to afford the best care. Ideally, these new approaches would not only reward individuals and families but also encourage innovation, which can make healthcare systems more efficient, more productive, and ultimately of greater value for patients.

The path we choose will have enormous implications for all of us. We are in a golden age of science, and no field of scientific inquiry holds more promise than that of biomedicine. Not only can we look forward to the discovery of cures for chronic and acute disease, but also to the development of enabling therapies that can help people enjoy more rewarding and productive lives. New drugs are already helping people who would once have been disabled by arthritis or cardiovascular disease stay active and mobile. More effective anti-depressants and anti-psychotics are beginning to relieve the crippling illness of the mind, allowing sufferers to function normally and happily in society. The promise is quite simply - one of longer, healthier lives. What is at issue are the pace and breadth of discovery, and how quickly we can make the benefits of our knowledge available to the patients who need them.

Therefore, the policy environment the biomedical industry will face in the next century may make or break the next wave of biomedical breakthroughs. Will that environment include protection for intellectual property, freedom for the market to determine price, and support for a robust science base? Will healthcare systems nurture innovation, or remove incentives for discovery? Will they give consumers information and options, or impose stringent rules and regulations that limit access and choice? For the U. S., as for the rest of the world, the healthcare debate is by no means over. And for all of us, the stakes are higher than ever.

第二篇

漢譯英

我國為9億農民提供醫(yī)療保障

我國的農村人口超過9億。雖然他們的收入遠比城鎮(zhèn)居民要低，抗風險的能力更差，但是長期以來，他們卻不能像城鎮(zhèn)居民一樣享受基本的醫(yī)療保障。為此，我國正在推行一項前所未有的計劃：用8年的時間，在全國農村基本建立起新型的合作醫(yī)療制度，以解決9億農民的醫(yī)療保障問題，使他們不必再為看不起病而犯愁。在這種新型的醫(yī)療保障制度下，我國農村將建立合作醫(yī)療基金。合作醫(yī)療基金的資金來源有三條：中央政府撥付一部分，地方政府補助一部分，農民自己繳納一部分。三方繳納資金的比例可根據各地實際情況來定。參加合作醫(yī)療的農民一旦生病住院，就可以按比例報銷部分醫(yī)藥費。

經濟發(fā)達的浙江省已率先實行這一制度，并決定提前四年實現在全省推行合作醫(yī)療制度的目標。

浙江省省委書記習近平說：“新型的合作醫(yī)療制度將切實增強農村居民抵御重大疾病風險的能力，防止因病致貧、因病返貧”。目前，我國農村還有3000萬貧困人口，有6000萬人徘徊在溫飽線上。國務院發(fā)展研究中心研究員陳錫文撰文指出，目前農民90%的醫(yī)藥費需自己支付，這一比例在城市是60%，而農民收入僅相當于城市居民的三分之一，相當多的農民因此有病無力就醫(yī)。

2003年春非典疫情的爆發(fā)暴露出農村居民對非典一類傳染疾病的抗風險能力嚴重不足，引起了政府對農民醫(yī)療健康和衛(wèi)生保障問題的高度重視。

我國正致力于在未來的二十年內全面建設小康社會。如何提高占全國人口70%的農民的生活水平和生存質量，是實現這個目標的最大難題。

統(tǒng)計數據顯示：農村因病致貧、因病返貧的人口已經占到貧困人口的約50%。“從這一點看，不解決農民的看病問題，就很難最終實現中國社會的全面小康目標。”浙江大學教授張小蒂說。

為此，我國政府下決心為9億農民建立有效的農村醫(yī)療合作制度。按計劃，該制度要在2010年覆蓋全國。

參考譯文

China Offers Medicare to 900 Million Farmers

China has a farmer population of over 900 million, who were not entitled, for a very long period of time, to the basic medical service as urban people were, although they were more vulnerable because of their far lower income.

Thus, an unprecedented project is launched in China to build a new cooperative medicare system within eight years in rural areas, which will cover 900 million farmers and free them from worries of being unable to afford a cure.

Under this new medicare system, cooperative medical funds will be set up in rural areas with money from three parties: the central government, local governments and farmers themselves. The portions of funds paid by three parties vary in different regions. A farmer covered by the system will get varying portions of subsidies after he or she becomes ill and hospitalized.

The eastern booming province of Zhejiang, has taken a lead in employing the new system, aiming to make it fully operational in the province four years earlier than the timetable for the whole nation.

"This will certainly enhance farmers' ability to shield themselves from risks of being unable to afford a cure when they are seriously ill, and will help prevent farmers from falling into or falling back to poverty because of catching diseases," said Xi Jinping, Party Secretary of Zhejiang.

In Chinese rural areas, there are about 30 million people still in poverty and 60 million living close to the poverty line. According to Chen Xiwen, a research fellow with the State Development and Research Center, a think-tank to the Chinese cabinet, farmers have to pay 90 percent of medical expenses solely by themselves, compared to 60 percent of urban dwellers, while f'armers' income is about one third that of urban residents. As a result, a large number of farmers are unable to afford a cure when catching illness.

The outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in the spring of 2003 exposed farmers' vulnerability to epidemics like SARS, which awakened policymakers' attention to health and medicare problems for rural people.

China is vowing to build a relatively affluent society in two decades, and it is a key issue in reaching this goal to raise the living standards and quality of farmers, who account for 70 percent of the Chinese population.

Official statistics show that half of the poverty population suffer from poverty caused by disease. "This shows that, it is hardly possible to realize a relatively rich Chinese society in overall scale without a solution to farmers' medicare problem," said Professor Zhang Xiaodi of Zhejiang University.

The central government is resolute to set up an effective cooperative system to offer medicare for 900 million farmers and the system is scheduled to cover all farmers by 2010.