The money is there. So why is it not being spent? That is the big puzzle about the rich world"s efforts to improve health in poor countries. In June the leaders of the G8 promised up to $8 billion to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, an umbrella group coordinating health aid. The Global Fund closed its latest round of funding applications this week but much of themoney committed remains unused. officials at the fund insist that all is fine: disbursements always lag commitments and money can be released only if it will be spent effectively. But experts such as Joseph Dwyer of Management Sciences for Health say that the pitiful state of poor countries" health services is the main reason for the gap between what is promised and what is spent. Julian Schweitzer of the World Bank says that physical and human shortages in local health services represent "a huge bottleneck to aid". Now the aid efforts may be making things worse. Jordan Kassalow of the Scojo Foundation, an American charity, observes that rich singleissue outfits tend to divert the best medical talent to trendy causes and away from basic medicine against diarrhoea and respiratory infections—the chief killers of children. Laurie Garrett of the Council on Foreign Relations has a different worry: those anti-corruption efforts have pushed donors into an obsession with often meaningless short-term targets. The result is a never-ending stream of documents and meetings. A sharp focus on process and targets ordained from on high makes it harder to be flexible and innovative or to take advantage of enterprising locals. In poor countries, laments Ms Garrett, "we almost spit on the private sector." But it is the private sector that may offer the most practical chance of progress. Fed up with the costs of an unhealthy workforce, many big local and multinational firms in Africa and Asia are now offering their own innovative health schemes. These started as simple anti-AIDS efforts at mining firms such as Anglo American. Now they have spread. HSBC, a London-based international bank, recently started a scheme to improve its suppliers" and customers" health. In training, too, private-sector and voluntary efforts may work better than official programmes. The International Centre for Equal Healthcare Access has trained thousands of local health-care workers in South-East Asia. Kenya"s HealthStore Foundation has helped nurses and community health workers set up dozens of for-profit clinics that reach patients government clinics don"t. Such ideas may yet transform the world"s most dilapidated health systems into better and more far-reaching ones—if only the current wave of top-down spending does not drown them out.

【正确答案】 C

【答案解析】解析：推理判断题。答案在第四段。迅速浏览选项确定需要通过AIDS，HSBC等词进行更精确的定位。文中提到“英美矿业公司等采矿企业设立的防治艾滋病的简单项目”，结合上文提到的不健康的劳动力可推断C项正确。文中并未提到私人医疗是卫生医疗服务最后的救命稻草，只是讲到私人医疗更加有成效，可以用来解决诸多问题，故排除A项。此外文中还提到许多大型企业厌倦了不健康的劳动力带来的高额成本，但B项中的rather weak推理过度了；D项attracts一词无原文依据。