So, should we halve malaria while dramatically increasing the possibility of solving global warming in the medium term? Or should we make a pledge that does 2,000 times less good and barely alters the global climate?
因此，我们是否应该减少一半的霍乱，与此同时大幅度提高在中期解决全球变暖的可能性呢？或者我们是否应该做出保证，效益要少两千倍而几乎并不改变全球气候呢？