so I'm going to dive straight in, right at the point

18分鐘的時間限制真是苛刻，

where I get this thing to work.

那麼我將直切入核心主題，

Here we go. I'm going to talk about five different things.

等我把這機器弄好。

I'm going to talk about why defeating aging is desirable.

好了。我會分別談到五個話題。

I'm going to talk about why we have to get our shit together,

我會講為什麼戰勝衰老是可取的。

and actually talk about this a bit more than we do.

我會講為什麼我們得"痛改前非"

I'm going to talk about feasibility as well, of course.

在這方面得要比現在討論更多一點。

I'm going to talk about why we are so fatalistic

當然，我也會講可行性。

about doing anything about aging.

我會談談為何我們會認為對於衰老

And then I'm going spend perhaps the second half of the talk

做任何努力都是徒勞的宿命論。

talking about, you know, how we might actually be able to prove that fatalism is wrong,

接下來我會用演講後半段

namely, by actually doing something about it.

來談談如何證明這宿命主義是錯誤的，

I'm going to do that in two steps.

即，我們可以通過行動來改變它。

The first one I'm going to talk about is

我會分兩步來談。

how to get from a relatively modest amount of life extension --

第一部份要講的是，

which I'm going to define as 30 years, applied to people

如何從一個較保守的壽命延長年數 ---

who are already in middle-age when you start --

我定義為30年，並針對於

to a point which can genuinely be called defeating aging.

已步入中年才開始抗老化的人 ----

Namely, essentially an elimination of the relationship between

讓他們達到一個真正可稱為戰勝衰老的境界。

how old you are and how likely you are to die in the next year --

本質上來說，即是徹底地消除

or indeed, to get sick in the first place.

你的年齡與接下來一年內死亡機率 --

And of course, the last thing I'm going to talk about

或在那之前得病的機率，這兩者之間的關係。

is how to reach that intermediate step,

當然，最後我會講的題目

that point of maybe 30 years life extension.

是如何達到這個中間階段,

So I'm going to start with why we should.

即延長壽命大約三十年。

Now, I want to ask a question.

那麼，我從為什麼應該抗衰老開始。

Hands up: anyone in the audience who is in favor of malaria?

現在，我想問你們一個問題。

That was easy. OK.

請舉手： 現場觀眾誰贊同瘧疾？

OK. Hands up: anyone in the audience

這個簡單。好。

who's not sure whether malaria is a good thing or a bad thing?

好。請舉手，現場觀眾

OK. So we all think malaria is a bad thing.

誰不確定瘧疾是件好事還是件壞事?

That's very good news, because I thought that was what the answer would be.

好。那麼我們都認為瘧疾是件壞事。

Now the thing is, I would like to put it to you

那太好了，因為我也想這應該是你們會回答的答案。

that the main reason why we think that malaria is a bad thing

現在我想向你們提出

is because of a characteristic of malaria that it shares with aging.

使我們認定瘧疾是件壞事的主要原因，

And here is that characteristic.

是因為瘧疾和衰老共有的一個特徵。

The only real difference is that aging kills considerably more people than malaria does.

那就是… (問：為何我們要治癒衰老？答：因為衰老是殺人狂！)

Now, I like in an audience, in Britain especially,

唯一真正不同的地方是衰老所弒殺人數遠超於瘧疾。

to talk about the comparison with foxhunting,

那麼，我想向觀眾，尤其是英國觀眾，

which is something that was banned after a long struggle,

講下衰老與獵殺狐狸的對比，

by the government not very many months ago.

獵狐在英國是經過了長期鬥爭

I mean, I know I'm with a sympathetic audience here,

才終於在近幾個月前被政府正式禁止的。

but, as we know, a lot of people are not entirely persuaded by this logic.

雖然我知道這裡的觀眾是有同情心的，

And this is actually a rather good comparison, it seems to me.

但，大家都知道，有許多人對此邏輯不盡認同。

You know, a lot of people said, "Well, you know,

而就這點讓我覺得這是個不錯的比喻。

city boys have no business telling us rural types what to do with our time.

有許多人表示， "那些

It's a traditional part of the way of life,

城裡人憑什麼對我們郊區鄉民指點怎麼用我們的時間?

and we should be allowed to carry on doing it.

這是生活傳統的一部份，

It's ecologically sound; it stops the population explosion of foxes."

我們不該被禁止繼續做這件事 （對比表：獵狐vs.人類老化）

But ultimately, the government prevailed in the end,

這對自然生態有益；這是在防止狐狸繁殖氾濫。”

because the majority of the British public,

但最終政府還是佔了上風，

and certainly the majority of members of Parliament,

因為大多數的英國民眾

came to the conclusion that it was really something

尤其是大多數的國會議員，

that should not be tolerated in a civilized society.

達到的共識是，這真的

And I think that human aging shares

不該為一個文明社會所容許。

all of these characteristics in spades.

而我認為人類的衰老與獵狐

What part of this do people not understand?

在所有這些共同特質上都極為契合。

It's not just about life, of course --

哪方面是令人無法理解的呢？

(Laughter) --

當然，不僅是為了生命----

it's about healthy life, you know --

(笑聲) (為什麼不確定? 左：有趣 右：不好玩)

getting frail and miserable and dependent is no fun,

這更是為了健康的生命 ---- 我們都知道

whether or not dying may be fun.

變得悴弱，愁苦，依賴，都不好玩，

So really, this is how I would like to describe it.

無論死亡是否好玩。

It's a global trance.

講真的，這就是我想表達的。

These are the sorts of unbelievable excuses

對衰老的看法是一種全球性麻木 (會很無聊；我們沒法付養老金；)

that people give for aging.

這些就是各種滑稽的藉口 (非洲飢荒怎辦；獨裁暴君會活太久)

And, I mean, OK, I'm not actually saying

人們用這些藉口給衰老做辦解。

that these excuses are completely valueless.

我的意思是，好吧，我並不是說

There are some good points to be made here,

這些藉口是完全沒有價值的。

things that we ought to be thinking about, forward planning

這裡的確是有幾點不錯。

so that nothing goes too -- well, so that we minimize

譬如一些我們本該思量和預備的事，

the turbulence when we actually figure out how to fix aging.

以免… 我是說，當我們解決了抗衰老問題之後，

But these are completely crazy, when you actually

可以讓我們把因此而造成的動盪最小化。

remember your sense of proportion.

但這些真的很瞎掰 --- 一旦你

You know, these are arguments; these are things that

記起尺長寸短的話。

would be legitimate to be concerned about.

你知道的，這些是議論辯詞，這些是

But the question is, are they so dangerous --

理應關心的事情。

these risks of doing something about aging --

但問題是，這些真有那麼危險嗎? ---

that they outweigh the downside of doing the opposite,

這些對抗老化的風險 ---

namely, leaving aging as it is?

會比不對抗老化——即對老化不聞不問帶來的

Are these so bad that they outweigh

缺點更嚴重嗎？

condemning 100,000 people a day to an unnecessarily early death?

這些風險比

You know, if you haven't got an argument that's that strong,

每天對十萬人判決無謂的早死更嚴重嗎？

then just don't waste my time, is what I say.

要知道，若是沒比這更有力的理由，

(Laughter)

那麼就別浪費我的時間了。

Now, there is one argument

(笑聲)

that some people do think really is that strong, and here it is.

好，那麼現在是有這麼一個觀點

People worry about overpopulation; they say,

有些人的確覺得它非常有理，那就是

"Well, if we fix aging, no one's going to die to speak of,

"我們擔心人口氾濫," 他們說。

or at least the death toll is going to be much lower,

"我們治好衰老的話，就沒有人會死了，

only from crossing St. Giles carelessly.

死亡人數至少會大幅減少，

And therefore, we're not going to be able to have many kids,

除了那些過馬路不小心的。

and kids are really important to most people."

這樣一來，我們就不能多生小孩，

And that's true.

而小孩對大部分人來說又很重要。”

And you know, a lot of people try to fudge this question,

說的對。

and give answers like this.

要知道，很多人都想把這個問題蒙混過去，

I don't agree with those answers. I think they basically don't work.

給些這樣的答覆。

I think it's true, that we will face a dilemma in this respect.

我不同意這些說法。我覺得這些說法基本上是不通的。

We will have to decide whether to have a low birth rate,

我想，我們是得面對這方面的兩難問題。

or a high death rate.

我們將必須決定，是要選擇生育率低，

A high death rate will, of course, arise from simply rejecting these therapies,

還是死亡率高。

in favor of carrying on having a lot of kids.

死亡率高，可以簡單地由拒絕接受這些治療來達成，

And, I say that that's fine --

要偏好繼續多生小孩的話。

the future of humanity is entitled to make that choice.

我說那也可以 ----

What's not fine is for us to make that choice on behalf of the future.

未來的人類是有權做這個選擇的。

If we vacillate, hesitate,

但，不應該的是由我們來代替未來人作此決定。

and do not actually develop these therapies,

我們要是舉棋不定，優柔寡斷，

then we are condemning a whole cohort of people --

然後不好好著手研發這些治療技術的話，

who would have been young enough and healthy enough

那我們即是判了一大幫人的死刑 --

to benefit from those therapies, but will not be,

他們原可在夠年輕夠健康的時候

because we haven't developed them as quickly as we could --

得益于接受治療，但沒機會了，

we'll be denying those people an indefinite life span,

就因我們沒盡責儘速研究開發這些治療技術 ---

and I consider that that is immoral.

我們等於是剝奪了那些人的無限壽命，

That's my answer to the overpopulation question.

我認為那是不道德的。

Right. So the next thing is,

這就是我對於人口氾濫這個問題的答案。

now why should we get a little bit more active on this?

好，那下一個題目是，

And the fundamental answer is that

我們為什麼得在這方面更積極呢？

the pro-aging trance is not as dumb as it looks.

而我的主要答案是

It's actually a sensible way of coping with the inevitability of aging.

麻木接受衰老並非如其表面看來那麼傻。

Aging is ghastly, but it's inevitable, so, you know,

這其實是一種合理方法，用來應付衰老的必然性。

we've got to find some way to put it out of our minds,

衰老是恐怖的，但又是必然的，那，只好

and it's rational to do anything that we might want to do, to do that.

得找個方法來讓我們別去想它，

Like, for example, making up these ridiculous reasons

而且不論用什麼方式來不想它都合理。

why aging is actually a good thing after all.

就像，舉例，編出這麼些無稽的理由，

But of course, that only works when we have both of these components.

要辯解說衰老退化最終還是件好事。

And as soon as the inevitability bit becomes a little bit unclear --

不過，那也當然是只有在這兩項因素都成立的前提下才行得通。

and we might be in range of doing something about aging --

一旦必然性方面不再那麼清楚，變得有點模糊，

this becomes part of the problem.

那我們也許就在對衰老問題能有所行動了，

This pro-aging trance is what stops us from agitating about these things.

這又成為問題的一部份。

And that's why we have to really talk about this a lot --

接受衰老為宿命的麻木認同正是阻止我們對此些事著急的原因。

evangelize, I will go so far as to say, quite a lot --

而那也正是為什麼我們需要多提此事 ---

in order to get people's attention, and make people realize

像傳福音一樣，我會甚至這樣比喻 ---

that they are in a trance in this regard.

為了讓人關注，讓人醒悟

So that's all I'm going to say about that.

原來在這方面他們一直逃避於麻木中。

I'm now going to talk about feasibility.

那麼這些就是我對這方面所有要講的內容了。

And the fundamental reason, I think, why we feel that aging is inevitable

現在我要講可行性。

is summed up in a definition of aging that I'm giving here.

我想基本上，我們為何感到老化是無法避免的

A very simple definition.

可以綜述於我下面要解說的，對老化的定義。

Aging is a side effect of being alive in the first place,

一個非常簡單的定義。

which is to say, metabolism.

老化，是從生命一開始就有的副作用。

This is not a completely tautological statement;

也就是說，新陳代謝。

it's a reasonable statement.

這不是全然同義重覆的說詞；

Aging is basically a process that happens to inanimate objects like cars,

而是合理的說法。

and it also happens to us,

老化基本上是一個發生在沒有生命的物件如汽車上的過程，

despite the fact that we have a lot of clever self-repair mechanisms,

也在我們身上發生，

because those self-repair mechanisms are not perfect.

雖然我們有很多精巧的自我修復機制，

So basically, metabolism, which is defined as

但還是因為那些自我修復機制不完美。

basically everything that keeps us alive from one day to the next,

所以簡單講，新陳代謝，即定義為

has side effects.

基本上所有維持我們日復一日活命的每件事，

Those side effects accumulate and eventually cause pathology.

都有副作用。

That's a fine definition. So we can put it this way:

那些副作用經年累月累積成病變。

we can say that, you know, we have this chain of events.

那是個不錯的定義。所以我們可以這樣說：

And there are really two games in town,

我們可以說，這是一串互連的作用。

according to most people, with regard to postponing aging.

在延緩老化這個領域，

They're what I'm calling here the "gerontology approach" and the "geriatrics approach."

大多數人所知，有兩種方式。

The geriatrician will intervene late in the day,

在這裡我分別稱他們為：老年學方式和老人醫學方式。

when pathology is becoming evident,

老人醫學家在時日為晚之際才做干涉介入性治療，

and the geriatrician will try and hold back the sands of time,

在病變情況趨於明顯時，

and stop the accumulation of side effects

老人醫學家會試圖阻撓病魔拖延時間漏沙，

from causing the pathology quite so soon.

並致力阻止副作用的持續累積

Of course, it's a very short-term-ist strategy; it's a losing battle,

來阻止過早引發病變。

because the things that are causing the pathology

當然這是一種非常短期主義的策略，在打敗仗，

are becoming more abundant as time goes on.

因為那些致病因素

The gerontology approach looks much more promising on the surface,

會不斷的隨時間氾濫為患。

because, you know, prevention is better than cure.

老年學方式表面上看來前景似乎樂觀許多，

But unfortunately the thing is that we don't understand metabolism very well.

因為，大家都知道預防勝於治療。

In fact, we have a pitifully poor understanding of how organisms work --

但很遺憾的我們對新陳代謝瞭解不多。

even cells we're not really too good on yet.

甚至可以說，我們對生物體如何工作所知少得可憐 ---

We've discovered things like, for example,

我們連細胞都還沒能算是真正的弄懂。

RNA interference only a few years ago,

我們所發現的東西，例如，

and this is a really fundamental component of how cells work.

RNA核糖核酸干擾現象，僅僅是近幾年來的事，

Basically, gerontology is a fine approach in the end,

而且這是一個細胞如何運行的非常基礎的部分。

but it is not an approach whose time has come

本質上，老年學方式還算是個不錯的途徑，

when we're talking about intervention.

不過它不適用於那些時日已至的人，

So then, what do we do about that?

若我們講的是介入性的醫療手法。

I mean, that's a fine logic, that sounds pretty convincing,

那麼，我們對這個要怎麼辦？

pretty ironclad, doesn't it?

我是說，這邏輯不錯，聽起來是足以令人信服地，

But it isn't.

穩紮鐵定，是不是?

Before I tell you why it isn't, I'm going to go a little bit

但並非也。

into what I'm calling step two.

我在告訴你為什麼它不是之前，要首先進入

Just suppose, as I said, that we do acquire --

我稱之為第二步驟的話題。

let's say we do it today for the sake of argument --

假設，如我所說過的，我們真能得到 ---

the ability to confer 30 extra years of healthy life

今天這麼做就算是為了方便討論吧 ----

on people who are already in middle age, let's say 55.

有能力將額外三十年的健康生命附加予

I'm going to call that "robust human rejuvenation." OK.

已入中年的人，我們說55歲好了。

What would that actually mean

我將稱之為人類健康回春 。好的。

for how long people of various ages today --

這有什麼實質上的意義呢

or equivalently, of various ages at the time that these therapies arrive --

對於現今各種不同歲數的人們來說 ---

would actually live?

或相當於，在這些療法來臨之際的各個年齡層的人們---

In order to answer that question -- you might think it's simple,

真正可以活多久？

but it's not simple.

為了要回答這個問題… 也許你覺得這很簡單，

We can't just say, "Well, if they're young enough to benefit from these therapies,

但其實它不簡單。

then they'll live 30 years longer."

我們不能就說： “那麼，若他們在足夠年輕的時候從這些療法中受益，

That's the wrong answer.

那他們就會再活多個三十年。”

And the reason it's the wrong answer is because of progress.

這是錯的答案。

There are two sorts of technological progress really,

答錯的原因呢，是因為技術的進步。

for this purpose.

科技進展可以分為兩種

There are fundamental, major breakthroughs,

以此話題來講。

and there are incremental refinements of those breakthroughs.

有基礎級的重要突破，

Now, they differ a great deal

另有在那些突破基礎上逐步的精修改良。

in terms of the predictability of time frames.

那麼，在對時間框架的預估上，

Fundamental breakthroughs:

這兩種科技進步區別很大。

very hard to predict how long it's going to take

基礎性突破：

to make a fundamental breakthrough.

非常難預測需要多久時間

It was a very long time ago that we decided that flying would be fun,

才能達成一個基礎性突破

and it took us until 1903 to actually work out how to do it.

我們從很久以前，就已經認定飛翔會很有趣，

But after that, things were pretty steady and pretty uniform.

然後我們拖到1903年才發明出實踐方法。

I think this is a reasonable sequence of events that happened

但在那之後，一切就滿穩定滿按部就班的了。

in the progression of the technology of powered flight.

我想在動力飛行技術發展過程中，

We can think, really, that each one is sort of

這個是合理的事件發生順序。

beyond the imagination of the inventor of the previous one, if you like.

我們可以把這想成是，每一步都似乎是

The incremental advances have added up to something

超越前項發明者的想像力

which is not incremental anymore.

這漸階式進步是在

This is the sort of thing you see after a fundamental breakthrough.

某樣非漸階式即突破性發展的基礎上產生的。

And you see it in all sorts of technologies.

那是在基礎性大突破之後才會看見的發展。

Computers: you can look at a more or less parallel time line,

而且你會在各種各樣的科學技術裡發現這樣的情況。

happening of course a bit later.

電腦發展的時間線和飛機差不多，

You can look at medical care. I mean, hygiene, vaccines, antibiotics --

當然發生時間是稍晚些。

you know, the same sort of time frame.

你可以看醫療保健，如個人衛生，疫苗，抗生素 --

So I think that actually step two, that I called a step a moment ago,