I want to tell you about a student of mine. A few weeks ago, she was on vacation when at 3am she got a phone call. It was her husband telling her that the city that she was in would be quarantined by 10am. She was in Wuhan, China. The epicenter of the coronavirus outbreak. By 8am she was on the road in a friend's car driving 500 miles to Shanghai Airport. The entire time, she was terrified the authorities would arrest her. She made it out on one of the last flights.
我想和大家分享我一個學生的故事。 幾週前,她正在度假。 凌晨三點接到了一個電話, 電話是她的丈夫打來的, 通知她,說她所在的城市 將在早上十點前被隔離 當時,她在中國武漢, 新型冠狀病毒爆發的震央。 早上八點, 她已在朋友的車裡, 奔向 500 英里以外的上海機場。 一路上,她膽戰心驚,怕被當局逮捕。 她終於搭上了最後 幾個航班中的一個離開了。
So we're all relieved that she's back home, safe in the US. But what if I told you she was in this room? What if I told you she was sitting next to you? There's no vaccine. There won't be a vaccine for at least 12 months. And this virus is mutating, so there's no guarantee that the vaccine that we produce 12 months from now will match the mutated virus. We're always playing catch-up. And this is the scenario we're in every time there's an outbreak. Our quarantines are porous, our medical responses are flat-footed.
她現在安全地回到了美國, 我們都鬆了一口氣。 但如果我告訴你們她正在這裡, 而且她就坐在你旁邊呢? 當時沒有疫苗。 至少在 12 月內都不會有疫苗。 同時,這個病毒在變異, 所以,不能保證 我們 12 個月後製出的疫苗 會與已經變異的病毒般配。 我們總是追趕在後。 每次疫情爆發都面臨這樣的情形。 我們的隔離漏洞百出, 我們的醫療應對笨拙拖沓。
The fundamental problem that we face in controlling these outbreaks is that viruses and other infections do two things really well: they mutate and they transmit. Our medical tools do neither of these two things. Our medical tools don't mutate or transmit. We have a fundamental mismatch between our tools, which are static, and the infections, which are dynamic. This mismatch is why we're always flat-footed. This mismatch is why we're playing catch-up. And this mismatch is universal. It's the reason that we have antibiotic-resistant infections that killed 40,000 Americans last year, and it's the reason that the flu vaccine couldn't prevent the flu from killing 60,000 Americans last year. So how do we resolve this fundamental mismatch?
在控制疫情爆發時 我們面對的根本問題是 病毒和其它感染性疾病 擅長做兩件事: 它們變異 而且傳播。 我們的醫療設施做不到這兩件事: 我們的醫療設施 既不能變異也不會傳播。 我們面對一種根本性的不般配, 我們的設施是靜止的, 而傳染病是不斷變化的。 這種不般配導致我们總是笨拙拖沓。 這種不般配也是為什麼 我們總是追趕在後。 而這種不般配是普遍的。 這是為什麼去年有 4 萬美國人 死於抗生素耐藥性感染, 也是為什麼去年流感疫苗並沒能防止 6 萬美國人死於流感。 那我們怎麼解決 這種根本性的不般配呢?
I've devoted my career to studying and solving this problem. For 100 years, we've used chemicals as drugs to treat infections. Chemicals will never mutate or transmit. Similarly, our vaccines are not designed to mutate or transmit. 20 years ago, I had a radical idea to use the viruses themselves as therapies -- as building blocks for therapies. To build therapies that could mutate and transmit. Let me share with you how we've had a major breakthrough, and we're already testing these new therapies.
我的職涯致力於 研究和解決這個問題。 我們用化學製品作為藥品 治療感染有一百年了。 化學製品從不變異或傳播。 同樣,我們的疫苗設計 也不是為了變異或傳播。 20 年前, 我有了一個激進的想法, 就是用病毒本身作治療 ── 作為療法的基本模塊, 去建立可變種和可傳播的療法。 請讓我與大家分享 我們是如何有了重大突破, 以及我們已經在怎樣 檢測這些新型療法。
HIV is the most devastating pandemic of our era. 75 million infected; 33 million dead. Most of us think that HIV is a solved problem. We have truly amazing antiviral drugs: they're safe and effective, and we've spent 15 years and billions of dollars deploying these drugs around the world. So let's look at the numbers.
愛滋病是我們時代 最具破壞性的傳染病。 已有 7 千 5 百萬人被感染, 3 千 3 百萬人死亡。 我們大多數人以為愛滋病已被解決。 我們的確有非常了不起的抗病毒藥: 它們既安全又有效, 我們花了 15 年的時間和數十億美金 把這些藥運送到 世界各地。 接下來,讓我們來看看相關的數據。
In 2019, 1.7 million people acquired HIV. This number only hit home for me last year when I visited this rural village outside of Durban, South Africa. I was driving along this dirt road with my 10-year-old daughter in the back seat, and walking next to us on the side of the road were girls, the same age as my daughter, barefoot. My daughter asked about why these girls are barefoot and I had to explain disparity to her, which was hard. But what really shocked me was when my colleagues, the local African scientists explained to me that these young girls the same age as my daughter --
在 2019 年, 170 萬人感染上了愛滋病。 去年,當我訪問南非 德班外的一個農村時, 我才對這個數字有切身的感受。 我在一條土路上開著車, 我十歲的女兒坐在後面。 跟我女兒同齡的女孩 光著腳就走在 我的車外。 我女兒問我 為什麼這些女孩光著腳, 而我很難跟她解釋 什麼是貧富差距。 但令我震驚的是, 當我的同事, 當地的非洲科學家告訴我 這些跟我女兒同齡的女孩兒──
(Breathes)
(深呼吸)
sorry -- had an 80 percent chance of acquiring HIV in their lifetime. It blew me away. How can these girls have an 80 percent risk if we have safe and effective drugs?
對不起── 她們一生中有 80% 的可能性 會得上愛滋病。 這一下讓我懵了。 如果我們有既安全又有效的藥品, 這些女孩兒怎麼可能有 80% 的可能性得上愛滋?
The reason is the fundamental mismatch. It creates barriers to controlling infectious disease, particularly in resource-limited settings. The first barrier is mutation: viruses mutate, our drugs don't. The second barrier: adherence. It's really hard to get these drugs to those who need the most. I can't even adhere to a week-long antibiotic regimen in this country. We're asking those in resource-limited settings who face enormous adversity to adhere to lifelong regimens.
原因就是根本性的不般配, 它對控制傳染性疾病形成障礙, 尤其在資源有限的地區。 第一個障礙是變異: 當病毒變異時, 我們的藥品卻不變。 第二個障礙:對治療的遵守。 很難把這些藥發給最需要它的人們。 居住在美國的我連 服用一周的抗生素都不能遵守, 我們卻要那些生活在資源缺乏地區 面對巨大困境的人們 遵守終身的療法。
And the third barrier is deployment, or access. It's super hard to get these drugs to those who need them most. Not these girls but those who engage in high-risk activities, such as commercial sex work and injection drug use. In the epidemiological parlance, these groups are called "super-spreaders." And in the 1900s, a small subset of super-spreaders drove HIV along the Trans-Africa Highway and spread the virus through the continent like this. These groups are exceptionally hard to identify, they're small, they face enormous social stigma so they don't self-identify and they're the ones we need to get to the most. All of these barriers combined created the situation we have today, where greater than 15 percent of people in Southern Africa live with HIV.
第三個障礙是佈署 或取得。 把這些藥送達給最需要人 是一件特別難的事。 不是這些女孩,而是 從事高風險活動的女孩, 比如性交易和注射吸毒。 在流行病說法裡, 這些人稱為「超級傳播者」。 在 20 世紀, 一小股超級傳播者 通過橫貫非洲的高速公路 把愛滋病散播到了整個非洲。像這樣。 這些人群極難辨別, 群體小, 又面對著巨大的社會羞辱, 所以不會自己站出來, 卻是我們最需要影響的。 所有這些障礙加起來 造成了我們今天的局面, 非洲南部超過 15% 的人有愛滋病。
Now, conventional wisdom is: what we need to do is get more drugs to more people more effectively. I'd argue we need to solve the fundamental mismatch; we need to eliminate these barriers. If we can build therapies that mutate and transmit, we can overcome drug resistance, overcome adherence barriers, and if we do it properly, we will convert the super-spreaders from the greatest barrier to the most powerful deployment strategy that we can imagine.
傳統的智慧告訴我們: 我們需要做的是更有效地 把更多的藥給更多的人。 但我認為我們需要解決 這個根本性的不般配; 我們需要消除這些障礙。 如果我們能造出 可變異和傳播的療法, 我們就能克服抗藥性, 克服遵守治療的障礙。 而且,如果我們把這些事處理得當, 我們將把這些超級傳播者 從最大的障礙,轉變為 我們所能想像的 最強有力的佈署戰略。
This is a radical concept. It has huge potential payoff, but there's a catch. And it's serious. Before we deploy a therapy that may transmit, even if it's only in a limited population of already infected individuals, before we do this, we need to be exceptionally careful, and we need to test safety in the most rigorous ways possible. The reason I'm here today is because for the first time 20 years, we got it to work, and this is the first time I'm sharing it publicly.
這個激進的概念 有極大的潛力獲益, 但也有一個 嚴重的隱患。 在我們部署一個可能傳播的療法前, 即使是針對一個有限的 已受感染的人群, 在我們做這個之前, 我們都需要非常小心, 要用最嚴謹的方法測試安全性。 我在這裡是因為過了二十年, 我們第一次做到了。 我今天來到這裡就是為了 首次公佈這個突破性的成果。
(Applause and cheers)
(掌聲和歡呼)
Last two times I did this I cried, so --
前兩次我做這個我哭了,所以──
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
So in order to help you understand this breakthrough, let me take you back 20 years to 1999. I was a graduate student in Berkeley, California, studying the biophysics of HIV. For such a complex epidemic, the simplicity of this virus fascinated me. HIV, like all viruses, is just an instruction set -- malware. It hijacks a cell and converts that cell into a factory to do one thing: single-mindedly churn out more virus. All the normal functions of the cell get wiped away. HIV infects the white blood cell that keeps us healthy. This cell has already been hijacked and converted into a factory. And if we magnify, we can see the anatomy of the virus. Those squiggly red lines in the middle? That's HIV's instruction set. Its genetic material.
為了幫助大家理解這個突破, 請讓我帶你們回到 20 年前的 1999 年。 我是加州柏克萊大學的一名研究生, 研究有關愛滋病的生物物理。 對於如此複雜的傳染病, 其病毒的簡單性讓我著迷。 像所有的病毒, 愛滋只不過是一串指令 ── 像病毒軟件。 它劫持一個細胞後,把這個細胞 轉化成一個只做一件事的工廠: 一門心思地生產更多的病毒。 這個細胞的所有的正常功能 都被一掃而光。 愛滋感染了保持我們健康的白血球。 這個細胞已經被劫持 改造成了一個工廠。 如果我們放大, 我們就能看到這個病毒的解剖結構。 看到中部的這些彎彎曲曲的紅線了嗎? 那就是愛滋的指令組, 它的基因物質。
This genetic material directs the hijacking process, converting that cell into a factory first to make more copies of the instruction set, and then all the other components of the virus and assemble them into a particle. This is how the virus replicates. Each of these particles can go in and hijack a new cell. This is how the virus transmits. And every time a cell is hijacked, little mistakes are made in copying the genetic material. That's how the virus mutates. This ability to replicate, transmit and mutate is something that our current drugs cannot do.
這個基因物質指揮劫持的過程, 先把那個細胞轉成工廠, 複製更多的指令, 再生產病毒的所有的其它部件, 然後把它們組裝成一個粒子。 這就是病毒的複製機制。 這些粒子裡的每一個 都能侵入並劫持新的細胞。 這就是病毒的傳播。 每當一個細胞被劫持, 在複製基因物質的過程中 都會有些小錯誤。 這就是病毒的變異。 這種複製、傳播和變異的能力 是我們現在的藥品力所不及的。
So, being young and naïve and a little bit ignorant, I thought: why can't we create therapies that mutate and transmit and replicate? Here was the idea. If we can take the virus and engineer it to amputate the genetic material in blue here, this amputated instruction set can no longer hijack a cell. But this amputated instruction set can do something very special. In an already infected cell, this amputated instruction set can hijack the hijacker. It can commandeer HIV's machinery to make more copies of itself, the amputated instruction set, and then each of these copies can steal all of HIV's other components so that the cell gets converted from a factory that produces virus to a factory that produces therapy. Hijackers. These carry no disease. This dramatically lowers HIV levels and keeps the cell healthier.
那時年輕、單純、 還有點驕傲的我想: 何不創造能變異、複製、 傳播的療法呢? 這是我的想法。 如果我們能拿到這個病毒, 通過策劃去截肢 在這裡顯示的藍色的基因物質, 這個被截肢過的指令組 就不能再劫持細胞了。 但是, 這個被截肢過的指令組 能做一些特殊的事情。 在一個已經被感染的細胞裡 這個被截肢過的指令組 能劫持這個劫機者。 它能征募愛滋的機制 用來複製它自己, 這個被截肢過的指令組, 以及它的每一個複製品 都能竊取愛滋的所有的其它部件, 這樣,這個細胞就從複製愛滋的工廠 轉變成了一個生產療法的工廠。 這些劫機者 不攜帶疾病。 這樣,就神奇地降低了愛滋的水平, 因而保持細胞更健康。
This idea consumed me for months. It was the most intense intellectual experience of my life. On every bike ride to lab, on every walk to the coffee shop, on every run in the hills above campus, the ideas, the arguments, the counterarguments, they all came so rapidly in my head, in my inner monologue, that I was physically out of breath. I thought if we can create a therapy that replicates, it would only need to be taken once. It could mutate along with the virus and possibly it could transmit between infected individuals to treat them. It was a therapy that could do all of the things that the virus could do. It solved the fundamental mismatch.
這個想法,我琢磨了好幾個月。 它是我一生中對探索知識的 最強烈的體驗。 在每一次騎車去實驗室的路上, 每一次走去咖啡館的途中, 每一次跑在校園頂部的小山坡上, 這些想法、 這些命題、 這些反命題, 全都一起突然出現在我的腦海裡, 在我內心的獨白裡, 讓我喘不過氣來。 我想, 如果我們能創造 一種可複製的療法, 那麼,就會只需要治療一次。 它會隨著病毒的變異而變異, 並且可能在被傳染的個體之間傳播 去醫治他們。 病毒能做的所有事情 這個療法也能做到。 它解決了根本性的不般配。
The most radical part of this concept was that the super-spreaders would also be converted from transmitting the virus to now transmitting the therapy. It was a therapy that would go viral along with the virus. This scared some people. But there's already a precedent: we already inadvertently use therapies that transmit. The vaccine that eradicated polio in the US, the oral polio vaccine, transmits between people. It's not well-known, but the fact that this vaccine transmits is part of the reason that it was chosen for the worldwide eradication effort despite its safety issues.
這個概念最激進的部分是 超級傳播者也將會從 傳播病毒轉成傳播對病毒的療法。 這種療法會像病毒一樣廣為傳播。 這讓很多人害怕。 但是,我們已經有了先例: 我們無意間用上了可傳播的療法。 在美國根除脊髓灰質炎的疫苗, 口服脊髓灰質炎疫苗, 在人與人之間傳播。 雖然鮮為人知, 可是這疫苗在根除疾病的全球努力中 它被選用的部分原因 正是由於它可傳播, 儘管它的安全性有些問題。
So the bigger problem was that these hijacker therapies didn't exist. My Berkeley advisors said to me, "Lovely idea, so sad it will never work," or, "Regulators will never allow it, drop it." But the idea wouldn't drop me.
所以,更大的問題是 這樣的劫機者療法不存在。 我在柏克萊的導師們告訴我, 「想法很可愛,可惜無法實現。」 或者,「立法的人永遠都不會允許, 打消這個念頭。 」 可是,這個念頭不肯放棄我。
If it ever worked, it would solve the fundamental mismatch. So we tried for years to build it. We tried every trick in the book and failed over and over again. We -- every time we thought we had a good idea, we'd spend months, sometimes years working on it only to come up empty. We once spent five years building 150,000 versions of a hijacker therapy. Every single one failed. I once asked a really bright student what he hoped to learn from me during his PhD --
萬一這個療法實現了, 它將解決這種根本性的不般配。 所以,我們花了很多年 建造這樣的療法。 書裡的每個招數我們都試過, 一次又一次地失敗。 我們 ── 每次我們以為我們有了個好主意, 我們就花上幾個月, 有時甚至是幾年的時間去研究, 卻總是竹籃打水一場空。 有一次,我們花了 5 年時間 對一種劫機者療法 建造了 15 萬個版本。 每一個版本都失敗了。 我曾經問過我一個很聰明的學生 他讀博期間打算從我這裡 學到什麼 ──
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
And he replied, "How to keep going, how to continue moving forward despite zero evidence that there's anything there."
他回答說, 「如何堅持, 如何在渺茫中 繼續前行。」
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
I wonder if he was trying to tell me something.
我不知道他是不是 在試著告訴我什麼。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
By 2018, things looked bad. There was no evidence that a hijacker therapy could be engineered. In fact, we had evidence that it might be impossible. It was time to face the hard truth. This solution that I'd wanted so badly, this hijacker therapy just didn't exist. For 20 years, I had been chasing a ghost.
到了 2018 年, 情況看起來很糟糕。 沒有任何證據證明 能夠構建出一種劫機者療法。 事實上,我們有證據證明 或許這不可能。 是面對殘酷事實的時候了。 我極度渴求的這個方案, 這種劫機者療法就是不存在。 20 年來, 我一直在追隨一個幽靈。
Then one day, Elizabeth, a postdoc in my lab, came to me with this picture. It doesn't look like much. My wife thinks it looks like a pregnancy test.
然後, 有一天, 伊麗莎白,我實驗室的一名博士後, 拿著這張照片來找我。 這張照片看起來沒什麼出奇的。 我的妻子覺得它看起來像是驗孕。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
But this little band down here -- that was the amputated genetic material that we had been looking for for 20 years. The entire time that we had been trying to build it and failing, it had evolved by itself in a flask in the back of the lab.
可是,這裡的這個小帶子 ── 就是我們花了 20 年一直在找的 被截肢的基因物質。 整段時間裡, 我們嘗試 構建它的努力都失敗了, 它卻在實驗室後面的一個小壺裡 自己演變出來了。
(Audience) What?
(聽眾)什麼?
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
We finally had a foothold. And we used this to build the first hijacker. But we had no evidence that what we built was a therapy.
我們終於有了一個支撐。 我們用這個支撐建造第一個劫機者。 但是, 我們沒有證據證明 我們建造的是個療法。
The first hurdle that any therapy has to clear is testing in a mouse. It can be risky. In our case, if our mice died, so did our funding, and with it, any hopes of this becoming a therapy, let alone a transformative one. After so many failures, we were all pretty skeptical but we didn't really have an alternative. We had to give it a shot; we had to try.
任何療法第一個要跨越的是 通過老鼠試驗。 它會有風險。 在我們的情況下, 如果我們的老鼠死了, 我們的資金也就斷了。 隨之而去的是成為一種療法的希望, 更別提可傳播的療法了。 經過了無數的失敗, 我們大家都心存疑慮, 可是我們真的別無選擇。 我們只能試試;我們必須試試。
Amazingly, the hijacker therapy worked in a mouse, and it worked exactly as we'd predicted 20 years before. It protected the cells in a mouse from HIV. Here are the cells under a microscope. First, HIV in red infects those cells, and then the hijacker, in blue, can be activated, protects those cells and transmits to other cells. We'd finally built the hijacker after 20 years. Everyone in the lab was elated. For me, this was proof of concept. If we could do it for one virus we could do it for others.
神奇地是,這個劫機者療法 在老鼠身上見效了, 並且完全像我們 在 20 年前所預測的那樣。 它保護老鼠的細胞免於愛滋。 這裡是顯微鏡下面的細胞。 首先,紅色的愛滋感染這些細胞, 然後,藍色的劫機者被激活, 保護這些細胞,還傳播給其它的細胞。 經過了 20 年,我們終於 建造了這個劫機者。 實驗室裡的每個人都很興奮。 對我來說,這是概念的證明。 如果我們能對一種病毒做這療法, 我們也能對其它的病毒做。
To understand how this hijacker might impact HIV levels worldwide, we ran computer simulations. Epidemiological models. And the results were pretty amazing. If we do nothing in the hardest-hit parts of Africa, HIV prevalence will stay between 25 and 30 percent. If we manage to introduce drugs to three-quarters of the population or if we ever get the long-sought-after vaccine, we would reduce those numbers down to 20 percent. But those are best-case scenarios. If HIV evolves resistance or if people change their behaviors, these numbers could go right back up to 30 percent or even beyond. The blue is the hijacker therapy. And we've not found a way, either theoretically or experimentally, that HIV can evolve resistance to the hijacker.
為了理解這個劫機者 對全球愛滋水平可能會有的影響, 我們進行了計算機模擬。 流行病學模型。 模擬的結果令人振奮。 如果我們對處在非洲的 愛滋重災區什麼也不做, 愛滋病流行將會持續 在 25% 和 30% 之間。 如果我們能把藥品 介紹給 3/4 的人口, 或者我們一旦有了夢寐以求的疫苗, 我們能把這個數字降到 20%。 但是,這些都是最好的情況。 如果愛滋病毒產生抗體 或者人們改變他們的行為方式, 這些數字馬上就能回到 30%, 甚至更高。 藍色的是劫機者療法。 不論在理論上 還是在試驗中, 我們還沒有發現愛滋病毒 能對劫機者發展抗體。
The reason this hijacker works so well is the super-spreaders. If the hijacker is introduced in one place over here, the super-spreaders can pick it up and transmit it through the population. Imagine if 10 years from now, HIV is no longer a pandemic.
這個劫機者如此有效的原因 是因為超級傳播者。 如果劫機者被引進到此處, 超級傳播者接受了這個劫機者, 然後把它在人群中傳播出去。 想像十年之後, 愛滋病 不再是流行性傳染病。
To get there, we have to start large-scale clinical trials in five years, which means initial human tests next year. The FDA has cleared us to start testing in HIV-positive patients who have a terminal cancer and have less than a year left to live. Volunteering for this trial is their last incredibly generous gift to the world. They're called the "Last Gift cohort." And to test in these altruistic patients next year, we have to finish our preclinical tests this year ... and I think we will.
實現這個目標, 我們必須在 5 年內 開始大規模的臨床試驗, 這意味著,明年開始初步的人體測試。 FDA 已經批准我們對癌症患者中 那些僅有不到一年的生存時間 並且 HIV-陽性的病人進行測試。 這些病人自願參加測試, 這是他們給這個世界的 最後的無比慷慨的禮物。 他們被稱作「最後獻禮的隊列」。 為了明年去測試這些利他的病人, 我們今年必須完成臨床前試驗... 我認為我們辦得到。
I still meet colleagues who push back and are stridently opposed to letting us move forward with testing. They say, "What if something goes wrong? You can't unrelease it." They say, "There are ethical issues; people can't consent." Well, oral polio vaccine faced similar ethical and safety concerns. In fact, oral polio vaccine faced such an effective misinformation campaign that most people still don't know that it transmits, that it successfully eradicated polio in many countries or that this vaccine is the basis for new vaccines. When we presented this hijacker therapy idea in Africa last year, the African scientists had a different response. They said, "How can you not test this?" They said it's unethical to not test it. So even though we might fail, I think the stakes are too high not to try. If we do nothing, those girls outside of Durban will acquire HIV, and the next time that there's a new virus that emerges, we'll be in the same vulnerable position that we are today with quarantines that are porous and vaccines that we need to wait months for that may not match.
我仍有些同事不支持 甚至強烈反對我們推進測試。 他們說,「萬一出錯怎麼辦? 你不能再收回來。 」 他們說,「這裡有些道義的問題; 人們不能同意。 」 可是骨髓灰質炎的口服疫苗 也面臨過類似的道義和安全的擔憂。 事實上,骨髓灰質炎的口服疫苗 面臨如此有效的錯誤信息宣導, 就是多數人仍然不知道 這個疫苗會傳播, 它成功地在很多國家 根除了骨髓灰質炎, 以及這個疫苗是新疫苗的基礎。 去年,當我們在非洲介紹 這個劫機者療法的想法時, 非洲科學家們的回答截然不同。 他們說,「你們怎麼能不測試呢?」 他們說,不測試是不道義的。 所以,儘管我們有可能失敗, 我認為不試一試的賭注太大了。 如果我們什麼都不做, 這些德班外面的女孩兒 將會得上愛滋病, 而下一次一種新病毒出現時, 我們將會陷於 和今天一樣的脆弱境地: 隔離漏洞百出, 等了幾個月的疫苗可能根本不般配。
I think it's time for a new approach that's different than the static approaches of the last century. It's time for a new technology that is less reactive and more proactive. I think it's time for treatments that don't just benefit the most affluent among us but also those who face the greatest adversity. I think it's time for a new type of weapon that matches, or that solves the fundamental mismatch. I think it's time for therapies that can go viral.
我認為採用一種不同於上世紀 靜態方法的新方法的時候到了。 是開創新技術的時候了, 少一些被動,多一些主動。 我認為治療的時候到了, 不僅讓我們當中富裕的人受益, 而且使那些面臨最大逆境的人受益。 我認為開發新型匹配的武器 解決根本性不般配武器的時候到了。 我認為是發明 能迅速傳染的療法的時候了。
Thank you very much.
謝謝大家。
(Applause)
(掌聲)