So when I was a kid ... this was my team.
童年的時候, 它們就是我的玩伴。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
I stunk at sports. I didn't like to play them, I didn't like to watch them. So this is what I did. I went fishing. And for all of my growing up I fished on the shores of Connecticut, and these are the creatures that I saw on a regular basis. But after I grew up and went to college, and I came home in the early 90's, this is what I found. My team had shrunk. It was like literally having your roster devastated. And as I sort of looked into that, from a very personal point of view as a fisherman, I started to kind of figure out, well, what was the rest of the world thinking about it?
我運動很差勁, 我不喜歡做體育運動, 也不喜歡看別人運動。 所以我就選擇去釣魚。 我的成長記憶, 都是在康涅狄格州岸邊釣魚, 而這些生物, 就是我常常遇到的玩伴。 但長大之後,我上了大學, 90年代初,我回到家時, 我卻發現: 我的玩伴減少了。 少得不成隊形。 當我開始從釣客的個人角度 去調查這件事時, 我開始有點想了解, 究竟...世界上其他人 對這件事情是怎麼想的?
First place I started to look was fish markets. And when I went to fish markets, in spite of where I was -- whether I was in North Carolina, or Paris, or London, or wherever -- I kept seeing this weirdly repeating trope of four creatures, again and again -- on the menus, on ice -- shrimp, tuna, salmon and cod. And I thought this was pretty strange, and as I looked at it, I was wondering, did anyone else notice this sort of shrinking of the market?
我首先去看的地方是魚市。 當我去了魚市場, 無論是哪裡的魚市場, 南卡羅琳娜的、巴黎的、 倫敦的、還有其他地方的, 我不斷地看到這四種生物 奇異地重複組合出現, 一次又一次地出現 在菜單上、在冰上: 蝦,鮪魚,鮭魚和鱈魚。 我覺得這樣相當奇怪, 在調查時,我就想: 難道沒有別人注意到 市面上的海鮮種類在減少嗎?
Well, when I looked into it, I realized that people didn't look at it as their team. Ordinary people, the way they looked at seafood was like this. It's not an unusual human characteristic to reduce the natural world down to very few elements. We did it before, 10,000 years ago, when we came out of our caves. If you look at fire pits from 10,000 years ago, you'll see raccoons, you'll see, you know, wolves, you'll see all kinds of different creatures. But if you telescope to the age of -- you know, 2,000 years ago, you'll see these four mammals: pigs, cows, sheep and goats. It's true of birds, too. You look at the menus in New York City restaurants 150 years ago, 200 years ago, you'll see snipe, woodcock, grouse, dozens of ducks, dozens of geese. But telescope ahead to the age of modern animal husbandry, and you'll see four: turkeys, ducks, chicken and geese.
是的,當我深入調查時, 我發現人們並沒有 把魚看成他們的玩伴, 普通人眼中的海鮮是這樣的。 這是人之常情, 人們喜歡將自然界 精簡成寥寥幾個元素。 一萬年前,從洞穴人進化時, 我們就是這樣子, 一萬年前的煮食火堆遺跡裡, 你可以發現浣熊、狼, 各種各樣的生物都有, 但,要是近觀到兩千年前, 你會看到這四種哺乳類動物: 豬、牛、綿羊、山羊。 還有一些鳥類。 紐約市餐館裡的菜單, 在150年前、200年前, 賣的是鷸、山鷸、松雞, 鴨和鵝更是居多, 但再看看現代畜牧業, 大家會看到四種生物: 火雞、鴨、雞、鵝。
So it makes sense that we've headed in this direction. But how have we headed in this direction? Well ... first it's a very, very new problem. This is the way we've been fishing the oceans over the last 50 years. World War II was a tremendous incentive to arm ourselves in a war against fish. All of the technology that we perfected during World War II -- sonar, lightweight polymers -- all these things were redirected towards fish. And so you see this tremendous buildup in fishing capacity, quadrupling in the course of time, from the end of World War II to the present time. And right now that means we're taking between 80 and 90 million metric tons out of the sea every year. That's the equivalent of the human weight of China taken out of the sea every year. And it's no coincidence that I use China as the example because China is now the largest fishing nation in the world.
因此我們今天之所以這樣, 是可以理解的。 但我們到底是如何走到這一步呢? 嗯... 首先這是一個相當新起的問題。 我們在過去50年裡 就一直這樣在海裡捕魚。 二戰給了我們極大的動力 來武裝自己、對付魚類。 我們在二戰期間完善了所有科技, 例如聲納、輕質聚合物, 都被轉換成用來對付魚類。 所以你可以看到 捕撈量的驚人增長, 自二戰結束至今, 短時間裡就翻了兩番。 也就是說, 我們現在的年均捕魚量 在 8~9千萬噸之間。 這相當於每年從海裡撈出 全體中國人的重量。 我用中國做例子, 不是純屬巧合, 因為中國目前是世界上 捕魚量最大的國家。
Well, that's only half the story. The other half of the story is this incredible boom in fish farming and aquaculture, which is now, only in the last year or two, starting to exceed the amount of wild fish that we produce. So that if you add wild fish and farmed fish together, you get the equivalent of two Chinas created from the ocean each and every year. And again, it's not a coincidence that I use China as the example, because China, in addition to being the biggest catcher of fish, is also the biggest farmer of fish.
這只不過是故事的一半。 故事的另一半是, 魚類養殖和水產養殖快速增長, 在過去短短一兩年時間內, 就開始超過野生魚的產量。 所以野生魚和養殖魚加在一起, 就等同每年從海裡產出 全體中國人總重量的兩倍。 再次,我用中國做例子, 不是純屬巧合, 因為中國不僅是最大的捕魚國, 還是最大的魚類養殖國。
So let's look though at the four choices we are making right now. The first one -- by far the most consumed seafood in America and in much of the West, is shrimp. Shrimp in the wild -- as a wild product -- is a terrible product. 5, 10, 15 pounds of wild fish are regularly killed to bring one pound of shrimp to the market. They're also incredibly fuel inefficient to bring to the market. In a recent study that was produced out of Dalhousie University, it was found that dragging for shrimp is one of the most carbon-intensive ways of fishing that you can find.
來看看現在我們選擇的四種魚類: 首先 在美國和許多西方國家 目前消耗最多的海鮮是 蝦。 野生蝦在野生產品當中, 是一種糟糕的產品。 一般要殺5、10、15磅的野生魚類 才能給市場帶來 1 磅蝦。 而且蝦的運輸燃油效率極低。 達爾豪斯大學最近的一項研究發現, 拖網捕蝦, 是二氧化碳排放最高的捕魚方式之一。
So you can farm them, and people do farm them, and they farm them a lot in this very area. Problem is ... the place where you farm shrimp is in these wild habitats -- in mangrove forests. Now look at those lovely roots coming down. Those are the things that hold soil together, protect coasts, create habitats for all sorts of young fish, young shrimp, all sorts of things that are important to this environment. Well, this is what happens to a lot of coastal mangrove forests. We've lost millions of acres of coastal mangroves over the last 30 or 40 years. That rate of destruction has slowed, but we're still in a major mangrove deficit.
你可以養殖蝦, 的確有人養蝦, 而且在這一帶養得特別多。 但問題是, 養蝦是在野生棲息地養, 在紅樹林裡面養。 大家看看那些往下生長的樹根。 這些樹根鞏固土壤, 保護海線,為各種小魚蝦 以及各種生物創造棲息地, 而這些生物亦同時維護這個環境。 但是,許多沿海紅樹林 卻落得此下場。 在過去30-40年裡, 我們喪失了上百萬畝的沿海紅樹林。 破壞率雖然有減緩, 但是我們仍然損失了太多的紅樹林。
The other thing that's going on here is a phenomenon that the filmmaker Mark Benjamin called "Grinding Nemo." This phenomenon is very, very relevant to anything that you've ever seen on a tropical reef. Because what's going on right now, we have shrimp draggers dragging for shrimp, catching a huge amount of bycatch, that bycatch in turn gets ground up and turned into shrimp food. And sometimes, many of these vessels -- manned by slaves -- are catching these so-called "trash fish," fish that we would love to see on a reef, grinding them up and turning them into shrimp feed -- an ecosystem literally eating itself and spitting out shrimp.
目前另外一個狀況是 電影製作人Mark Benjamin所稱的 「海底碎魚總動員」現象。 這個現象,對於你在熱帶珊瑚礁上 看到過的生物來說,至關重要。 因為目前捕蝦, 我們用拖蝦網去捕蝦, 同時又兼捕大量副漁獲, 這些副漁獲會被碾碎做蝦飼料。 有時許多這些漁船, 都是奴工在工作-- 亦會捕獲到所謂的「垃圾魚」, 我們喜歡在珊瑚礁上看到的魚, 然後將它們碾碎, 將它們變成蝦飼料, 一個自己吃自己、自動產蝦 的生態系統。
The next most consumed seafood in America, and also throughout the West, is tuna. So tuna is this ultimate global fish. These huge management areas have to be observed in order for tuna to be well managed. Our own management area, called a Regional Fisheries Management Organization, is called ICCAT, the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas. The great naturalist Carl Safina once called it, "The International Conspiracy to Catch all the Tunas." Of course we've seen incredible improvement in ICCAT in the last few years, there is total room for improvement, but it remains to be said that tuna is a global fish, and to manage it, we have to manage the globe.
美國消費量第二大的海鮮, 亦備受西方國家喜愛, 鮪魚(也叫吞拿魚、金槍魚) 鮪魚是頂級的全球性魚類。 這些大範圍的管理區域必須接受監測, 目的是更好地管理對鮪魚的捕撈。 我們的「區域漁業管理組織」, 簡稱「ICCAT」, 「大西洋鮪類保育委員會」的簡稱。 偉大的自然學家 Carl Safina曾經戲稱為: 「撈光所有鮪魚的國際陰謀會」。 當然,我們看到ICCAT 在過去兩年的巨大進步, 雖然還有很大的改善空間, 鮪魚是不是全球性魚類 雖仍有待商榷, 但要管理它, 我們就必須全球管理,
Well, we could also try to grow tuna but tuna is a spectacularly bad animal for aquaculture. Many people don't know this but tuna are warm-blooded. They can heat their bodies 20 degrees above ambient temperature, they can swim at over 40 miles an hour. So that pretty much eliminates all the advantages of farming a fish, right? A farmed fish is -- or a fish is cold-blooded, it doesn't move too much. That's a great thing for growing protein. But if you've got this crazy, wild creature that swims at 40 miles an hour and heats its blood -- not a great candidate for aquaculture.
我們也可以試試養殖鮪魚, 但鮪魚極不適合水產養殖。 很多人可能不知道, 其實鮪魚是溫血動物。 它們可以使自己身體的溫度 比環境溫度高20度, 鮪魚可以每小時游40英里。 所以這把養殖魚類的優點 完全消滅了,對吧? 水產養殖魚或者一般魚 都是冷血動物,不怎麼運動。 這有利於蛋白質生長。 但要養殖這瘋狂野生動物, 每小時游40英里, 又要溫熱血液, 恐怕這對水產養殖來說 不是個好選擇。
The next creature -- most consumed seafood in America and throughout the West -- is salmon. Now salmon got its plundering, too, but it didn't really necessarily happen through fishing. This is my home state of Connecticut. Connecticut used to be home to a lot of wild salmon. But if you look at this map of Connecticut, every dot on that map is a dam. There are over 3,000 dams in the state of Connecticut. I often say this is why people in Connecticut are so uptight --
美國和西方國家消費最多的 另一種海鮮是 鮭魚(也稱三文魚)。 目前鮭魚也很搶手, 但是不必通過漁業來捕捉。 我來自康州。 康州以前是大量野生鮭魚的棲身地。 但看看康州的這張地圖, 地圖上每個點代表一個堤壩。 康州有超過3,000個堤壩。 我常說這就是為什麼 康州人脾氣這麼爆躁--
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
If somebody could just unblock Connecticut's chi, I feel that we could have an infinitely better world. But I made this particular comment at a convention once of national parks officers, and this guy from North Carolina sidled up to me, he says, "You know, you oughtn't be so hard on your Connecticut, cause we here in North Carolina, we got 35,000 dams." So it's a national epidemic, it's an international epidemic. And there are dams everywhere, and these are precisely the things that stop wild salmon from reaching their spawning grounds.
要是有人能把康州通通氣, 我覺得我們會有 一個更美好的世界。 但是有次我對一個國家公園 的工作人員提了這個提議, 有個來自南卡州的人 就走過來跟我說: 「你可不要太跟你的康州過不去, 你看我們南卡州這裡, 有3萬5千個堤壩呢。」 所以說美國有個堤壩流行病, 這也是個全球流行病。 堤壩無處不在, 就是這些堤壩, 讓野生鮭魚無法到達產卵地。
So as a result, we've turned to aquaculture, and salmon is one the most successful, at least from a numbers point of view. When they first started farming salmon, it could take as many as six pounds of wild fish to make a single pound of salmon. The industry has, to its credit, greatly improved. They've gotten it below two to one, although it's a little bit of a cheat because if you look at the way aquaculture feed is produced, they're measuring pellets -- pounds of pellets per pound of salmon. Those pellets are in turn reduced fish. So the actual -- what's called the FIFO, the fish in and the fish out -- kind of hard to say. But in any case, credit to the industry, it has lowered the amount of fish per pound of salmon.
因此我們就轉靠水產養殖, 而鮭魚是最成功的水產魚類, 至少從數字上看是最成功的。 人們剛開始養殖鮭魚時, 要消耗多達 6 磅野生魚, 才能產出 1 磅鮭魚。 鮭魚養殖業的確大有進步。 現在是消耗 2 磅產 1 磅, 雖然這其中有一點欺騙性, 因為養殖飼料的生產方式, 是用顆粒計算的, 飼料的磅數比鮭魚的磅數。 而飼料也是用魚製造的。 所以實際魚的投入和產出比-- 簡稱為 FIFO-- 就很難說出一個正確數字。 但無論如何, 養殖業功勞很大, 降低了生產每磅鮭魚所需的魚量。
Problem is we've also gone crazy with the amount of salmon that we're producing. Aquaculture is the fastest growing food system on the planet. It's growing at something like seven percent per year. And so even though we're doing less per fish to bring it to the market, we're still killing a lot of these little fish.
問題是:目前我們的鮭魚產量 也開始有點瘋狂了。 水產業是全球發展最快的食物系統。 年均增長率約為7%。 雖然我們消耗更少的魚, 產出更多的鮭魚, 我們還是在捕殺很多小魚。
And it's not just fish that we're feeding fish to, we're also feeding fish to chickens and pigs. So we've got chickens and they're eating fish, but weirdly, we also have fish that are eating chickens. Because the byproducts of chickens -- feathers, blood, bone -- get ground up and fed to fish. So I often wonder, is there a fish that ate a chicken that ate a fish? It's sort of a reworking of the chicken and egg thing. Anyway --
而且我們不僅用魚來餵魚, 我們也用魚餵雞和豬。 所以我們吃雞,雞吃魚, 但見怪不怪,我們也有魚吃雞, 因為雞的副產品: 雞毛、雞血、雞骨, 會被碾碎用來餵魚。 所以我經常想, 有沒有魚吃過吃過魚的雞? 好像雞生蛋蛋生雞的問題。好吧——
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
All together, though, it results in a terrible mess. What you're talking about is something between 20 and 30 million metric tons of wild creatures that are taken from the ocean and used and ground up. That's the equivalent of a third of a China, or of an entire United States of humans that's taken out of the sea each and every year.
總的來說,結果是非常糟糕的。 我們看到的是, 2 - 3千萬公噸的野生動物 從海裡捕撈出來, 被碾碎使用。 也就是三分之一中國人的重量, 或者是整個美國的總人口體重, 每年從海裡被撈出來。
The last of the four is a kind of amorphous thing. It's what the industry calls "whitefish." There are many fish that get cycled into this whitefish thing but the way to kind of tell the story, I think, is through that classic piece of American culinary innovation, the Filet-O-Fish sandwich. So the Filet-O-Fish sandwich actually started as halibut. And it started because a local franchise owner found that when he served his McDonald's on Friday, nobody came. Because it was a Catholic community, they needed fish. So he went to Ray Kroc and he said, "I'm going to bring you a fish sandwich, going to be made out of halibut." Ray Kroc said, "I don't think it's going to work. I want to do a Hula Burger, and there's going to be a slice of pineapple on a bun. But let's do this, let's have a bet. Whosever sandwich sells more, that will be the winning sandwich." Well, it's kind of sad for the ocean that the Hula Burger didn't win. So he made his halibut sandwich. Unfortunately though, the sandwich came in at 30 cents. Ray wanted the sandwich to come in at 25 cents, so he turned to Atlantic cod. We all know what happened to Atlantic cod in New England.
四種魚裡的最後一種, 定義有點模糊, 業界一般稱為「白魚」。 很多種魚最後變成了所謂的「白魚」, 但要解釋個中故事, 要先提一下美國飲食 的革命性發明: 麥香魚堡。 麥香魚堡一開始用的是大比目魚。 原因是當時一個本地食店老闆發現 星期五他的麥當勞店沒有顧客。 因為當地人信基督教,需要吃魚。 所以他去找Ray Kro,說: 「我要做一種魚肉堡, 用大比目魚做。」 Ray Kroc就說:「我看不太好吧!」 「我想做一種呼拉漢堡, 在麵包上放一片菠蘿。 我們倆各做各的, 打賭看誰贏。 誰的漢堡賣得多, 誰的漢堡是冠軍漢堡。」 哎,呼拉漢堡最後沒有贏, 對大海真是件悲傷的事, 所以他就做了比目魚堡。 不過不妙的是, 魚堡賣30美分一個, Ray想要做到25美分。 所以他就去用大西洋鱈魚。 新英格蘭的大西洋鱈魚, 不用說大家都知道。
So now the Filet-O-Fish sandwich is made out of Alaska pollock, it's the largest fin fish fishery in the United States, 2 to 3 billion pounds of fish taken out of the sea every single year. If we go through the pollock, the next choice is probably going to be tilapia. Tilapia is one of those fish nobody ever heard of 20 years ago. It's actually a very efficient converter of plant protein into animal protein, and it's been a godsend to the third world. It's actually a tremendously sustainable solution, it goes from an egg to an adult in nine months. The problem is that when you look about the West, it doesn't do what the West wants it to do. It really doesn't have what's called an oily fish profile. It doesn't have the EPA and DHA omega-3s that we all think are going to make us live forever.
所以如今的麥香魚堡 用的是阿拉斯加黃線狹鱈, 它是美國捕撈量最大的魚類, 每年捕撈20到30億磅。 如果黃線狹鱈撈完了, 下一個選擇應該就是羅非魚。 羅非魚在20年前不出名, 但可以非常有效地將植物蛋白質 轉為動物蛋白質, 羅非魚一直是第三世界的福音。 它其實是一種極好的 可持續發展解決方案, 它從卵成長為成魚只需九個月。 問題是從西方角度看, 羅非魚卻沒有西方想要的特點。 羅非魚沒有所謂的“魚油”賣點。 也沒有EPA,DHA、 omega-3不飽和脂肪酸, 這些我們覺得吃了 可以長生不老的東西。
So what do we do? I mean, first of all, what about this poor fish, the clupeids? The fish that represent a huge part of that 20 to 30 million metric tons. Well, one possibility that a lot of conservationists have raised is could we eat them? Could we eat them directly instead of feeding them to salmon? There are arguments for it. They are tremendously fuel efficient to bring to market, a fraction of the fuel cost of say, shrimp, and at the very top of the carbon efficiency scale. They also are omega-3 rich, a great source for EPA and DHA. So that is a potential. And if we were to go down that route what I would say is, instead of paying a few bucks a pound -- or a few bucks a ton, really -- and making it into aquafeed, could we halve the catch and double the price for the fishermen and make that our way of treating these particular fish?
那我們該怎麼辦? 首先來說, 這種小魚怎麼樣,鯡魚? 在上面提到的二、三千萬噸裡, 這種魚占了很大比例。 許多保護主義者 都提到這種可能性, 我們可以吃鯡魚嗎? 我們可不可以直接吃它, 而不是用來餵鮭魚? 這有些爭論。 鯡魚的燃油經濟性極高, 只佔蝦的燃油費用的冰山一角, 碳效率的排名也相當可觀。 鯡魚含豐富EPA、DHA、 omega-3不飽和脂肪酸。 所以鯡魚有潛力。 如果我們從這點說開來, 我想說的是, 與其在每磅上支出幾美元-- 實際是每噸幾美元-- 用來把鯡魚變成魚飼料, 我們是不是可以將捕撈量減半, 讓漁民的售價提升一倍, 以此作為我們對待 這些魚類的做法嗎?
Other possibility though, which is much more interesting, is looking at bivalves, particularly mussels. Now, mussels are very high in EPA and DHA, they're similar to canned tuna. They're also extremely fuel efficient. To bring a pound of mussels to market is about a thirtieth of the carbon as required to bring beef to market. They require no forage fish, they actually get their omega-3s by filtering the water of microalgae. In fact, that's where omega-3s come from, they don't come from fish. Microalgae make the omega-3s, they're only bioconcentrated in fish.
另外一個選擇更有趣: 雙殼貝類,特別是貽貝。 貽貝含豐富EPA和DHA, 跟鮪魚罐頭相似。 貽貝的燃油經濟性也極高。 上市一磅貽貝的碳排放, 只有上市一磅牛肉的十三分之一。 它們也不用吃魚, 它們實際上可以過濾水中的藻類 得到自己的omega-3不飽和脂肪酸。 這其實是omega-3不飽和脂肪酸 的來源,而不是魚。 omega-3不飽和脂肪酸由藻類製造, 它們在魚類體內進行生物富集,
Mussels and other bivalves do tremendous amounts of water filtration. A single mussel can filter dozens of gallons every single day. And this is incredibly important when we look at the world. Right now, nitrification, overuse of phosphates in our waterways are causing tremendous algal blooms. Over 400 new dead zones have been created in the last 20 years, tremendous sources of marine life death.
貽貝和其他雙殼類 能過濾大量的水。 一個貽貝每天可以過濾幾十加侖水。 這對地球的發展相當重要。 如今,水體中過量的氮和磷 使得藻類大量繁殖。 過去20年裡新形成的死水區 有超過400個, 造成大量的海洋生物死亡。
We also could look at not a fish at all. We could look at a vegetable. We could look at seaweed, the kelps, all these different varieties of things that can be high in omega-3s, can be high in proteins, tremendously good things. They filter the water just like mussels do. And weirdly enough, it turns out that you can actually feed this to cows. Now, I'm not a big fan of cattle. But if you wanted to keep growing cattle in a time and place where water resources are limited, you're growing seaweed in the water, you don't have to water it -- major consideration.
我們還可以完全不考慮魚類, 我們可以考慮植物, 我們可以吃海帶,褐藻, 它們有許多不同品種, 均富含ω-3不飽和脂肪酸, 富含蛋白質, 極好的優質食品。 這些植物可以像貽貝那樣過濾水。 而且信不信由你, 你還可以用海帶來餵牛。 我不是那麼喜歡吃牛。 但要是你想養牛, 但是養殖時間和地點 不能提供很多水源, 你可以在水裡養海草, 又不需要去澆水—— 這點很重要。
And the last fish is a question mark. We have the ability to create aquacultured fish that creates a net gain of marine protein for us. This creature would have to be vegetarian, it would have to be fast growing, it would have to be adaptable to a changing climate and it would have to have that oily fish profile, that EPA, DHA, omega-3 fatty acid profile that we're looking for.
最後一種魚是一個問號。 我們現在有能力 去創造一種水產養殖魚, 給我們帶來豐富海洋蛋白。 這種魚要只吃植物, 又要生長得很快, 既要容易適應氣候變化, 又要有油性魚類的好處, 給我們帶來EPA、DHA、 omega-3不飽和脂肪酸。
This exists kind of on paper. I have been reporting on these subjects for 15 years. Every time I do a new story, somebody tells me, "We can do all that. We can do it. We've figured it all out. We can produce a fish that's a net gain of marine protein and has omega-3s." Great. It doesn't seem to be getting scaled up. It is time to scale this up. If we do, 30 million metric tons of seafood, a third of the world catch, stays in the water.
這似乎只存在於紙面上。 過去15年我一直報導這類話題。 每次我做一個新報導, 人們就說: 「這些我們都可以做到。沒問題。 我們已經有辦法了。」 「我們可以生產一種魚, 富含海洋蛋白和 omega-3不飽和脂肪酸。」 了不起。 但好像做不成規模。 是時候要把這規模做大。 要是做到, 三千萬噸海鮮, 全球捕撈量的三分之一, 就可以留在水裡。
So I guess what I'm saying is this is what we've been going with. We tend to go with our appetites rather than our minds. But if we went with this, or some configuration of it, we might have a little more of this.
所以我想說的就是, 這些是我們一直以來的選擇。 我們傾向於聽從自己的胃口, 而不是我們的思想。 但要是我們選擇這些, 或者類似的組合, 那我們就可以有更多魚類。
Thank you.
謝謝。
(Applause)
(掌聲)