A roadmap to end aging | Aubrey de Grey

Prevoditelj: Davorin Jelačić Recezent: Tilen Pigac - EFZG

18 minutes is an absolutely brutal time limit,

Samo 18 minuta je užasno vremensko ograničenje

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

pa ću odmah zaroniti, u samu suštinu stvari

where I get this thing to work.

kako sam to ja zamislio.

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

Krećemo. Pričat ću o pet različitih stvari.

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

Govorit ću zašto je poželjno poraziti starenje.

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

Govorit ću o tome zašto se moramo dovesti u red,

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

i zapravo raspravljati o ovome malo više nego što to radimo.

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

Također ću pričati i o samoj izvedivosti naravno.

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

Pojasnit ću zašto imamo tako poguban stav

about doing anything about aging.

oko bilo kakve borbe sa starenjem.

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

Zatim ću potrošiti drugu polovicu ovog predavanja

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

pričajući o tome kako bismo zaista mogli dokazati da je takav stav pogrešan,

namely, by actually doing something about it.

ponajprije ako poduzmemo nešto oko ovog problema.

I'm going to do that in two steps.

To ću učiniti u dva koraka.

The first one I'm going to talk about is

Prvi korak o kojem ću pričati je

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

kako stići od relativno skromnog produljenja života --

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

koje definiram kao 30 godina, primijenjeno na ljude

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

koji su već u srednjoj životnoj dobi --

to a point which can genuinely be called defeating aging.

do točke koju s pravom možemo smatrati pobjedom nad starenjem.

Namely, essentially an elimination of the relationship between

Odnosno, uklanjanjem veze između

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

vaše starosti i vjerojatnosti vaše smrti tijekom narednih godinu dana --

or indeed, to get sick in the first place.

ili uklanjanjem mogućnosti da uopće obolite.

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

Na kraju ću reći nešto

is how to reach that intermediate step,

o tome kako postići taj prijelazni korak,

that point of maybe 30 years life extension.

koji predstavlja produljenje života za otprilike 30 godina.

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

Počinjem s razlozima zašto bismo ovo trebali učiniti.

Now, I want to ask a question.

Prvo bih vam postavio pitanje.

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

Ruke gore: Tko u publici smatra da je malarija dobra?

That was easy. OK.

To je bilo lako. OK.

OK. Hands up: anyone in the audience

OK. Ruke gore, ima li koga u publici

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

tko nije siguran da li je malarija dobra ili loša?

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

OK. Dakle svi se slažemo kako je malarija loša stvar.

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

To su dobre vijesti, jer sam i očekivao takav odgovor.

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

A sada bih vam htio reći

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

da je glavni razlog zbog kojega malariju smatramo lošom

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

karakteristika koju malarija dijeli sa starenjem.

And here is that characteristic.

To je sljedeća karakteristika: "Zato što ubija ljude!"

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

Jedina prava razlika je ta što starenje ubija znatno više ljudi nego malarija.

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

Volim publici, osobito u Velikoj Britaniji,

to talk about the comparison with foxhunting,

prikazati usporedbu s lovom na lisice,

which is something that was banned after a long struggle,

koji je vlast zabranila nakon duge borbe,

by the government not very many months ago.

prije nekoliko mjeseci.

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

Priznajem, ovdje imam naklonjenu publiku,

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

ali kao što znamo, puno ljudi nije potpuno uvjereno ovom logikom.

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

Ovo je zaista odlična usporedba, barem se meni tako čini.

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

Naime, puno je ljudi reklo: "Znate,

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

vi gradski dečki nemate pravo govoriti nama ruralnim tipovima kako raspolagati osobnim vremenom.

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

To je dio tradicije

and we should be allowed to carry on doing it.

pa bi nam trebalo biti dopušteno nastaviti s tim.

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

To je ekološki prihvatljivo, jer sprječava eksploziju populacije lisica."

But ultimately, the government prevailed in the end,

Ali naposljetku je vlada prevagnula

because the majority of the British public,

jer je većina britanske javnosti

and certainly the majority of members of Parliament,

i svakako većina članova Parlamenta

came to the conclusion that it was really something

zaključila kako je to nešto

that should not be tolerated in a civilized society.

što ne treba tolerirati u civiliziranom društvu.

And I think that human aging shares

A ja mislim da je ljudsko starenje

all of these characteristics in spades.

u mnogome slično.

What part of this do people not understand?

Koji dio ovoga ljudi ne razumiju?

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

Nije riječ samo o životu, naravno --

(Laughter) --

(Smijeh)

it's about healthy life, you know --

riječ je o zdravome životu --

getting frail and miserable and dependent is no fun,

krhkost, slabost i ovisnost nisu zabavni,

whether or not dying may be fun.

pa bilo samo umiranje zabavno ili ne.

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

Zaista, ja bih naš stav objasnio kao

It's a global trance.

globalni trans.

These are the sorts of unbelievable excuses

Evo nekih nevjerojatnih isprika

that people give for aging.

koje ljudi daju za starenje.

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

Mislim, OK, ne tvrdim

that these excuses are completely valueless.

da su te isprike sasvim bezvrijedne.

There are some good points to be made here,

Ima tu i dobrih argumenata.

things that we ought to be thinking about, forward planning

Stvari o kojima trebamo razmišljati, planirati unaprijed

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

kako ništa ne bi pošlo previše -- no, kako bismo minimizirali

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

turbulentnost kada zaista otkrijemo kako riješiti starenje.

But these are completely crazy, when you actually

Ali te isprike su sulude, kad steknete

remember your sense of proportion.

osjećaj za razmjer.

You know, these are arguments; these are things that

Znate, ti argumenti su nešto što

would be legitimate to be concerned about.

bi bio legitiman razlog za zabrinutost.

But the question is, are they so dangerous --

Ali pitanje je da li su toliko opasni --

these risks of doing something about aging --

rizici poduzimanja nečega protiv starenja --

that they outweigh the downside of doing the opposite,

da pretežu nad lošim stranama suprotnog djelovanja,

namely, leaving aging as it is?

odnosno, ostavljanja da sa starenjem bude sve po starom?

Are these so bad that they outweigh

Jesu li rizici toliko loši da su važniji

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

od osude 100.000 ljudi dnevno na nepotrebnu ranu smrt.

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

Znate, ako nemate argument koji bi bio toliko snažan,

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

tada naprosto nemojte traćiti moje vrijeme, velim.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

Now, there is one argument

No, evo jednog argumenta

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

za kojeg neki misle da je doista tako snažan.

People worry about overpopulation; they say,

Ljudi brinu o prevelikom broju stanovnika; kažu:

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

"Pa, ako riješimo starenje, praktički nitko neće umirati,

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

ili će barem smrtnost biti puno manja,

only from crossing St. Giles carelessly.

samo uslijed neopreznog prelaska cesta.

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

I zato nećemo moći imati mnogo djece,

and kids are really important to most people."

a djeca su stvarno važna mnogim ljudima."

And that's true.

I to je istina.

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

I znate, mnogi pokušavaju izbjeći ovo pitanje,

and give answers like this.

i daju slične odgovore.

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

Ne slažem se s tim odgovorima. Mislim da nisu valjani.

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

Mislim da je točno da ćemo se suočiti s dilemom u ovom pogledu.

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

Morat ćemo odlučiti da li imati nisku stopu rađanja,

or a high death rate.

ili visoku stopu smrtnosti.

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

Visoka stopa smrtnosti će, naravno, nastati jednostavno odbijanjem terapija,

in favor of carrying on having a lot of kids.

u korist mogućnosti da imamo puno djece.

And, I say that that's fine --

I ja kažem da je to u redu --

the future of humanity is entitled to make that choice.

buduće čovječanstvo ima pravo birati.

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

Ono što nije u redu je da mi odabiremo u ime budućnosti.

If we vacillate, hesitate,

Ako se premišljamo, oklijevamo,

and do not actually develop these therapies,

i ne razvijemo te terapije,

then we are condemning a whole cohort of people --

tada osuđujemo čitave kohorte ljudi --

who would have been young enough and healthy enough

koji bi bili dovoljno mladi i dovoljno zdravi

to benefit from those therapies, but will not be,

da imaju koristi od terapija, ali neće imati koristi

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

jer ih nismo razvili onoliko brzo koliko smo mogli --

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

odbit ćemo tim ljudima mogućnost neograničenog života,

and I consider that that is immoral.

i ja smatram da je to amoralno.

That's my answer to the overpopulation question.

To je moj odgovor na pitanje prekobrojne populacije.

Right. So the next thing is,

Dobro. Sljedeće pitanje je

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

zašto bismo trebali postati malo aktivniji u ovome?

And the fundamental answer is that

A fundamentalan odgovor je taj da

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

trans u korist starenja nije tako glup kao što izgleda.

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

On je zapravo osjetljiv način nošenja s neizbježnošću starenja.

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

Starenje je strašno, ali je neizbježno, pa, znate,

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

moramo naći načina da ne mislimo toliko o tome

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

i racionalno je sve što činimo, da izbjegnemo misliti o tome.

Like, for example, making up these ridiculous reasons

Kao, na primjer, izmišljanje tih smiješnih razloga

why aging is actually a good thing after all.

zašto bi starenje u stvari bilo dobra stvar.

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

No, naravno, to funkcionira samo ako imamo obje komponente.

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

I čim koncept neizbježnosti postane malo nejasniji --

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

i dolazimo na domašaj mogućnosti da nešto poduzmemo oko starenja --

this becomes part of the problem.

to postaje dio problema.

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

Trans koji zagovara starenje je ono što nas sprečava djelovati protiv starenja.

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

I zato zaista moramo puno pričati o tome --

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

širiti vjeru, otići ću toliko daleko da kažem, i to mnogo --

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

kako bismo privukli pažnju ljudi i uvjerili ih

that they are in a trance in this regard.

da su u ovom pogledu u transu.

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

To je sve što ću reći o tome.

I'm now going to talk about feasibility.

A sada ću govoriti o izvedivosti.

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

Fundamentalan razlog zašto mislim da osjećamo starenje kao neizbježno

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

nalazi se u definiciji starenja koju ovdje dajem.

A very simple definition.

Vrlo jednostavna definicija.

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

Starenje je popratni učinak života,

which is to say, metabolism.

konkretnije, metabolizma.

This is not a completely tautological statement;

Ovo nije sasvim tautološka tvrdnja;

it's a reasonable statement.

već razumna tvrdnja.

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

Starenje je proces koji se događa i neživim stvarima poput automobila,

and it also happens to us,

a događa se i nama,

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

unatoč činjenici da imamo mnogo pametnih mehanizama za popravke

because those self-repair mechanisms are not perfect.

jer ti samo-popravljajući mehanizmi nisu savršeni.

So basically, metabolism, which is defined as

Dakle, u suštini, metabolizam, kojega definiramo kao

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

sve ono što nas drži na životu iz dana u dan,

has side effects.

ima svoje popratne učinke.

Those side effects accumulate and eventually cause pathology.

Ti popratni učinci se gomilaju i naposljetku uzrokuju patologiju.

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

To je lijepa definicija. Zato možemo reći:

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

možemo reći da, znate, imamo taj lanac događaja.

And there are really two games in town,

A u gradu su zapravo dvije predstave,

according to most people, with regard to postponing aging.

kako ih većina vidi, u odnosu na odgađanje starenja.

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

One su ono što nazivam gerontološkim pristupom i gerijatrijskim pristupom.

The geriatrician will intervene late in the day,

Gerijatrist će intervenirati kasno,

when pathology is becoming evident,

kad patologija već postane očita,

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

i on će pokušati zadržati pijesak vremena,

and stop the accumulation of side effects

zaustaviti akumulaciju popratnih učinaka

from causing the pathology quite so soon.

da ne uzrokuje patologiju prerano.

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

Naravno, ovo je strategija kratkog roka, bitka koja se gubi,

because the things that are causing the pathology

jer su uzroci patologije

are becoming more abundant as time goes on.

sve brojniji kako vrijeme odmiče.

The gerontology approach looks much more promising on the surface,

Gerontološki pristup na prvi pogled izgleda više obećavajući,

because, you know, prevention is better than cure.

jer, znate, prevencija je bolja od liječenja.

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

Nažalost, činjenica je da metabolizam ne razumijemo baš dobro.

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

U stvari, naše razumijevanje djelovanja organizama je žalosno skromno --

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

čak još nismo predobri ni po pitanju stanica.

We've discovered things like, for example,

Otkrili smo stvari poput, na primjer,

RNA interference only a few years ago,

RNK interferencije, tek prije koju godinu,

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

a to je doista fundamentalna komponenta djelovanja stanice.

Basically, gerontology is a fine approach in the end,

U suštini, gerontologija je, na koncu, dobar pristup,

but it is not an approach whose time has come

ali nije pristup čije vrijeme je nastupilo

when we're talking about intervention.

kad govorimo o intervenciji.

So then, what do we do about that?

Pa onda, što ćemo poduzeti u vezi s tim?

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

Mislim, u pitanju je fina logika, zvuči sasvim uvjerljivo,

pretty ironclad, doesn't it?

poprilično neosporivo, zar ne?

But it isn't.

Ali nije.

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

Prije nego što vam kažem zašto nije, udubit ću se malo

into what I'm calling step two.

u ono što nazivam drugi korak.

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

Pretpostavite, kao što rekoh, da postignemo --

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

recimo, zaradi rasprave, da postignemo danas

the ability to confer 30 extra years of healthy life

sposobnost dodati 30 godina zdravog života

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

ljudima koji su već u srednjoj dobi, recimo 55 godina.

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

Nazvat ću to snažnim ljudskim pomlađivanjem. OK.

What would that actually mean

Što bi to zapravo značilo

for how long people of various ages today --

koliko bi ljudi različite dobi danas --

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

ili ekvivalentno, ljudi različite dobi u vrijeme kad ove terapije stignu --

would actually live?

koliko bi oni doista živjeli?

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

Kako bismo odgovorili na to pitanje -- mogli biste pomisliti

but it's not simple.

da je odgovor jednostavan, ali nije.

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

Ne možemo samo reći, "No, ako su dovoljno mladi da im te terapije koriste,

then they'll live 30 years longer."

tada će živjeti 30 godina dulje."

That's the wrong answer.

To je netočan odgovor.

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

A razlog zašto je pogrešan je napredak.

There are two sorts of technological progress really,

Zapravo imamo dvije vrste tehnološkog napretka

for this purpose.

kad govorimo o ovome.

There are fundamental, major breakthroughs,

Postoje fundamentalna, velika otkrića,

and there are incremental refinements of those breakthroughs.

i postoje postupna poboljšanja tih otkrića.

Now, they differ a great deal

Razlika između njih je velika

in terms of the predictability of time frames.

u smislu predvidljivosti vremenskog okvira.

Fundamental breakthroughs:

Fundamentalna otkrića:

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

vrlo je teško predvidjeti koliko će trebati

to make a fundamental breakthrough.

da se otkrije nešto fundamentalno.

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

Jako smo davno zaključili da bi letenje bilo zabavno,

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

ali nam je trebalo do 1903. da otkrijemo kako to izvesti.

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

Ali nakon toga, napredak je prilično postojan i redovit.

I think this is a reasonable sequence of events that happened

Mislim da je ovo razuman slijed događaja koji se zbio

in the progression of the technology of powered flight.

u napretku tehnologije pogonskog leta.

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

Možemo smatrati da je svako fundamentalno otkriće zapravo

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

izvan dosega mašte izumitelja prethodnog otkrića.

The incremental advances have added up to something

Postupna poboljšanja su nam gomilanjem dala nešto

which is not incremental anymore.

što više nije postupno.

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

To je ono što vidite nakon fundamentalnih otkrića.

And you see it in all sorts of technologies.

I vidite to u svim vrstama tehnologije.

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

Kod računala, možete promatrati više ili manje paralelan razvoj

happening of course a bit later.

koji se, naravno, zbio nešto kasnije.

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

Možete promatrati medicinu. Mislim, higijenu, cjepiva, antibiotike --

you know, the same sort of time frame.

znate, sličan vremenski okvir.

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

Zato mislim da zapravo korak broj dva, kojeg sam upravo nazvao korak,

isn't a step at all.

uopće i nije korak.

That in fact, the people who are young enough

Da će, u stvari, ljudi koji su dovoljno mladi

to benefit from these first therapies

da imaju koristi od prvih terapija

that give this moderate amount of life extension,

koje će donijeti ovakvo umjereno produljenje života,

even though those people are already middle-aged when the therapies arrive,

čak i ako ti ljudi budu već srednjovječni kad terapije stignu,

will be at some sort of cusp.

bit će na nekakvoj prekretnici.

They will mostly survive long enough to receive improved treatments

Većina njih će poživjeti dovoljno dugo da prime poboljšane tretmane

that will give them a further 30 or maybe 50 years.

koji će im dati daljnjih 30 ili možda 50 godina.

In other words, they will be staying ahead of the game.

Drugim riječima, imat će koristi od daljnjeg razvoja.

The therapies will be improving faster than

Terapije će napredovati brže nego što će nam

the remaining imperfections in the therapies are catching up with us.

preostale nesavršenosti u terapijama škoditi.

This is a very important point for me to get across.

To je vrlo važna poanta koju vam želim prenijeti.

Because, you know, most people, when they hear

Jer, znate, kad većina ljudi čuje

that I predict that a lot of people alive today are going to live to 1,000 or more,

da predviđam da će mnogi danas živi ljudi živjeti 1.000 ili više godina,

they think that I'm saying that we're going to invent therapies in the next few decades

oni misle da kažem da ćemo u sljedećiih nekoliko desetljeća izumiti terapije

that are so thoroughly eliminating aging

koje će tako temeljito eliminirati starenje

that those therapies will let us live to 1,000 or more.

da će nam omogućiti da doživimo tisućitu godinu, ili više.

I'm not saying that at all.

A ne kažem to.

I'm saying that the rate of improvement of those therapies

Kažem da će stopa poboljšanja tih terapija

will be enough.

biti dovoljna.

They'll never be perfect, but we'll be able to fix the things

One nikada neće biti savršene, ali ćemo moći ukloniti probleme

that 200-year-olds die of, before we have any 200-year-olds.

od kojih umiru 200-godišnjaci, prije nego dobijemo prve dvjestogodišnjake.

And the same for 300 and 400 and so on.

I isto vrijedi za 300- i 400-godišnjake, i tako dalje.

I decided to give this a little name,

Odlučio sam tome dati jedan mali naziv,

which is "longevity escape velocity."

koji glasi "brzina bijega u dugovječnost."

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

Well, it seems to get the point across.

Pa, čini se da shvaćate poantu.

So, these trajectories here are basically how we would expect people to live,

Dakle, prikazane putanje su naša očekivanja o ljudskom životu,

in terms of remaining life expectancy,

u smislu očekivanog ostatka života,

as measured by their health,

mjereno njihovim zdravljem,

for given ages that they were at the time that these therapies arrive.

za odabrane starosne dobi u kojima su bili u trenutku otkrivanja terapija.

If you're already 100, or even if you're 80 --

Ako već imate 100 godina, čak i ako imate 80 --

and an average 80-year-old,

ako ste prosječan 80-godišnjak,

we probably can't do a lot for you with these therapies,

vjerojatno ovim terapijama za vas ne možemo učiniti puno,

because you're too close to death's door

jer ste preblizu dverima smrti

for the really initial, experimental therapies to be good enough for you.

da bi prve, eksperimentalne terapije za vas bile dovoljno dobre.

You won't be able to withstand them.

Nećete ih moći podnijeti.

But if you're only 50, then there's a chance

Ali ako imate samo 50 godina, tada postoji šansa

that you might be able to pull out of the dive and, you know --

da biste se mogli iščupati iz poniranja i, znate --

(Laughter) --

(Smijeh)

eventually get through this

na kraju se provući

and start becoming biologically younger in a meaningful sense,

i početi bivati biološki mlađi u bitnom smislu riječi,

in terms of your youthfulness, both physical and mental,

u smislu vašeg osjećaja mladosti, fizičkog i mentalnog,

and in terms of your risk of death from age-related causes.

i u smislu rizika od smrti čiji su uzroci povezani sa starenjem.

And of course, if you're a bit younger than that,

I, naravno, ako ste nešto mlađi od toga,

then you're never really even going

tada nikada zapravo nećete doći

to get near to being fragile enough to die of age-related causes.

ni blizu da budete toliko krhki da biste umrli od uzroka povezanih sa starošću.

So this is a genuine conclusion that I come to, that the first 150-year-old --

Tako dolazim do svog istinskog zaključka, da je prvi 150-godišnjak --

we don't know how old that person is today,

ne znamo koliko ta osoba danas ima godina,

because we don't know how long it's going to take

jer ne znamo koliko će nam trebati

to get these first-generation therapies.

da dobijemo terapije prve generacije.

But irrespective of that age,

Ali nebitno koja je dob te osobe,

I'm claiming that the first person to live to 1,000 --

tvrdim vam da će prva osoba koja će doživjeti 1.000 godina --

subject of course, to, you know, global catastrophes --

uzimajući u obzir, naravno, globalne katastrofe --

is actually, probably, only about 10 years younger than the first 150-year-old.

prva osoba je vjerjoatno samo 10 godina mlađa od prvog 150-godišnjaka.

And that's quite a thought.

A to je silna misao.

Alright, so finally I'm going to spend the rest of the talk,

Dobro, napokon ću ostatak svog govora posvetiti,

my last seven-and-a-half minutes, on step one;

svojih zadnjih sedam i pol minuta, na prvi korak;

namely, how do we actually get to this moderate amount of life extension

naime, kako da stvarno dođemo do umjerenog produljenja života

that will allow us to get to escape velocity?

koje će nam omogućiti dostizanje brzine bijega?

And in order to do that, I need to talk about mice a little bit.

Kako bih došao na to, moram malo govoriti o miševima.

I have a corresponding milestone to robust human rejuvenation.

Imam odgovarajuću prekretnicu, pandan snažnom ljudskom pomlađivanju.

I'm calling it "robust mouse rejuvenation," not very imaginatively.

Zovem ga snažno mišje pomlađivanje, ne baš kreativno.

And this is what it is.

Evo o čemu se radi.

I say we're going to take a long-lived strain of mouse,

Uzet ćemo dugovjeku mišju lozu,

which basically means mice that live about three years on average.

što praktički znači miševe koji prosječno žive tri godine.

We do exactly nothing to them until they're already two years old.

Ne činimo im baš ništa sve dok ne budu stari dvije godine.

And then we do a whole bunch of stuff to them,

A tada im radimo puno toga,

and with those therapies, we get them to live,

i s tim terapijama im omogućavamo život,

on average, to their fifth birthday.

u prosjeku, do njihovog petog rođendana.

So, in other words, we add two years --

Drugim riječima, dodajemo dvije godine --

we treble their remaining lifespan,

utrostručujemo njihov preostali životni vijek,

starting from the point that we started the therapies.

počevši od trenutka kad smo počeli s terapijom.

The question then is, what would that actually mean for the time frame

Pitanje je tada, što bi to zapravo značilo za vremenski okvir

until we get to the milestone I talked about earlier for humans?

dok ne dođemo do prekretnice koju sam ranije spominjao u vezi s ljudima?

Which we can now, as I've explained,

Koju sad možemo, kako sam objasnio,

equivalently call either robust human rejuvenation or longevity escape velocity.

zvati ili snažno ljudsko pomlađivanje ili brzina bijega u dugovječnost.

Secondly, what does it mean for the public's perception

Drugo, što će to značiti za percepciju javnosti

of how long it's going to take for us to get to those things,

vrijeme koje će biti potrebno da postignemo navedeno,

starting from the time we get the mice?

počevši od vremena kad smo to postigli s miševima?

And thirdly, the question is, what will it do

I treće, pitanje je kako će to djelovati

to actually how much people want it?

na želju ljudi da to stvarno i ostvare?

And it seems to me that the first question

Izgleda mi da je prvo pitanje

is entirely a biology question,

posve biološke naravi,

and it's extremely hard to answer.

i teško je na njega odgovoriti.

One has to be very speculative,

Čovjek mora biti vrlo špekulativan,

and many of my colleagues would say that we should not do this speculation,

i mnogi bi moji kolege rekli da ne trebamo ulaziti u tu špekulaciju,

that we should simply keep our counsel until we know more.

da jednostavo trebamo sačekati dok ne doznamo više.

I say that's nonsense.

Ja vam kažem da je to glupost.

I say we absolutely are irresponsible if we stay silent on this.

Kažem da smo apsolutno neodgovorni ako šutimo o ovome.

We need to give our best guess as to the time frame,

Moramo pokušati pogoditi što točnije možemo taj vremenski okvir

in order to give people a sense of proportion

kako bismo ljudima dali osjećaj proporcije

so that they can assess their priorities.

da oni mogu procijeniti svoje prioritete.

So, I say that we have a 50/50 chance

Dakle, tvrdim da imamo šansu 50:50

of reaching this RHR milestone,

da dosegnemo tu SLJP (RHR) prekretnicu,

robust human rejuvenation, within 15 years from the point

snažno ljudsko pomlađivanje, u roku od 15 godina od trenutka

that we get to robust mouse rejuvenation.

kad postignemo snažno pomlađivanje miševa.

15 years from the robust mouse.

15 godina nakon mišjeg.

The public's perception will probably be somewhat better than that.

Ljudska percepcija će vjerojatno biti nešto optimističnija.

The public tends to underestimate how difficult scientific things are.

Javnost ima tendenciju podcijeniti teškoće znanstvenog razvoja.

So they'll probably think it's five years away.

Oni će stoga vjerojatno misliti da će trebati 5 godina.

They'll be wrong, but that actually won't matter too much.

Neće biti u pravu, ali to zapravo i neće značiti puno.

And finally, of course, I think it's fair to say

I konačno, naravno, mislim da je u redu konstatirati

that a large part of the reason why the public is so ambivalent about aging now

da je veliki dio razloga za današnju ambivalentnost javnosti prema starenju

is the global trance I spoke about earlier, the coping strategy.

u tom globalnom transu kojeg sam spominjao, u strategiji nošenja sa starenjem.

That will be history at this point,

To će u tom trenutku biti povijest,

because it will no longer be possible to believe that aging is inevitable in humans,

jer više neće biti moguće vjerovati da je starenje kod ljudi neizbježno,

since it's been postponed so very effectively in mice.

kad je tako učinkovito odgođeno kod miševa.

So we're likely to end up with a very strong change in people's attitudes,

Zato će vjerojatno doći do snažne promjene stavova kod ljudi,

and of course that has enormous implications.

i, naravno, to će imati ogromne implikacije.

So in order to tell you now how we're going to get these mice,

Kako bih vam objasnio kako ćemo postići to s miševima,

I'm going to add a little bit to my description of aging.

dodat ću malo svojoj definiciji starenja.

I'm going to use this word "damage"

Upotrijebit ću izraz "oštećenje"

to denote these intermediate things that are caused by metabolism

da objasnim međuposljedice koje uzrokuje metabolizam,

and that eventually cause pathology.

a koje na kraju dovode do patologije.

Because the critical thing about this

Kritična stvar u ovome je to

is that even though the damage only eventually causes pathology,

da, premda oštećenje uzrokuje patologiju tek na kraju,

the damage itself is caused ongoing-ly throughout life, starting before we're born.

samo oštećenje nastaje neprestano tijekom života, počinjući prije našeg rođenja.

But it is not part of metabolism itself.

Ali ono nije dio samog metabolizma.

And this turns out to be useful.

I pokazuje se da nam je to korisno.

Because we can re-draw our original diagram this way.

Jer možemo naš originalni dijagram ponovno iscrtati ovako.

We can say that, fundamentally, the difference between gerontology and geriatrics

Možemo reći da je, fundamentalno, razlika između gerontologije i gerijatrije

is that gerontology tries to inhibit the rate

u tome što gerontologija pokušava spriječiti stopu

at which metabolism lays down this damage.

kojom metabolizam nanosi oštećenja.

And I'm going to explain exactly what damage is

A objasnit ću točno što je to oštećenje

in concrete biological terms in a moment.

konkretnim biološkim rječnikom, za koji trenutak.

And geriatricians try to hold back the sands of time

Gerijatrijanci pokušavaju zadržati istjecanje pijeska vremena

by stopping the damage converting into pathology.

pokušavajući spriječiti da se oštećenje pretvori u patologiju.

And the reason it's a losing battle

Razlog zašto je to bitka koja se gubi

is because the damage is continuing to accumulate.

je u tome što se oštećenja trajno nagomilavaju.

So there's a third approach, if we look at it this way.

Ako tako gledamo na to, postoji i treći pristup.

We can call it the "engineering approach,"

Možemo ga nazvati inženjerskim pristupom,

and I claim that the engineering approach is within range.

i tvrdim vam da je inženjerski pristup na dohvat ruke.

The engineering approach does not intervene in any processes.

Inženjerski pristup ne intervenira u procese.

It does not intervene in this process or this one.

Ne intervenira u ovaj proces, niti u ovaj.

And that's good because it means that it's not a losing battle,

To je dobro jer znači da nismo u bitci koju gubimo,

and it's something that we are within range of being able to do,

a znači nešto i što smo na dohvat mogućnosti da to postignemo,

because it doesn't involve improving on evolution.

jer to ne uključuje poboljšavanje evolucije.

The engineering approach simply says,

Inženjerski pristup jednostavno kaže,

"Let's go and periodically repair all of these various types of damage --

"Hajdemo periodično popravljati sve te razne vrste oštećenja --

not necessarily repair them completely, but repair them quite a lot,

ne nužno popravljati ih u potpunosti, ali popravljati ih u značajnoj mjeri,

so that we keep the level of damage down below the threshold

kako bismo razinu oštećenja zadržali ispod praga

that must exist, that causes it to be pathogenic."

koji mora postojati, a koji ih pretvara u patogene."

We know that this threshold exists,

Znamo da taj prag postoji,

because we don't get age-related diseases until we're in middle age,

jer nemamo bolesti povezane sa starenjem prije nego uđemo u srednju dob,

even though the damage has been accumulating since before we were born.

usprkos činjenici da se oštećenje akumulira još otprije našeg rođenja.

Why do I say that we're in range? Well, this is basically it.

Zašto kažem da smo na dohvat ruke? Evo zašto.

The point about this slide is actually the bottom.

Bitno na ovom prikazu je na njegovom dnu.

If we try to say which bits of metabolism are important for aging,

Ako probamo reći koji dijelovi metabolizma su važni za starenje,

we will be here all night, because basically all of metabolism

provest ćemo ovdje cijelu noć, jer, u suštini, sav je metabolizam,

is important for aging in one way or another.

na ovaj ili onaj način, važan za starenje.

This list is just for illustration; it is incomplete.

Ovaj popis je samo ilustracija, nepotpun je.

The list on the right is also incomplete.

Popis na desnoj strani je također nepotpun.

It's a list of types of pathology that are age-related,

To je popis svih vrsta patologije povezanih sa starenjem,

and it's just an incomplete list.

i naprosto je nepotpun.

But I would like to claim to you that this list in the middle is actually complete --

Ali htio bih vam ustvrditi da je popis u sredini zapravo potpun,

this is the list of types of thing that qualify as damage,

to je popis svih vrsta onoga što kvalificiramo kao oštećenja,

side effects of metabolism that cause pathology in the end,

popratnih učinaka metabolizma koji na kraju dovode do patologije,

or that might cause pathology.

ili bi mogli dovesti do patologije.

And there are only seven of them.

Ima ih samo sedam.

They're categories of things, of course, but there's only seven of them.

To su kategorije oštećenja, naravno, ali ima ih samo sedam.

Cell loss, mutations in chromosomes, mutations in the mitochondria and so on.

Gubitak stanica, mutacije u kromosomima, mutacije u mitohondriju, i tako dalje.

First of all, I'd like to give you an argument for why that list is complete.

Kao prvo, argumentirat ću vam zašto je ovaj popis potpun.

Of course one can make a biological argument.

Naravno, može se iznijeti i biološki argument.

One can say, "OK, what are we made of?"

Možemo reći, "OK, od čega smo napravljeni?"

We're made of cells and stuff between cells.

Napravljeni smo do stanica i tvari između stanica.

What can damage accumulate in?

Gdje se oštećenje može nakupljati?

The answer is: long-lived molecules,

Odgovor je, u dugovječnim molekulama,

because if a short-lived molecule undergoes damage, but then the molecule is destroyed --

jer ako molekula kratkog vijeka doživi oštećenje, ona je uništena --

like by a protein being destroyed by proteolysis -- then the damage is gone, too.

poput proteina kojeg uništava proteoliza -- a s njom nestaje i oštećenje.

It's got to be long-lived molecules.

Znači mora biti u dugovječnim molekulama.

So, these seven things were all under discussion in gerontology a long time ago

O ovih sedam stvari se u gerontologiji odavno raspravlja

and that is pretty good news, because it means that,

a to su dobre vijesti jer to znači da smo,

you know, we've come a long way in biology in these 20 years,

znate, prešli dug put u biologiji u zadnjih 20 godina,

so the fact that we haven't extended this list

pa činjenica da nismo mogli proširiti ovaj popis

is a pretty good indication that there's no extension to be done.

predstavlja prilično dobru indikaciju da se i ne može proširiti.

However, it's better than that; we actually know how to fix them all,

No, i bolje je od toga; mi zapravo znamo kako sve njih riješiti,

in mice, in principle -- and what I mean by in principle is,

na miševima, u principu -- a što mislim pod tim "u principu" je to

we probably can actually implement these fixes within a decade.

da vjerojatno možemo primijeniti ta rješenja u narednom desetljeću.

Some of them are partially implemented already, the ones at the top.

Neka od njih su već djelomice ugrađena, ona na vrhu popisa.

I haven't got time to go through them at all, but

Nemam vremena proći kroz sva, ali

my conclusion is that, if we can actually get suitable funding for this,

moj je zaključak da, kad bismo dobili odgovarajuće financiranje za ovo,

then we can probably develop robust mouse rejuvenation in only 10 years,

mogli bismo vjerojatno razviti snažno mišje pomlađivanje za samo 10 godina,

but we do need to get serious about it.

ali stvarno se moramo uozbiljiti.

We do need to really start trying.

Stvarno se moramo početi istinski truditi.

So of course, there are some biologists in the audience,

Naravno, u publici su i neki biolozi,

and I want to give some answers to some of the questions that you may have.

i volio bih odgovoriti na neka pitanja koja biste mogli imati.

You may have been dissatisfied with this talk,

Možda niste zadovoljni ovim predavanjem,

but fundamentally you have to go and read this stuff.

ali, u suštini, morate poći i čitati o ovome.

I've published a great deal on this;

Objavio sam puno na ovu temu;

I cite the experimental work on which my optimism is based,

citiram eksperimente na kojima temeljim svoj optimizam,

and there's quite a lot of detail there.

i tamo ima puno detalja.

The detail is what makes me confident

Detalji su ono što mi daje sigurnost

of my rather aggressive time frames that I'm predicting here.

u procjeni prilično agresivnog vremenskog okvira kojeg sam iznio.

So if you think that I'm wrong,

Pa, ako mislite da griješim,

you'd better damn well go and find out why you think I'm wrong.

bilo bi vam dobro upustiti se i otkriti zašto mislite da griješim.

And of course the main thing is that you shouldn't trust people

I, naravno, bitno je da ne biste trebali vjerovati ljudima

who call themselves gerontologists because,

koji sebe nazivaju gerontolozima, jer

as with any radical departure from previous thinking within a particular field,

kao kod svakog radikalnog napuštanja starog mišljenja na nekom području,

you know, you expect people in the mainstream to be a bit resistant

znate, očekujete da glavna struja ljudi pokazuje izvjestan otpor

and not really to take it seriously.

i ne uzima stvar ozbiljno.

So, you know, you've got to actually do your homework,

Stoga, znate, morate doista uraditi domaću zadaću,

in order to understand whether this is true.

kako biste razumjeli da li je ovo točno.

And we'll just end with a few things.

I završit ćemo s nekoliko stvari.

One thing is, you know, you'll be hearing from a guy in the next session

Jedno je, znate, sljedeći govor ćete čuti tipa

who said some time ago that he could sequence the human genome in half no time,

koji je prije nekog vremena tvrdio da može brzo sekvencionirati ljudski genom

and everyone said, "Well, it's obviously impossible."

i svi su rekli, "No, pa to je očito nemoguće."

And you know what happened.

A znate što se dogodilo.

So, you know, this does happen.

Tako da, znate, stvari se događaju.

We have various strategies -- there's the Methuselah Mouse Prize,

Poduzimamo različite strategije -- imamo nagradu za miša Metuzalema,

which is basically an incentive to innovate,

koja je, u biti, inicijativa za izume,

and to do what you think is going to work,

da pokušate ono što mislite da će funkcionirati,

and you get money for it if you win.

i dobijete novac za to, ako uspije.

There's a proposal to actually put together an institute.

Postoji i prijedlog da se osnuje institut.

This is what's going to take a bit of money.

Za to će trebati ponešto novca.

But, I mean, look -- how long does it take to spend that on the war in Iraq?

Ali, mislim, gledajte -- koliko traju ta sredstva kad se troše na rat u Iraku?

Not very long. OK.

Ne baš dugo. OK.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

It's got to be philanthropic, because profits distract biotech,

To bi moralo biti filantropski, jer profiti ometaju biotehnologiju,

but it's basically got a 90 percent chance, I think, of succeeding in this.

ali zapravo imamo 90 posto šanse, mislim, da uspijemo.

And I think we know how to do it. And I'll stop there.

A mislim da znamo kako to učiniti. I završit ću s tim.

Thank you.

Hvala vam.

(Applause)

(Pljesak)

Chris Anderson: OK. I don't know if there's going to be any questions

Chris Anderson: OK. Ne znam hoće li biti pitanja

but I thought I would give people the chance.

ali dao bih ljudima priliku.

Audience: Since you've been talking about aging and trying to defeat it,

Iz publike: budući da ste govorili o starenju i pokušajima da ga porazite,

why is it that you make yourself appear like an old man?

zašto izgledate kao starac?

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

AG: Because I am an old man. I am actually 158.

Zato što jesam starac. Zapravo imam 158 godina.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

(Applause)

(Pljesak)

Audience: Species on this planet have evolved with immune systems

Iz publike: Vrste na ovom planetu su evoluirale s imunološkim sustavom,

to fight off all the diseases so that individuals live long enough to procreate.

koji se bori s bolestima kako bi jedinke živjele dovoljno dugo da se razmnože.

However, as far as I know, all the species have evolved to actually die,

Ipak, koliko ja znam, sve su vrste evoluirale kako bi umrle,

so when cells divide, the telomerase get shorter, and eventually species die.

pa kad se stanice dijele, telomeraza se skraćuje, i vrste na kraju umiru.

So, why does -- evolution has -- seems to have selected against immortality,

Zato, zašto se čini da je evolucija odabirala protiv besmrtnosti,

when it is so advantageous, or is evolution just incomplete?

ako je ona tako dobra, ili je evolucija samo nedovršena?

AG: Brilliant. Thank you for asking a question

Briljantno. Hvala vam na pitanju

that I can answer with an uncontroversial answer.

na koje mogu odgovoriti na nekontroverzan način.

I'm going to tell you the genuine mainstream answer to your question,

Dat ću vam istinski glavnostrujaški odgovor na to pitanje,

which I happen to agree with,

s kojim se slažem,

which is that, no, aging is not a product of selection, evolution;

a koji kaže ne, starenje nije rezultat odabira, evolucije;

[aging] is simply a product of evolutionary neglect.

starenje je naprosto rezultat evolucijskog zanemarivanja.

In other words, we have aging because it's hard work not to have aging;

Drugim riječima, starimo jer je teško postići da ne starimo,

you need more genetic pathways, more sophistication in your genes

trebate više genetskih staza, više sofisticiranosti u genima

in order to age more slowly,

kako biste sporije starili,

and that carries on being true the longer you push it out.

i to nastavlja biti istinom što je duže odgurujete.

So, to the extent that evolution doesn't matter,

Dakle, u mjeri u kojoj evolucija nije važna,

doesn't care whether genes are passed on by individuals,

ne mari da li se geni prenose od strane pojedinaca

living a long time or by procreation,

koji dugo žive ili razmnožavanjem,

there's a certain amount of modulation of that,

postoji određena količina modulacije kod toga,

which is why different species have different lifespans,

zbog koje različite vrste imaju različiti životni vijek,

but that's why there are no immortal species.

ali to je razlog zašto nema besmrtnih vrsta.

CA: The genes don't care but we do?

CA: Genima nije stalo, ali nama jest?

AG: That's right.

AG: Tako je.

Audience: Hello. I read somewhere that in the last 20 years,

Iz publike: Dobar dan. Pročitao sam negdje da se u zadnjih 20 godina

the average lifespan of basically anyone on the planet has grown by 10 years.

prosječan životni vijek svakoga na planetu praktički produljio za 10 godina.

If I project that, that would make me think

Ako to projiciram, trebao bih pomisliti

that I would live until 120 if I don't crash on my motorbike.

da ću živjeti do 120-te ako se ne razbijem na motociklu.

That means that I'm one of your subjects to become a 1,000-year-old?

To bi značilo da sam ja jedan od vaših pojedinaca koji će doživjeti dob od 1000 godina?

AG: If you lose a bit of weight.

AG: Ako izgubite nešto kila.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

Your numbers are a bit out.

Brojevi vam nisu točni.

The standard numbers are that lifespans

Standardni brojevi kažu da životni vijek

have been growing at between one and two years per decade.

raste stopom od jedne do dvije godine po desetljeću.

So, it's not quite as good as you might think, you might hope.

Dakle, nije baš tako dobro kao što biste mislili -- nadali se.

But I intend to move it up to one year per year as soon as possible.

Ali namjeravam to podići na godinu za godinu što je prije moguće.

Audience: I was told that many of the brain cells we have as adults

Iz publike: Čuo sam da su mnoge moždane stanice koje imamo kao odrasli

are actually in the human embryo,

u stvari iz embrija,

and that the brain cells last 80 years or so.

i da moždane stanice traju 80 godina ili slično.

If that is indeed true,

Ako je to stvarno točno,

biologically are there implications in the world of rejuvenation?

ima li to bioloških posljedica u svijetu pomlađivanja?

If there are cells in my body that live all 80 years,

Ako su u mojem tijelu stanice koje sve žive 80 godina,

as opposed to a typical, you know, couple of months?

za razliku od tipičnih, znate, nekoliko mjeseci?

AG: There are technical implications certainly.

AG: Sigurno da ima tehničkih implikacija.

Basically what we need to do is replace cells

U biti, ono što moramo učiniti je zamijeniti stanice

in those few areas of the brain that lose cells at a respectable rate,

u onih nekoliko područja mozga koja gube stanice značajnom brzinom,

especially neurons, but we don't want to replace them

posebno neurone, ali ne želimo ih zamjenjivati

any faster than that -- or not much faster anyway,

brže od te stope -- ili barem ne puno brže,

because replacing them too fast would degrade cognitive function.

jer bi prečesta zamjena narušila kognitivne funkcije.

What I said about there being no non-aging species earlier on

Kad sam ranije rekao da nema vrsta koje ne stare,

was a little bit of an oversimplification.

malo sam previše pojednostavnio stvari.

There are species that have no aging -- Hydra for example --

Postoje vrste koje ne stare -- hydra, na primjer --

but they do it by not having a nervous system --

ali one to postižu time što nemaju živčani sustav --

and not having any tissues in fact that rely for their function

i nemaju tkivo čije funkcioniranje ovisi

on very long-lived cells.

o stanicama vrlo dugog vijeka.