|
|
|
The "seven deadly things" and why there are only seven
"致死七事项"
为什么仅此七项？
SENS is a practical, foreseeable
approach to curing aging because all the types of metabolic side-effect whose
accumulation is (or is even hypothesised to be) eventually pathogenic are
amenable to repair (or in some cases obviation, i.e. disruption of the
mechanism by which they become pathogenic) by techniques that, according to
the experimentalists who have performed the key work on which those
techniques build, can (with adequate funding) probably be implemented in mice
within a decade or so. SENS是用于治愈老化的实用而且前瞻性的方法，因为所有类型的代谢副作用都应该由某些技术来修复（在某些情况下应该排除，也就是说，变成病源性的机制应该破坏）：它的积累最终是（或假设是）病源性的，实验家进行了关键的研究工作，确立了某些技术，按他们的说法，这些技术也许可以（若给以足够经费）在十年左右的时间内在小鼠中实现。 There
are seven major categories of such damage, listed below, along with the
leading technique or techniques that can address them. Follow the links to
read more detail about these techniques. I apologise that these more detailed
pages do not yet include references to the literature. In most cases you can
find the key references in my relevant publications, which are all available here. 这样的损伤有七个主要类型，列举如下（包括领头技术或适合于某类损伤的技术）。请按链接来阅读这些技术的更多细节。我要道歉的是，这些较详细的网页没有包括原文的参考文献。在大多数情况下，您可以在我的有关文章中发现主要参考文献，它们都能在这里（here）找到。 Note: The
dates given are when the category of damage in question was first proposed,
in the gerontology literature, to be responsible for aging or some major
age-related cause of death or debilitation. The earlier ones may not in fact
be the first such mention, but they are well-known and often cited as
pioneering publications in the area in question. 附注：所列出的日期是：当还在讨论中的损伤类型在老年学文章中第一次被提出会引起老化、或引起一些主要与年龄相关的死亡或虚弱。事实上，较早可能不是最早，但它们已为大家所熟悉，并在我们所讨论领域中常常被引用为先驱文章。 The full
citations are below the table. The relevance of these dates is that they are
all over 20 years ago. The fact that we have not discovered another major
category of even potentially pathogenic damage accumulating with age in two
decades, despite so tremendous an improvement in our analytical techniques
over that period, strongly suggests that no more are to be found -- at least,
none that would kill us in a presently normal lifetime. 本表之下是完整的引用。有关的这些日期全是二十多年前的。在这20年中，尽管我们的分析技术大有改善，但还没有发现另一种主要损伤（哪怕是随龄积累的潜在病源性的），这一事实有力地提示，不会再发现更多的了Ñ至少没有一种能在目前的正常寿命范围内杀死我们。
The above table is to some extent similar to Table
4.3 in Holliday's 1995 book Understanding Ageing, though with important differences
resulting from the focus on types of damage rather than types of maintenance.
Some of the studies cited here were in fact incorrect in their interpretation
of the data they examined, but the point is that they brought the
corresponding type of damage to the fore as a candidate component of aging. 上表在某种程度上类似于Holliday1995年《理解老化》一书的表4.3，虽然有重大差别：本表着重于损伤类型、而不是维护类型。这里所引用的某些研究，实际上他们对所查资料的解释是不正确的，但是重要的是，他们把相应类型的损伤，作为老化的候选构件摆了出来。 Alzheimer A. †ber eine eigenartige Erkrankung der
Hirnrinde. Allgemeine Zeitschrift fŸr Psychiatrie und psychisch-gerichtliche
Medizin, Berlin, 1907, 64: 146-148. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Problems or questions
regarding this site should be directed to Dr. de Grey
有关本网站的问题和询问一律由Dr. de Grey主持