評(píng)論
打印
So later on in life, there are fewer and fewer of these naive T-cells left to deal with any new disease, causing organisms that might attack,
所以在生命的晚年階段，剩下的對(duì)付新疾病的這些幼稚型T細(xì)胞越來越少，會(huì)產(chǎn)生可能會(huì)引發(fā)疾病的微生物，
which means less immunity, and the animal or person is more likely to get sick.
這就意味著免疫力下降，動(dòng)物或人類生病的可能性就更大。
But caloric restriction, it kind of shocks the system,
但是卡路里限制，它有點(diǎn)驚嚇住了整個(gè)系統(tǒng)，
and one result is, well, those monkeys on the calorie-restricted diet had lots more naive T-cells left than you’d expect in monkeys that old.
一個(gè)結(jié)果就是，那些使用了卡路里限制食譜的猴子會(huì)有更多幼稚型T細(xì)胞剩下，這個(gè)數(shù)量遠(yuǎn)比我們?cè)谀昙o(jì)那么大的猴子身上預(yù)期看到的要多。
The expected drop in naive T-cells, apparently the shock of getting 30% fewer calories really slows that down.
預(yù)計(jì)的幼稚型T細(xì)胞的減少，顯然減少30%卡路里受到的驚嚇真的減緩了這個(gè)過程。
And after many years, with so many more naive T-cells still in reserve,
很多年后，仍有著那么多幼稚型T細(xì)胞，
these monkeys are a lot better at fighting off new infections than normally fed monkeys of the same advanced age.
這些猴子在對(duì)抗新感染方面比同樣年紀(jì)的普通喂養(yǎng)的猴子表現(xiàn)要好得多。
And that’s why they live longer?
這就是為什么它們活得更久嗎？
Well, it’s got be one reason. This is all pretty complex though with lots of details yet to be worked out.
這一定是其中一個(gè)原因。不過這一切都非常復(fù)雜，還有很多細(xì)節(jié)有待查明。
But are results the same for humans?
但是這些結(jié)果對(duì)人類來說也是一樣的嗎？
Hard to say. A good study would take decades.And it’s not easy finding people who’d want to take part, would you?
很難說。認(rèn)真研究要花十幾年時(shí)間。而且找到愿意參與實(shí)驗(yàn)的人不太容易，你會(huì)愿意參加嗎？
And eat 30% less. That would be tough.
要少吃30%？那太難了。
You bet it would.
可不是嘛。
