听力课堂TED音频栏目主要包括TED演讲的音频MP3及中英双语文稿，供各位英语爱好者学习使用。本文主要内容为演讲MP3+双语文稿:结束封锁、恢复经济的新冠对抗战略，希望你会喜欢！
【演讲者及介绍】Uri Alon
Uri Alon研究细胞如何工作，使用一系列工具(包括即兴表演)来理解执行生命功能的生物电路
【演讲主题】结束封锁、恢复经济的新冠对抗战略
A COVID-19 "exit" strategy to end lockdown and reopen the economy
【中英文字幕】
翻译者 psjmz mz 校对者 Wanting Zhong
Chris Anderson: So our first speaker gave a TED Talk at TEDGlobal I think seven years ago. His name is Professor Uri Alon, at the Weizmann Institute of Science. Now, he and his colleagues there have come up with a powerful idea that addresses this key question: How on earth do we get back to work without creating a second surge of the infection? Uri Alon, welcome to TED.
克里斯·安德森：我们的第一位演讲者大概七年前在TED Global上做过一次TED演讲。他就是尤里·阿隆（Uri Alon）教授，来自以色列魏茨曼科学研究所。他和他的同事想出了一个绝佳的主意去解决这个关键问题：我们究竟应该如何复工才不会造成疫情的再次爆发？尤里·阿隆，欢迎来到TED。
Uri Alon: Thank you. Nice to be here again.CA: It's great to see you again. So, I guess the key to your idea is this obsession with the reproduction number R, R-naught. If that number is less than one, then fewer than one person is infected by a typical person, and eventually, the epidemic fades away. People are worried that as we come back to work, R will shoot up above one again. You have a suggestion for how we might avoid that. What is that suggestion?
尤里·阿隆：谢谢，很高兴再次来到这里。克里斯：再次见到你我也很高兴。我猜你的想法的关键在于对传染数R0的关注。如果R0低于1，就意味着一个典型感染者能感染的人数小于1，最终，疫情将渐渐消失。大家担心如果返工的话，R0将再次飙升到1以上。你有一个关于如何避免这种情况发生的建议。这个建议是什么？
UA: Exactly. So, we are suggesting a strategy that's based on a weak spot based on the biology of the virus, which is a cycle of work and lockdown. It exploits the vulnerability of the virus in that, when a person gets infected, they're not infectious for about three days. So you don't infect others for the first three days, and after another two days, on average, you get symptoms. So we're proposing a strategy which is four days of work and then 10 days of lockdown, and the next two weeks, again: four days of work, 10 days of lockdown. And that way, if a person gets infected at work, they reach their peak infectiousness during lockdown, and that way, they avoid infecting many others. This restricts the viral transmission. Also, just working four days out of two weeks restricts the amount of time the virus gets to see many other people, and that's a very powerful effect. So everybody works on the same four days, kids go to school on the same four days, with all the measures of social distancing and masks, etc, and then there's a lockdown period.
尤里：没错。我们提出的这个策略是基于病毒的生物学弱点，即周期性的返工与隔离。它利用了病毒的弱点：那就是当一个人被感染时，他有大约三天的时间是“无害”的。也就是说在最初的三天里，你不会传染其他人，一般来说，再过两天，你就会出现发病症状。所以我们提出了一个工作四天，然后隔离十天的策略，然后在接下来的两周重复这个周期：工作四天，隔离十天。用这种方法，如果一个人在工作的时候被感染，他的传染性会在隔离期达到最高峰，这样就可以避免感染很多其他人。这个措施限制了病毒的传播。并且，每两周工作四天也限制了病毒接触很多其他人的时间，这能起到很大的抗疫作用。每个人选择在同样的四天上班，孩子也在相同的四天时间去上学，外加所有的社交距离和口罩等防护措施，然后进入一个隔离期。
CA: So if you take the worst-case scenario, where you come to work on a Monday morning at the start of your four days, and you're infected on the subway, say, on the way to work, the theory here is that even by the end of that four days, you're not really starting to infect your coworkers?
克里斯：那么假设一下最坏的情况：你在“工作四日”开始的周一早上去工作，然后在上班的路上，在地铁上被感染了，根据这个理论，就算工作到第四天结束，你也不会开始传染你的同事吗？
UA: That's correct. So you're infected on the subway, and so for the first three days or so, you're in your latent period, you don't infect your coworkers, you reach your peak infectiousness at home, there will be secondary infections at home, and people with symptoms can self-quarantine, and over the long run, you have a reproduction number less than one, so the epidemic, if you continue these cycles, will go away.
尤里：对的。假设你在地铁被感染，那么在最初的三天里，你还处于潜伏期，不会感染你的同事，当你的传染性达到顶峰时，你已经在家里，这时会在家里发生二次传染，而出现症状的人可以自我隔离，长期来看，R0将小于1，因此如果一直继续这个周期，疫情最终将会消失。
So we have to consider the alternatives. If you open up the economy and there's a second wave, you'll get all those infections anyway during the lockdown that happens, along with the devastating effects on the economy, etc. And so, in the long run, if you do a cyclic strategy like this but with a reproduction number that's less than one, you avoid, at least with these mathematical models and considerations, the much larger number of infections you'd get if there's a second wave.
那么我们要想想别的方案会怎样。如果你重启了经济，并出现了第二波疫情，那么在隔离期间，所有这些人还是会被感染，且对经济有毁灭性打击。所以，就长远来看，如果执行这样的周期策略但让病毒感染数小于1，至少根据数学模型和预测，我们可以避免第二波疫情，以及第二波疫情带来的更大规模的感染。
CA: Right.
克里斯：没错。
CA: Tell me this, though -- because four days out of 14, someone's going to say, "Well, great idea, but that implies, like, a 70 percent loss of productivity in the economy, so that can't possibly work." I think you think that the productivity loss need not be anything like that much.
克里斯：不过我想问——因为十四天里只工作四天，有人会说，“这个主意倒是不错，但那意味着，经济会损失70%的生产率，所以这可能不太可行。”我感觉你会认为生产率的损失其实并不会那么严重。
UA: That's right, and of course, most people don't work weekends, so it's four days out of the 10 work days in the two weeks, and once you have a predictable schedule of four days at work, you can work longer hours, you can design shifts and get higher productivity by prioritizing in those four days much more than 40 percent of the workdays.
尤里：没错。当然，大部分人周末都不工作，所以是在两周的十个工作日里的四天，并且一旦你有了固定的四天工作日程，你就可以工作更长的时间，你可以设计轮班，合理分配优先级，通过这样在这四天中达到远高于十个工作日中40%的效率。
CA: Yes, so talk through how that could work. I mean, let's imagine, first of all, manufacturing, which is currently shut down. Is the implication here that a manufacturer could set up two, possibly even three, shifts of four days, maybe 35 hours or something of work over those four days and still get a lot of productivity, basically, having the lines almost running continuously that way?
克里斯：能否讲一讲具体如何操作？我们可以想象一下，首先比如制造业，目前处于关闭状态。这是否意味着一个制造商可以安排两个、甚至三个为期四天的轮班，可能在这四天里一共工作35个小时左右，仍然能保持很高的生产效率。基本上就是通过这种办法让生产线保持连续运转？
UA: Exactly. So this is a staggered version of this idea, where you take the population, divide it into two groups or three groups. Let's say one group works four days and then 10 days of lockdown. Then the other group kicks in. This idea was proposed by colleagues at Bar-Ilan University. Then you get an added benefit that during workdays there's less density. If there's two groups, there's half the density and less transmission. And you can keep production lines working almost continuously like that using this staggered idea.
尤里：没错。你说的是这个想法的交错版本：把所有的人分成两组或者三组。比方说一组人工作四天，然后隔离十天。然后由另外一组接上。这个想法是巴依兰大学的同行提出的。同时还有个额外好处，就是工作日时人员密度更低。如果有两个组，人员密度就只有一半，病毒传播的可能性也就更低。使用这种交错的方法，你就可以让生产线基本保持连续运转。
CA: And applying it to thinking about offices coming back -- I mean, it seems to me that, as we've already seen, there's a lot of productivity that can happen when you're at home, so you could picture on this idea of people doing one set of things during the four days when they're, say, back at the office, doing the exposure to each other, sparking off each other, the discussions, the brainstorming, all that good stuff, while at home, they're then doing all the things that we've been doing the last few weeks, kind of working solo. How much have you thought about how that, whether it's possible, effectively, to divide work into different types and actually use a strategy like this to maintain almost full or even better productivity?
克里斯：再考虑一下办公室复工——就像大家已经看到的，在家的工作效率也可以很高。所以可以想象一下，人们在回公司上班的四天里可以做某些事情，相互接触、彼此启发，做些诸如讨论、头脑风暴这样有益的事情。而在家时，他们接着做过去几周所做的事情，类似独立办公。你对此有什么想法？是否可能有效地把工作分成不同的类型，并通过这样的策略，来保持几乎100%，甚至更高的工作效率呢？
UA: I agree -- for many sectors, people work at home very effectively, and we've heard from several industries that productivity actually went up during lockdown and people working at home. So if you have a schedule, a [cyclic exit strategy] you can restrict the amount, or you can plan the work where you need to be together in a very effective way with avoiding a lot of time lost, if the person's work can be more effective at home and more effective at work and get high productivity. I should say that some sectors really need to adjust, like hotels, tourism, dining. In several industries, this will require more thought and adjusting. But other industries are almost built for ideas like this. Maybe it's even something you can consider after the epidemic, because productivity can be at least as high.
尤里：我同意——对于很多行业，人们可以非常高效地居家办公，我们还听到有几个行业说，隔离期间人们居家办公，工作效率反而提升了。如果你有日程表，并且采用周期式复工策略，就可以很有效地限制或者合理规划需要一起在场完成的工作，来避免浪费大量时间，让人们在家和在公司时都能更高效地工作，提升工作效率。应该说，有些行业的工作模式确实需要调整，比如酒店、旅游、餐饮。对于有的行业，人们需要进行更多的思考和调整。但其他行业几乎天生就适合这样的工作方式。或许甚至在疫情后也可以考虑沿用，因为他们可以保持至少是同样水准的工作效率。
CA: I mean, I read this and I started thinking about our own organization, TED, and how, in many ways, you could argue that could work really well. I mean, for one thing, there's this question about extroverts and introverts. Some introverts, if they were honest, might say that this pandemic has been manna from heaven for them. They've found work less stressful. They've been able to focus and so forth. With this sort of four days on, four days off type strategy, perhaps you can imagine a work world that's optimized for both introverts and extroverts?
克里斯：了解这个之后，我开始思考我们自己的组织，TED，在很多方面，你都有理由认为这种方法会很有效。我意思是，首先，这是一个关于外向者和内向者的问题。一些内向者，如果说实话，他们会说这次疫情对他们可谓是天降甘露。他们发现工作压力不那么大了，也更能够集中注意力，等等。有了这种四天现场办公、四天居家的策略，也许你会认为这样的职场对外向者和内向者都很有利？
UA: Absolutely. I mean, I feel it also. Me and my partner, with different personalities, we both teach in universities, and teaching through this has [helped me] become productive in certain ways. So I agree completely, and I think harnessing the creativity of people at workplaces, we're only at the beginning of what these kinds of mixtures can offer.
尤里：的确如此。我也有同感。我和我的伴侣性格不同，我们都在大学教书。以这种方式教学让我在某些方面变得更有效率。所以我完全同意，我认为要想在工作场所发挥人们的创造力，这种混合工作方式的优势还只是初现端倪。
CA: But for people who are on the front line, again, if you're delivering goods and so forth and you can't do that virtually, is there any thought about how a four days on and then isolation strategy, how that off time could be used to nonetheless contribute to that person's work through some form of training? Or is it more just that people would work very intensely during four days, and maybe people still aren't quite earning their full pay in this scenario, but it's better than complete lockdown, and it's better than going back to work and seeing another surge?
克里斯：但对于一线工作者，比如快递员们，他们无法在线办公，你有没有思考过如果这些人采用工作四天后隔离的策略，他们该如何利用非工作时间来帮助提升自己的工作能力，比如说参加某种形式的培训？还是说人们更多只是在四天里高强度地工作，也许在这种情况下，他们仍然没法拿到全额工资，但这总好过彻底关门，也好过回到工作岗位，结果让疫情再次爆发？
UA: That's right. So on a society level, it's better than opening up and seeing another surge, which would require complete lockdown. For people like hospital shifts, some hospitals adopted this kind of program so we can protect shifts and avoid mixing. It also creates a lot of simplicity and clarity.It's also equitable in the sense that everybody gets to go to work, not only certain sectors, it's transparent, etc.
尤里：是的。在社会层面上，这的确要好过完全解禁后让疫情再次爆发，导致彻底关门。对于在医院轮班的人来说，有些医院采用了这样的规划，这样就可以保护值班人员，也能避免人员混杂。同时问题也被大大简化了。另外，这个策略也是公平的，因为大家都可以去上班，而不仅仅是特定行业，它也是透明的，等等。
CA: And this is something that is best implemented by individual companies? Or is it actually much better implemented a city at a time or even a nation at a time?
克里斯：这些措施最好是以公司为单位单独执行吗？还是说最好以城市甚至国家为单位依次执行？
UA: We think it can work [in levels]. So at certain companies, it's very natural to adopt, or at hospitals, schools, etc. It can also work at the level of a town or a region, and then we would advise trying it out for something like a month, seeing whether cases rise. In that case, you can dial down the number of workdays. Or, if cases are declining quickly, you can add workdays and therefore adapt to the climate and the location where a person is. So it's quite adaptable.
尤里：我们认为都是可以的。比如说某些公司、医院、学校可以很自然地采取这个措施。这个策略也可以在一个城镇或一个地区的层面进行实施，我们会建议试行一个月左右，看看病例是否会上升。如果病例增加了，你可以减少连续工作的天数。或者如果病例数快速下降，你可以增加工作的天数，因此，人们可以根据当地的气候和地理位置来调整。所以这是很灵活的。
CA: But by aligning work schedules with schools, for example, that suddenly allows parents to go back to work on the days that their kids are at school,克里斯：不过假如根据学校安排同步匹配工作日程，父母就可以在小孩上学的日子重返工作岗位了，
CA: I mean, is the best instantiation of this that countries literally divide households into different A and B categories, or something like that, so that that kind of alignment could happen?
克里斯：最好的方法是不是这样：国家将家庭进行分组，比如说划分成A组和B组之类的，这样就能进行这种上班和上学的匹配调整了？
UA: Exactly. So you can align different households, Group A and Group B, and then the children go to school, the parents go to work in a synchronized way, and the other group, let's say, the alternating weeks. A certain amount of people need to work all the time. Maybe teachers are, like, essential workers and need to work throughout. But a region that does this should be protected, in a sense, because it has a replication number of less than one, so imported infections also can't spread very much.
尤里：没错。你可以安排不同的家庭，比如A组和B组，让孩子们去上学，同时父母也去上班，而另一组则在另一周上学上班，两组交替进行。有些人需要一直工作。比如说老师和其它必需工种，需要一直上班。但在某种程度上，这样做的地区应该能得到防护，因为它的传染数R0小于1，所以输入性感染也不会大幅扩散。
UA: I want to say that there's essential workers, there's people with low income, that just can't adhere to lockdown because they have to make a living. And studies show that mobility [among] people in the low-income sectors is larger during lockdown. And also, in developing countries, people just have to go out of the house. You can't enforce lockdown. So this four-10 kind of strategy can actually make lockdown easier to bear for people who can still make a living during those days, or at least make their own choices about what fraction to work and what fraction to stay in lockdown. Some countries can't get R less than one even with lockdown, because of this adherence problem, because of informal sectors, etc. We believe that a four-10 cycle might make it easier to do lockdown and maybe get our infection level less than one. That affects billions of people in the world.
尤里：我想说，一线工作者，还有低收入人群，他们无法一直按要求隔离，因为他们必须谋生。研究发现，低收入人群在隔离期间流动性反而更大了。而且在发展中国家，人们必须要走出家门。你没法强制他们呆在家。所以这个4-10天的策略其实能让需要在这期间谋生的人更容易忍受隔离，或者至少可以让他们选择什么时候去工作，什么时候保持隔离。有些国家甚至在隔离期间也没法让传染数降到1以下，因为很难让人们一直隔离，比如非正式部门，等等。我们相信一个4-10天的周期策略可以让隔离更容易执行，也许还能让我们的感染数降到1以下。这会影响全球数十亿人。
CA:But just before you go: Have any governments expressed interest in exploring this? Do you see people considering actually implementing this as national policy?
克里斯：在我们结束之前：你认为有没有政府对此表示有兴趣呢？有人考虑在国家政策层面实施这个策略吗？
UA: Yes, we're in touch with several European countries and countries in South America and Israel, of course. Austria has adopted a similar program for their school system, which is five school days every two weeks. And several companies and hospitals, etc. And so we're very interested to see how this will play out.
尤里：是的，我们正在联系欧洲和南美的一些国家，当然还有以色列。奥地利已经在他们的学校系统中采用了类似的安排——就是每两周上五天学，还有几个公司和医院，等等。我们非常有兴趣观望事情的后续发展。
CA: Well, I love the basic start point of starting by looking at the enemy's weakness. And you've got this four-day period where it's not necessarily that dangerous after an infection, if you could figure out a way to work then. I assume that testing would actually enhance this idea as well a lot, right? To test people before they come back --
克里斯：我喜欢这个抓住敌人弱点的基本出发点。还有这个四天的、受到感染后也不一定那么危险的窗口期——假如在这期间你还能想办法上班的话。我觉得检测也能巩固这个策略的效果，对吧？在人们复工前检测——
UA: It's not predicated on testing. You don't have to have testing for this idea, so that can apply to regions without a lot of testing. If you do have testing, it could help you use testing in a more effective way by concentrating testing on people at the end of their 10 lockdown days, just as they're about to go to work; that could make each test more impactful in terms of reducing their reproduction number.
尤里：这个不是基于检测的。实施这个策略不需要检测，所以可以应用于没有大量检测的地区。如果你有能力进行检测，它可以帮助你更加有效地利用检测，就是把检测集中在结束了十天隔离期，快要返工的人群上；这可以让每一次检测都能更有效地降低传染数R0。
CA: Indeed, instead of having to test the whole population every three or four days, it's just once every two weeks. That's a much more imaginable goal.
克里斯：确实，与其每隔三到四天就检测所有人，这个策略只需要每两周检测一次。这是个更容易理解的目标。
UA: Sure.
尤里：当然。
CA: Yeah. Well, Uri Alon, thank you so much for spending this time.
克里斯：好的。尤里·阿隆，非常感谢你参与我们的对话。