????昨天的重磅科技新聞【甚至超過了蘋果（Apple）發(fā)布iOS7系統(tǒng)】實(shí)際上是一則生物技術(shù)新聞，只不過因?yàn)樗鼱可娴搅斯雀瑁℅oogle）。這則消息是，谷歌這家搜索巨頭宣布成立Calico，一家“關(guān)注健康和幸福，尤其向人類衰老和疾病有關(guān)的研發(fā)領(lǐng)域提出挑戰(zhàn)的全新公司”。

????或者，就如《時代》（Time ）周刊所言：谷歌對抗死亡。

????Calico首席執(zhí)行官阿特?萊文森曾擔(dān)任Genentech的首席執(zhí)行官，他也將留下繼續(xù)擔(dān)任Genentech和蘋果兩家公司的主席（和Genentech母公司Hoffmann-La Roche的主管）。大家也許還能想起，萊文森之前曾是谷歌董事會的成員，之后意識到這與他在蘋果所扮演的角色發(fā)生了利益沖突，于是辭職。

????除了上面這些信息之外，谷歌和萊文森并沒有任何其他有關(guān)Calico的內(nèi)容。甚至在《時代》的文章中也沒有更多的細(xì)節(jié)。不過下面這些線索或許可以幫助大家撥開迷霧。

????1. 這是一家獨(dú)立公司，不是谷歌的子公司，也不是它的分支機(jī)構(gòu)。

????2. 為這家公司進(jìn)行初期投資的是谷歌而不是谷歌風(fēng)投（Google Ventures）（盡管谷歌風(fēng)投的合伙人比爾?馬里斯為構(gòu)思這個概念的雛形立下了汗馬功勞）。目前尚沒有任何美國證券交易委員會（SEC）的文檔，不過預(yù)計初期投資的費(fèi)用以千萬美元計。

????3. 盡管風(fēng)投公司凱鵬華盈（Kleiner Perkins）曾經(jīng)對谷歌和Genetech進(jìn)行了初期投資，但這次卻沒有參與投資Calico。

????4. 我也接觸了其他幾家頂級的生命科學(xué)風(fēng)投公司，沒有一家在昨天的聲明之前聽說過Calico。醫(yī)療業(yè)的獵頭公司也一樣。換句話說，他們一直在隱瞞消息，憋著股勁要讓人大吃一驚呢。

????5. 我還聯(lián)系了一些制藥行業(yè)的從業(yè)人員，他們都談了自己的猜測。下面是我發(fā)現(xiàn)的最有趣的的回答（當(dāng)然，這個聰明的制藥公司員工也沒聽說過Calico）。

????“我要說，阿特在生物技術(shù)和基因癌癥治療上的背景意味著他可能會專注于研究確定細(xì)胞在分子層面/驅(qū)動/信號上的老化，尋求針對這些方面的介入療法。如果真的是這樣，與20世紀(jì)80年代腫瘤學(xué)領(lǐng)域類似的情形（完全開放、不講策略、沒有領(lǐng)袖，“真正”的科學(xué)家和大多數(shù)投資者都繞著走）將會重現(xiàn)。”

????6. “Calico”顯然是加利福尼亞生命公司（California Life Company）的簡稱，不過迄今為止在加利福尼亞州和特拉華州都還沒有已經(jīng)公布的公司文件。（財富中文網(wǎng)）

????譯者：嚴(yán)匡正

????

????Yesterday's big tech story (beyond Apple's iOS7 release) was actually a biotech story, but only because Google (GOOG) was involved. The search giant announced that it has launched Calico, a "new company that will focus on health and well-being, in particular the challenge of aging and associated diseases."

????Or, as Time magazine put it: Google vs. Death.

????Calico's CEO is ex-Genentech CEO Art Levinson, who will remain chairman of Genentech (plus a director of parent company Hoffmann-La Roche) and chairman of Apple (AAPL) . You may recall that Levinson also used to be on the Google board, before being leaving due to perceived conflicts of interest with his Apple role.

????Beyond the above information, neither Google nor Levinsohn is actually saying anything about Calico. And there aren't even additional details in the Time story. So here are a few tiny nuggets to begin moving things along:

????1. This is an independent company, not a subsidiary or affiliate of Google.

????2. Google corporate is making the initial investment, not Google Ventures (even though Google Ventures partner Bill Maris Maris was instrumental in the original brainstorming). There are not yet any SEC filings, but expect that the initial investment is in the tens of millions of dollars.

????3. Venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins is not an investor in Calico, despite being the first money into both Google and Genentech.

????4. I've also reached out to several other top life sciences VCs, none of whom had heard about Calico before yesterday's announcement. Same goes for some healthcare industry headhunters. In other words, this has legitimately taken folks by surprise.

????5. I also contacted a handful of pharma folks, each of whom offered what they admitted to be uninformed speculation. Here was the response I found most interesting (again – smart pharma guy who doesn't know Calico):

????"I'd say that Art's background in biotech and gene-driven cancer therapies would mean he'd be likely focusing on identifying the molecular aspects/drivers/signals of cellular aging and looking at interventional therapies targeting those targets. If true, this would be similar to how the oncology field was in the 1980s (wide open, no strategy, no leader, shunned by "real" scientists and most investors)."

????6. "Calico" is apparently shorthand for California Life Company, but so far there are no publicly-available incorporation documents in either California or Delaware.