济南强直关节响是不是好事济南哪里有治痛风的好医院,济南系统性红斑狼疮他克莫司用量,济南看强制性脊椎炎医院,济南患了痛风会有什么症状,济南尿酸值过高引起痛风,济南痛风冷敷能消肿吗,济南强直性脊椎炎那里治

Massachusetts is the first state since the deadly shooting in Las Vegas last month to ban bump stocks, the gun accessory the shooter used to increase his rate of fire.Bump stocks became a major source of discussion among lawmakers across the country after the attachments were found on the guns of Las Vegas shooter Stephen Paddock, who killed 58 and injured some 500 last month. But talk of banning the devices nationwide appears to have stalled.Beginning in 2018, penalties for the possession or use of a bump stock or trigger crank in Massachusetts will range from probation to life in prison, Representative David Linsky, a Democrat who proposed the amendment, told CNN.The new law defines a bump stock as "any device for a weapon that increases the rate of fire achievable with such weapon by using energy from the recoil of the weapon to generate a reciprocating action that facilitates repeated activation of the trigger."In other words, the devices allow semi-automatic rifles to fire more rapidly, similar to automatic weapons. Twelve of them were found on firearms recovered from Paddock's Las Vegas hotel room.Critics of the legislation say lawmakers rushed to push the passage without holding public hearings.Jim Wallace, Executive Director of the Gun Owners Action League, a Massachusetts gun-rights group, called the legislation "a knee-jerk reaction."Though lawmakers in the Massachusetts House and Senate both introduced traditional bills just days after the October 1 Las Vegas shooting, the legislators ultimately felt they needed to act in response to a public outcry from constituents, Linsky told CNN.Constituents flooded the inboxes of Massachusetts lawmakers, and Linsky said the "vast majority were begging legislators to do something about the situation."State House members enacted the ban by introducing language in an amendment to the fiscal year 2017 budget.RELATED: Senate Democrats want to ban assault weapons 1948

Many people across the country are full of hope now that a few COVID-19 vaccines are showing positive results, and they appear to be highly effective. But will Americans be willing to get a shot?Before Pfizer, Moderna and Astra Zeneca shared their results, Gallup Economics conducted a poll with Franklin-Templeton on what it would take for Americans to be willing to get a COVID-19 vaccine."We decided to dig deeper to why people are skeptical of a vaccine and see what pieces of information make a difference in effecting their decision in getting it or not," said Jonathan Rothwell, the Principal Economist at Gallup. Rothwell says, instead of a traditional Gallup Poll with multiple choice or open-ended questions, the more than 5,000 people surveyed were broken into groups of 200. Each group was asked different questions, proposing various scenarios and hypotheticals about a vaccine."'Imagine there's a vaccine that's going to be widely available in either', and then we varied the timing to be either the end of this year or beginning of next year. We varied whether we disclosed if it came after the FDA did three rounds of clinical trials or mention it was FDA approved," said Rothwell. People were also asked about how effective a vaccine would need to be and who would have to recommend it in order to take it."I would say the most surprising thing was telling people the Food and Drug Administration approved the vaccine after three rounds of clinical trials had a slightly negative, not significant effect relative to just telling them it's just FDA approved," said Rothwell.The results also showed African-Americans and Hispanics were more skeptical of a COVID-19 vaccine and that most people wouldn't resume activities like going to the store without a mask, traveling, or sending their kids back to school just because a COVID-19 vaccine was available.Dr. Bali Pulendran, a professor of microbiology and immunology at Stanford University, says news about the high efficacy of two different COVID-19 vaccines is extremely positive, but he understands people's hesitations."It's understandable because this is unprecedented, no one has developed vaccines at such warp speed. But, again, it has to be driven by the data and what the data shows us now is that at least in the short term, we have these vaccines that are in excess of 90% effective and safe," said Dr. Pulendran.Dr. Pulendran says just because it took less than a year to develop an effective COVID-19 vaccine, doesn't mean corners were cut to get there."The methods used to make these vaccines have gone through the same high rigorous standards that have always been used to make any number of vaccines that have been administered and that have been proven to be safe and effective. By that, I mean they’ve gone through phase one, phase two, phase three human trials, multiple independent bodies have looked at the data," said Dr. Pulendran.Gallup hopes scientists, doctors and politicians will use the results of this poll to help guide their messaging to the general public so that most people will be encouraged to get a COVID-19 vaccine when it becomes available. 3155

Many voters have already cast their ballots, but that doesn't mean we'll know the election results right away. Experts say all of the ingredients are there for this election to be highly contested.“There are a lot of different reasons why the election may not be decided by the morning of November 4, and a lot of lawsuits may start to fly once that happens,” said Claire Finkelstein, law professor and director of the Center for Ethics and the Rule of Law at the University of Pennsylvania.With a record number of ballots coming in by mail, Finkelstein says the counting period will be lengthy.If a candidate declares victory on election night, but then more results come in, there could be calls for recounts, especially in states where the results are close. That could mean litigation over the counting procedures.Each states' elector will cast their vote on December 14. Then Congress meets on January 6 to count those votes and name the winner.If no candidate has a majority of the electoral votes, or if the counting period goes on and the election is still undecided, it is possible that the House of Representatives must decide.Finkelstein says that would be extraordinary and complicated.“It would likely be very contested as well, but one way or another by January 20, there needs to be a new president being sworn in,” said Finkelstein.The professor says this election is also entangled with the new Supreme Court justice.Like for Pennsylvania, which could now see a new decision on allowing mail-in ballots received up to three days after Election Day, the Supreme Court could also be involved in recounts, as happened in Florida in 2000. 1659

MEXICO CITY (AP) — Residents of the town of Sonoyta, across from Lukeville, Ariz., briefly blocked the main road leading south from the U.S. border over fears of coronavirus outbreaks. Arizona has seen a major upsurge in infections, and there were worries about intensified contagion during the July 4 weekend. The mayor of Sonoyta issued a statement "inviting U.S. tourists not to visit Mexico." Local residents organized to block the road with their cars on the Mexican side. The road is the quickest route to the seaside resort of Puerto Pe?asco, also known as Rocky Point. 584

Lots of folks do their shopping on the internet these days, especially on Amazon. Not only because it's convenient, but you can find some great bargains. But wait until you hear how much a woman in Gallatin, Tennessee was charged for some paper plates. It was certainly no deal. Lorie Galloway said she does a lot of shopping on Amazon. She's a Prime member and told Scripps station WTVF in Nashville, "I don't order anything unless it's free shipping." Just before Christmas, Galloway bought some plates. Then her husband, Bob Galloway, got the bill."He sent me a text," Lorie Galloway recalled. "'What did you order at Amazon?' And, I'm like, 'What?' He said, 'Our bill is a thousand and something dollars.'"Now these plates she bought were not the kind you keep in a china cabinet. These were heavy duty paper plates. A hundred of them. Lorie Galloway said she thought she was getting for with free shipping. It turns out, the plates were ."But there was a ,080 shipping charge," Bob Galloway explained.It cost more than ,000 to ship a package of paper plates. "I mean that's just crazy for paper plates," Lorie Galloway said.And, her husband added, "I really thought it was some clerical error."The Galloways repeatedly tried contacting the seller and got no response. So they called Amazon about the charge."The reaction from the customer service representative at Amazon was, 'Wow, that's ridiculous,'" Bob Galloway said. So were these plates coming from somewhere half way around the world? No, according to the paperwork, they were shipped by UPS from Atlanta. Amazon eventually agreed to open an investigation and the company told Lorie Galloway they'd determined she  was "not overcharged for the transaction."Lorie Galloway said she believed she was overcharged. According to Amazon, the seller said they'd "sent the plates with expedited service," that Lorie Galloway had selected that option when she placed her order and had agreed to the ,000+ shipping fee, something Galloway insists isn't true. "If it would have said a thousand and something dollars, I would have noticed that," she said. If you try finding the seller now who sold Lorie Galloway those plates, you won't. An Amazon rep told the couple the seller had been dismissed after doing similar things to other customers. But Amazon refused to confirm that for us.And Amazon was asked why it didn't have technology to flag and even prevent outrageous charges like this, the company refused to directly answer the question and instead sent a statement saying, "Amazon is constantly innovating and improving our customer experience. If customers have concerns or feedback, we encourage them to contact our Customer Service."But that's what the Galloways did and Amazon told them there was nothing they could do. Lorie Galloway said she is now reconsidering where she shops. "If they [Amazon] are not going to take care of their customers, why should I order from them again?" she said. The Galloways spent the last couple of months disputing the shipping charge with their credit card company. Finally, just the other day, they got word that the shipping would be refunded.  3398