山西能治疗白癜风吗(天津哪医院治疗白癜风好) (今日更新中)

In a newly released documentary that debuted during the Rome Film Festival, Pope Francis made a statement supporting same-sex civil unions, the first pontiff to take that stance.“Homosexual people have the right to be in a family. They are children of God,” Francis said in one of his sit-down interviews for the film called “Francesco.” He went on to say “You can't kick someone out of a family, nor make their life miserable for this. What we have to have is a civil union law; that way they are legally covered.”Patrick Ambrosio, a leader in the San Diego gay and catholic community, said hearing this news feels like a step in the right direction.“In my Catholic faith, I’ve had a lot of struggles. I’m still blessed to know I still have a lot of support from my fellow catholics that are still supporting openly gay people like myself after all these year,” said Ambrosio.While the statement is a first and could create change in some parts of the world, Kevin Eckery, spokesperson for the Catholic Diocese of San Diego, said it won’t change anything in California.“Marriage is two different aspects. You’ve got the legal aspect which is we’ve got a marriage license from the state of California. And the religious aspect,” said Eckery.The Pope’s message addressed civil unions, not the sacrament of marriage, which has to be between a man and a woman. This will not change. Eckery added that the Pope has a history of making comments of support toward the gay community, so this is nothing new.“Nothing is changing about sacramental marriage and marriage within the Church. It’s just his way of reflecting on the laws surrounding marriage and the dignity of the individual,” said Eckery.For Ambrosio, it might not be a direct change locally, but it’s a step in the right direction. He hopes same-sex couples will someday be able to participate in the sacrament of marriage.“Seeing this on the news today is such a great exposé for the civil liberty, the civil union because it’s the first step to getting to that stage,” said Ambrosio. 2049

HOUSTON (AP) — An appeals court has refused to allow the Trump administration to continue detaining immigrant children in hotel rooms before expelling them under rules adopted during the coronavirus pandemic. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Sunday upheld a lower court’s order that would have required the U.S. to stop using hotels. Border agencies since March have held more than 600 children in hotel rooms before expelling them from the country without a chance to request asylum or other immigration protections. 533

Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents have released more people seeking asylum in the United States from custody, citing a shortage in space.The release comes as thousands of people fleeing violence in Central America as part of a migrant caravan are beginning to arrive in Tijuana, hoping to enter the U.S. and claim asylum here.Earlier this year, federal officials released several hundred families to relatives, church groups or other organizations due to statutory limitations on how long people can be held in custody."These people, they don't speak English they don't have any money, and they are in another country and they don't have a cell phone to call their relatives," said Magdalena Shwartz, who works with churches and ICE to help find places to stay until relatives can pick up those the government releases.For families detained by immigration authorities, under a settlement agreement and subsequent decision, unaccompanied children or families can only be held in custody for 20 days before being released while their cases work their way through immigration courts.Pastors at a church in Mesa said they recently received a call from ICE asking if the church could help at least one hundred people, who were dropped off Tuesday. Others were given a bus ticket and dropped off at a bus station in Phoenix."They don't have another option," Shwartz said. "They cannot keep the people detained there for a long time, because they are getting more people."Multiple attempts to seek comment from Immigration and Customs Enforcement on Tuesday's release were not returned.Those who are ultimately granted asylum by a judge are allowed to stay, while those whose applications are denied will be deported. 1747

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes warned Sunday that he plans to urge lawmakers "this week" to hold Attorney General Jeff Sessions in contempt of Congress for failing to hand over classified materials related to the Russia investigation.But the Justice Department informed Nunes three days ago -- on the deadline for responding to a subpoena from Nunes' committee -- that providing the information on a "specific individual" could pose grave implications for national security, according to a letter obtained by CNN."Disclosure of responsive information to such requests can risk severe consequences, including potential loss of human lives, damage to relationships with valued international partners, compromise of ongoing criminal investigations, and interference with intelligence activities," wrote Assistant Attorney General Stephen Boyd, who heads the Justice Department's Office of Legislative Affairs.It was not immediately clear why Nunes has targeted Sessions. A source familiar with the matter said that the request falls squarely within Sessions' recusal from all materials related to the Russia investigation. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein has been fielding the document requests in his place.Nunes has not described precisely what information he's seeking, but he said Sunday on "Fox and Friends" that it's "very important.""We're just not going to take this nonsense of every time we peel something back, every time we need information, we get ignored, we get stalled or stonewalled," Nunes said.The Justice Department and the California Republican have been down this road before. CNN reported Friday that Nunes threatened to hold Justice Department officials in contempt of Congress on several occasions for failing to turn over sensitive documents related to the Russia investigation only to not read the materials once they were made available to him.When asked about CNN's reporting by Fox News' Laura Ingraham on Friday evening, Nunes said he wouldn't play "process games" or discuss "specifics about how we conduct our investigation," emphasizing that Rep. Trey Gowdy of South Carolina has read them instead, which CNN has reported.Despite not reading the documents, Nunes' past threats, with the backing of the White House and House Speaker Paul Ryan, have resulted in the Justice Department making a significant amount of classified materials related to the Russia investigation available to lawmakers, including the document that formally authorized the FBI's counterintelligence investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election, the controversial surveillance warrants on Trump campaign aide Carter Page, and the records related to the infamous dossier?on Trump and Russia.This time, the Justice Department appears to have the backing of the White House in resisting Nunes' request -- at least for now.Boyd's letter makes clear that the Justice Department determined after consulting with the White House, FBI and Office of the Director of National Intelligence that it was "not in a position to provide information responsive to your request regarding a specific individual." 3163

How accurate are the coronavirus tests used in the U.S.?Months into the outbreak, no one really knows how well many of the screening tests work, and experts at top medical centers say it is time to do the studies to find out.When the new virus began spreading, the Food and Drug Administration used its emergency powers to OK scores of quickly devised tests, based mainly on a small number of lab studies showing they could successfully detect the virus.That’s very different from the large patient studies that can take weeks or months, which experts say are needed to provide a true sense of testing accuracy.The FDA’s speedy response came after it was initially criticized for delaying the launch of new tests during a crisis and after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention stumbled in getting its own test out to states.But with the U.S. outbreak nearly certain to stretch on for months or even years, some experts want the FDA to demand better evidence of the tests’ accuracy so doctors know how many infections might be missed.There have been more than 2 million confirmed coronavirus cases in the U.S. and more than 115,000 deaths, according to data compiled by Johns Hopkins University. Cases in nearly half of U.S. states are rising.In recent weeks, preliminary findings have flagged potential problems with some COVID-19 tests, including one used daily at the White House. Faulty tests could leave many thousands of Americans with the incorrect assumption that they are virus-free, contributing to new flare-ups of the disease as communities reopen.“In the beginning, the FDA was under a lot of pressure to get these tests onto the marketplace,” said Dr. Steven Woloshin of Dartmouth College, who wrote about the issue in the New England Journal of Medicine last week. “But now that there are plenty of tests out there, it’s time for them to raise the bar.”The FDA said in a statement that it has already asked multiple test makers to do follow-up accuracy studies, although it didn’t say for how many of the more than 110 authorized screening tests. The agency also said it is tracking reports of problems. Accuracy has also been an issue with blood tests that look for signs of past infections.No screening test is 100% accurate. So details on accuracy are routinely provided for tests of all types, including seasonal flu, hepatitis, HIV and cancers. For example, rapid flu tests are known to miss 20% or more of all cases, a factor doctors weigh when treating patients who have symptoms but test negative.For now, most COVID-19 tests in the U.S. don’t give data on real-world performance, including how often the tests falsely clear patients of infection or falsely detect the virus. That information is lacking for all but a few of the roughly 80 commercial screening tests available, according to an Associated Press review.The government’s emergency authorization process “requires a lower level of evidence,” the agency said. Makers need only show that a test “may be effective” instead of the usual requirement to demonstrate “safety and effectiveness.” They would have to meet that higher threshold once the U.S. government declares the emergency over.Many of the commercial test makers submitted results from 60 samples, the minimum number required and mostly used lab-produced specimens of the virus. The FDA now recommends the use of nasal swabs or other real samples from people screened for coronavirus.Experts say larger patient studies patients are needed to assess a test’s true performance.Lab testing bears little resemblance to actual — sometimes imperfect — conditions at hospitals, clinics and testing sites noted Dr. Robert Kaplan of Stanford University.“You’re testing people in parking lots, the patients themselves are extremely anxious and often unable to follow instructions,” said Kaplan, a former associate director of the National Institutes of Health.Kaplan and others say those differences could explain why some tests are not performing as expected.Last month, the FDA warned doctors of a potential accuracy problem with Abbott Laboratories’ rapid ID Now test, which delivers results in roughly 15 minutes. The test has been lauded by President Donald Trump and used to screen the president, his staff and visitors to the White House.The FDA alert followed a preliminary report by New York University that found Abbott’s test missed between a third to one-half of infections caught by a rival test in patients screened for the virus.Abbott rejected the findings, saying the researchers did not follow the instructions for using its test. The company pointed to alternate patient studies, including its own, that have found the test successfully detects between 91% and 95% or more of virus cases when compared to other tests.But similar problems with ID NOW’s accuracy have been flagged in preliminary reports by researchers at Stanford University, Loyola University and the Cleveland Clinic.For now, the FDA is requiring Abbott to conduct follow-up studies in several different patient groups.The FDA’s emergency standards “are still high but there is a significant difference in the body of work that what would go into a submission under the normal process,” said Abbott vice president John Hackett. “Our normal process takes years to bring these out.”Requiring bigger studies of all coronavirus tests could provide valuable information, but it could also strain the FDA’s already stretched staff and resources, said Dr. Daniel Schultz, former director of the FDA’s medical device center.Dr. Colin West of the Mayo Clinic worries doctors and patients have put too much confidence in the current crop of tests, when an unknown number of patients with COVID-19 are likely receiving false negative results.Even a modest error rate can have grave consequences during an outbreak like COVID-19. West gives the example of a test that is 95% accurate at detecting the virus and is used on 1 million people. That would still result in 50,000 people being incorrectly told that they don’t have the virus.“The negative test does not mean that I’m off the hook,” West said. “We just need to maintain that level of vigilance until we have a better sense of how good these tests really can be.”___Follow Matthew Perrone on Twitter: @AP_FDAwriter.___Follow AP pandemic coverage at http://apnews.com/VirusOutbreak and https://apnews.com/UnderstandingtheOutbreak.___The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content. 6604

来源：资阳报