成都什么医院治疗血糖足好(成都堵塞性{脉管炎}怎么治疗) (今日更新中)

SACO, Maine – A man in Maine has been arrested after authorities say he was caught putting razor blades into pizza dough that was then sold to customers.The Saco Police Department says it was notified of the tampered food by the city’s Hannaford Supermarket last Tuesday. Officers say a customer had purchased a Portland Pie pizza dough and later discovered razor blades inside.“The review of store security surveillance footage revealed a person tampered with the packaging of several Portland Pie pizza doughs,” wrote the department in a statement.Police have identified the suspect as 38-year-old Nicholas Mitchell and said he’s a former associate of It’ll Be Pizza company, which manufactures products for Portland Pie.A warrant was issued for Mitchell’s arrest and he was later taken into custody in Dover, New Hampshire, according to police.As a result of the incident, Hannaford Supermarkets has issued a recall for all Portland Pie branded products sold at its stores.The supermarket chain says customers who purchased Portland Pie pizza dough or cheese sold in its delis between Aug. 1 and Oct. 11 should not consume the products. They may return it to the store for a full refund.Additionally, the chain says it has removed all Portland Pie products from its shelves and paused replenishment of the products indefinitely, “after what is believed to be further malicious tampering incidents involving metal objects inserted into Portland Pie products.”Law enforcement is continuing to investigate the tampering. If you have purchased Portland Pie pizza dough and have found razor blades inside the dough, call the Saco Police Department's Detective Division at (207)282-8216. 1692

SACRAMENTO (KGTV) -- California's attorney general disclosed an ongoing probe into Facebook's privacy practices Wednesday, as it sued the company over its repeated refusal to turn over documents and answer questions.California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said his probe has been going on for more than a year. He said he was disclosing it now because his office was making a public court filing to force the company to comply with subpoenas and requests for information."Facebook is not just continuing to drag its feet in response to the Attorney General's investigation, it is failing to comply," the lawsuit said.The lawsuit was filed in state Superior Court in San Francisco.The California probe, one of many legal and regulatory inquiries into Facebook, began as a response to the Cambridge Analytica scandal and grew into an investigation into whether Facebook misrepresented its privacy practices, deceived users and broke California law.Cambridge Analytica, a data mining firm, gathered details on as many as 87 million Facebook users without their permission. The Federal Trade Commission fined Facebook billion this summer for privacy violations in an investigation that also grew out of that scandal. California officials say questions have been raised about what Facebook knew and why it didn't prevent third parties such as Cambridge Analytica from misusing user data.The court filing said Facebook hasn't given answers on 19 of the attorney general's questions and hasn't given any new documents in response to six document requests. The filing also said Facebook has refused to search the emails of top executives Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg, as the state requested.Becerra's office said it requested additional information after Facebook took a year to respond to an initial subpoena.Investigators sought communications among executives on developers' access to user data, the relationship between ad spending and access to data and the introduction of new privacy features and privacy-related news stories. Officials also sought information on the effects of privacy settings on third-party access to data and Facebook's enforcement of policies.Facebook, which has its headquarters in Menlo Park, California, didn't respond to requests for comment.California hadn't joined a separate probe involving attorneys general from New York and other states. The New York probe is looking into Facebook's dominance and any resulting anticompetitive conduct. California is also a holdout in a separate probe into Google's market dominance.The District of Columbia and Massachusetts have also gone after Facebook on privacy. The Massachusetts attorney general's office is set to argue in a state court Thursday why Facebook should be compelled to stop resisting and turn over documents for its investigation.Facebook's various legal troubles have yet to make a significant financial dent on the company. Even the FTC's billion fine, the largest ever for a tech company, came to just under one-tenth of Facebook's revenue last year. The penalty was criticized by consumer advocates and a number of public officials as being too lenient.___AP Technology Writers Mae Anderson and Frank Bajak contributed to this report. 3248

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Californians who lost their home insurance because of the threat of wildfires will be able to buy comprehensive policies next year through a state-mandated plan under an order issued Thursday by the state insurance commissioner.As wildfires threaten the state, insurance companies have been dropping many homeowners who live in fire-prone areas.Most of those people turn to the California Fair Access to Insurance Requirements Plan, an insurance pool mandated by state law that is required to issue policies to people who can’t buy them through no fault of their own.But FAIR Plan policies are limited, offering coverage for fires, explosions and limited smoke damage.California Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara on Thursday ordered the plan to begin selling comprehensive policies by June 1 to cover lots of other problems, including theft, water damage, falling objects and liability.Lara also ordered the plan to double homeowners’ coverage limits to million by April 1.“You have people that now are being sent to the FAIR Plan and they have no other alternative. They won’t even get a call back from an insurance company to offer them a quote,” Lara said.The FAIR Plan has been around since 1968. It is not funded by tax dollars. Instead, all property and casualty insurance companies doing business in California must contribute to the plan.Known as the “insurer of last resort,” the plan has been growing in recent years as wildfires have become bigger and more frequent because of climate change. FAIR Plan policies in fire-prone areas have grown an average of nearly 8% each year since 2016, according to the Department of Insurance.Likewise, since 2015 insurance companies have declined to renew nearly 350,000 policies in areas at high risk for wildfires. That data comes from the state, and it does not include information on how many people were able to find coverage elsewhere or at what price.The FAIR Plan is governed by a board of directors appointed by various government officials. Lara says he has the authority to reject its operating plan. On Thursday, he ordered it to submit a new plan within 30 days that includes an option for comprehensive policies and other changes.California FAIR Plan Association President Anneliese Jivan did not respond to an email seeking comment.It’s unknown how much the plan’s new policies will cost. But rates for FAIR Plan policies are supposed to break even. The insurance industry must cover any losses. And if the plan generates a profit, that money is given back to insurance companies.FAIR Plan policies have been limited because, in general, the insurance industry doesn’t want state-mandated plans to compete with private insurance plans. But Amy Bach, executive director of United Policyholders — a nonprofit advocating for consumers in the insurance industry — says her group is “hearing from panicked consumers daily.”“If (insurance companies) don’t like it, the solution really is to start doing their job and selling insurance again,” she said. “This is an untenable situation.” 3083

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California's governor vowed on Monday to continue expanding taxpayer funded health benefits to adults living in the country illegally next year, ensuring the volatile issue will get top billing in the 2020 presidential election as Democrats vying for the nomination woo voters in the country's most populous state.Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a 4.8 billion operating budget last week that includes spending to make low-income adults 25 and younger living in the country illegally eligible for the state's Medicaid program. California is the first state to do this, with an expected cost of million to cover about 90,000 peopleDemocrats in the state legislature had pushed to also cover adults 65 and older living in the country illegally, as well as all adults regardless of age. But Newsom rejected those proposals because they were too expensive — about .4 billion for all adults living in the country illegally in California.But Monday, Newsom told a crowd of supporters at Sacramento City College "we're going to get the rest of that done.""Mark my words," Newsom said. "We're going to make progress next year and the year after on that. That's what universal health care means. Everybody, not just some folks."If Newsom follows through, it will ensure California's legislature will be debating the issue at about the same time California voters are voting for a Democratic presidential nominee. The state has an outsized role in the selection process this year because its primary is scheduled for March 3.Republicans seemed to welcome the debate. Speaking to reporters on Monday, Trump said California doesn't "treat their people as well as they treat illegal immigrants.""At what point does it stop? It's crazy what they are doing," he said. "And it's mean. And it's very unfair to our citizens, and we're going to stop it. But we may need an election to stop it, and we may need to get back the House."Newsom's comments highlight how quickly Democrats have embraced using tax dollars to provide services for people living in the country illegally. Former Democratic President Barack Obama's health care law dramatically expanded Medicaid coverage in 2014, but only for people living in the country legally.Last week, all 10 Democratic presidential candidates during the second night of a televised debate raised their hands when asked if they supported expanding Medicaid to cover people living in the country illegally. They included front-runners like former Vice President Joe Biden, Vermont U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders and California U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris."I think the anti-immigrant stance by the Trump administration has in some sense created this as the bigger issue," said Larry Levitt, executive vice president for health policy at the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. "The Trump administration has pushed Democrats even further to defend immigration and provide services to people who are already here."California's 4.8 billion operating budget, which took effect Monday, also brings back an Obama-era tax on people who refuse to purchase private health insurance. State officials will use the money from the tax to help middle income families — including families of four who earn as much as 0,000 a year — pay their monthly health insurance premiums."To Donald Trump: eat your heart out," Newsom said.___This story has been corrected to show the budget bill signing was last week. 3457

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Athletes at California colleges could hire agents and sign endorsement deals under a bill the state Legislature sent to the governor on Wednesday, setting up a potential confrontation with the NCAA that could jeopardize the athletic futures of powerhouse programs like USC, UCLA and Stanford.Gov. Gavin Newsom has not said whether he will sign it. But the NCAA Board Of Governors is already urging him not to, sending him a letter Wednesday saying the bill "would erase the critical distinction between college and professional athletics" and would have drastic consequences for California's colleges and universities."Because it gives those schools an unfair recruiting advantage, (it) would result in them eventually being unable to compete in NCAA competitions," the letter said. "These outcomes are untenable and would negatively impact more than 24,000 California student-athletes across three divisions."Newsom has 30 days to either sign the bill, veto it or let it become law without his signature.The bill would allow student-athletes to hire agents and be paid for the use of their names, images or likenesses. It would stop California universities and the NCAA from banning athletes that take the money. If it becomes law, it would take effect Jan. 1, 2023."I'm sick of being leveraged by the NCAA on the backs of athletes who have the right to their own likeness and image, this is about fairness," Assemblywoman Sydney Kamlager-Dove, a Los Angeles Democrat, said Monday.The Senate voted 39-0 to pass the bill, which has the endorsement of NBA superstar LeBron James, who skipped college and went directly to the NBA before the league changed its rules to require players to be at least one year removed from high school before entering the draft. But the bill could impact James' 14-year-old son, who is a closely watched basketball prospect in Los Angeles.The NCAA is the governing body for college sports. But membership is voluntary. Athletes can get valuable scholarships, but the NCAA has long banned paying athletes to preserve the academic missions of colleges and universities. But college sports have since morphed into a multibillion-dollar industry, igniting a debate over the fairness of not paying the industry's most visible labor force.Earlier this year, NCAA President Mark Emmert told lawmakers that passing the bill would be premature, noting the NCAA has a committee — led by Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith and Big East Commissioner Val Ackerman — that is exploring the issue. Their report is due in October.The NCAA committee has already said it won't endorse a plan to pay athletes as if they were employees, but they could ease limits on endorsement deals for athletes. The NCAA already lets athletes accept money in some instances. Tennis players can accept up to ,000 in prize money and Olympians can accept winnings from their competitions.The bill still puts some restrictions on athletes, such as forbidding them from signing endorsement deals that conflict with their school's existing contracts.Republican Assemblyman Jim Patterson of Fresno was the only lawmaker to speak against the bill, though he did not cast a vote. He said allowing athletes to make money could make universities in rural areas less competitive because there could be fewer sponsorship opportunities in the area.But other lawmakers argued banning college athletes from being paid was a violation of their freedoms."Playing college sports should not have to come at the cost of personal liberty, dignity, self-expression or any other value this legislature is charged with protecting," said Republican Assemblyman Kevin Kiley of Rocklin. "Let's send a loud and clear message to the NCAA."But in and around California, schools and conferences believe this legislation might not be the best solution.The Pac-12, which includes Southern California, UCLA, Stanford and Cal, issued a statement Wednesday reiterating its previous stance — asking the California Legislature to delay the debate until the NCAA announces formal proposals."We all want to protect and support our student-athletes, and the Pac-12 has played a leadership role in national reforms for student-athletes over the past years," the statement said. "The question is what's the best way to continue to support our student-athletes. We think having more information and informed views will be helpful."J.D. Wicker, the athletic director at San Diego State, a Mountain West Conference member, agreed, saying "California weighing in on this complicates that.""I think the frustration for me is that they probably don't truly understand the NCAA and how we work as a governing body," Wicker said. "Again, it's schools across 50 states and it's all of us working together, whereas the state of California will only harm California schools." 4858

来源：资阳报