精索静脉曲张专科医院在成都哪儿成都治疗海绵状血管瘤的方法,成都医治静脉扩张要多少钱,成都血管瘤哪里看的好,成都治静脉曲张的费用,成都血管瘤做什么手术,成都治疗血管瘤要多少费用,成都治疗下肢动脉硬化去哪家医院好

Hackers who were able to take control of at least a dozen high-profile Twitter accounts and tweet messages calling for Bitcoin solicitations gained access to the accounts by targeting Twitter employees, the social media site said Wednesday evening.According to Twitter's support account, the hackers "successfully targeted some of our employees with access to internal systems and tools." They then posted messages seeking Bitcoin solicitations — with a promise to return double the amount — on a series of high-profile Twitter accounts.CNN reports that the Bitcoin wallet included in the tweets is in fact, real and that those conducting the scam have received more than 0,000 in Bitcoin. 700

Georgia has re-certified the results of the presidential election in the state, hours after state Sec. of State Brad Raffensperger confirmed that a machine recount requested by the Trump campaign upheld president-elect Joe Biden's win in the state.Raffensperger also criticized those who continue to doubt the results of the 2020 presidential election in the state, saying that the push to overturn the results was "hurting the state."Georgia has counted ballots in the presidential election three times — the initial count, a full election audit and hand recount, which was done at Raffensperger's request, and a machine recount which was held a the request of the Trump campaign. All three counts have shown Biden won the state.Raffensperger says he's been personally pressured by fellow Republicans to personally intervene and overturn the results of the election. At a Saturday political rally, Trump criticized Raffensperger publicly.There is no evidence of widespread voter fraud in the state. Last week, Attorney General Bill Barr said the Justice Department had not yet found evidence of fraud that would change the outcome of the 2020 presidential election. 1174

Holidays will look different this year for many Americans, with dinners outside, social distancing, or passing on family gatherings altogether. But several companies developing rapid at-home COVID-19 tests are hopeful that won't be the case next year. The goal is to make inexpensive, easy-to-use COVID tests that can deliver results in minutes, just like a pregnancy test. "For people to feel comfortable to associate with friends or family, there needs to be a testing methodology ideally that can be performed at home," said Tony Lemmo, CEO of the manufacturing company BioDot.The company's technology is being used by over 70 manufacturers worldwide making COVID-19 antigen, antibody, and PCR tests. Their automated platforms dispense nanoliter/picoliter amounts of reagent onto the tests accurately and fast.Lemmo says just one of their systems can support the production of roughly 100 million COVID-19 tests per year, helping to make high-volume production possible.“We knew we were going to be called on by customers to manufacture more equipment to provide them the ability to manufacture more tests," said Lemmo. To meet customer demand, BioDot increased staffing and built a new facility, compressing production time from months to weeks. The FDA recently authorized the first rapid at-home test that can deliver results in 30 minutes, eliminating the need for a lab to test the sample. But the molecular single-use test will only be available to patients with a doctor's prescription who are suspected of being infected with COVID-19.Companies developing tests hope the FDA will soon authorize another at-home testing tool: the rapid antigen test.These inexpensive tests provide results within minutes, and companies developing them say millions could be sold without a doctor's referral.“From what we’re hearing, it’s really just a matter of possibly months before there’s at least sufficient data to be able to support an at-home use of a test like an antigen test," said Lemmo.Lemmo says if authorized by the FDA, manufacturers could make millions of these tests in a matter of months. But antigen tests are less accurate, and the FDA wants to ensure they'll be simple enough for people to use at home. There are also concerns over how the data will be reported to health authorities. “I think any at-home testing or massive rollout of a test into the communities needs to be done very carefully and with a lot of education around it," said Clinical Lab Director Melissa Miller. Dr. Miller is a professor of pathology and laboratory medicine at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill and Medical Director for the Clinical Microbiology Lab for the Medical Center.She worries the inaccuracies of these tests could eventually lead the public to lose trust in all testing. “Even at 98 percent specificity, which is very, very high. That means you’re going to have a false positive two out of every 100. If you started testing a hundred million people, this is millions of people who have a false-positive test," said Dr. Miller. She says this could lead to healthy people isolating and missing work or school unnecessarily, and false-negative results could give people a false sense of security. “These rapid antigen tests were pushed out to skilled nursing facilities; this is a very high-risk patient population. This is actually where you want a very accurate test," said Dr. Miller. She says it’s unclear how well antigen tests detect the virus in asymptomatic patients but agrees more data is needed to figure that out.“It might make more sense for K-12 schools, or even college settings, where there’s less risk for a poor outcome if you have a false positive or a false negative," said Dr. Miller. But with a growing demand for convenient at-home testing, manufacturers are hopeful that in the months ahead, the FDA will soon open the door to new solutions. 3889

Global wildlife populations have fallen by 60% in just over four decades, as accelerating pollution, deforestation, climate change and other manmade factors have created a "mindblowing" crisis, the World Wildlife Fund has warned in a damning new report.The total numbers of more than 4,000 mammal, bird, fish, reptile and amphibian species declined rapidly between 1970 and 2014, the Living Planet Report 2018 says.Current rates of species extinction are now up to 1,000 times higher than before human involvement in animal ecosystems became a factor.The proportion of the planet's land that is free from human impact is projected to drop from a quarter to a tenth by 2050, as habitat removal, hunting, pollution, disease and climate change continue to spread, the organization added.The group has called for an international treaty, modeled on the Paris climate agreement, to be drafted to protect wildlife and reverse human impacts on nature.It warned that current efforts to protect the natural world are not keeping up with the speed of manmade destruction.The crisis is "unprecedented in its speed, in its scale and because it is single-handed," said Marco Lambertini, the WWF's director general. "It's mindblowing. ... We're talking about 40 years. It's not even a blink of an eye compared to the history of life on Earth.""Now that we have the power to control and even damage nature, we continue to (use) it as if we were the hunters and gatherers of 20,000 years ago, with the technology of the 21st century," he added. "We're still taking nature for granted, and it has to stop."WWF UK Chief Executive Tanya Steele added in a statement, "We are the first generation to know we are destroying our planet and the last one that can do anything about it."The report also found that 90% of seabirds have plastics in their stomachs, compared with 5% in 1960, while about half of the world's shallow-water corals have been lost in the past three decades.Animal life dropped the most rapidly in tropical areas of Latin America and the Caribbean, with an 89% fall in populations since 1970, while species that rely on freshwater habitats, like frogs and river fish, declined in population by 83%. 2205

Have you ever considered downsizing? Not just moving into a slightly smaller place, but really scaling back on your belongings and living space? Could you live in a tiny house? 184