成都下肢静脉血栓挂哪个科室(成都治前列腺肥大那个医院好) (今日更新中)

The Pac-12 Conference announced Thursday that they have decided to will play football this season after all.In a press release, the conference said the season would kick off Nov. 6 and no fans will be allowed "at any sporting competition taking place on Pac-12 campus.""Enabling Pac-12 teams would be considered for selection by the CFP," the conference said in the release. "The football schedule will be released in the coming days."The conference also stated that they be implement cardiac monitoring protocols for all student-athletes who test positive of COVID-19."The Pac-12 institutions are also participating in a national COVID-19 cardiac registry which will allow for medical practitioners to monitor closely, and gain greater insight into, potential health outcomes in student-athletes," the conference said. The conference said teams will play seven conference-only games, with the conference championship game scheduled for Dec. 18.“From the beginning of this crisis, our focus has been on following the science, data and counsel of our public health and infectious disease experts,” said Pac-12 Commissioner Larry Scott. “Our agreement with Quidel to provide daily rapid-results testing has been a game-changer in enabling us to move forward with confidence that we can create a safe environment for our student-athletes while giving them the opportunity to pursue their dreams. At the same time, we will continue to monitor health conditions and data and be ready to adjust as required in the name of the health of all.”The conference also announced that men’s and women’s basketball will begin their season on Nov. 25.In August, the Pac-12 decided that they were postponing this season of college football due to the coronavirus pandemic. 1762

The outcome of the presidential election remained in doubt one day after polls closed throughout the United States.As of Wednesday afternoon, Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden had a slight advantage over President Donald Trump in electoral college votes, but several key swing states had yet to be called.A candidate needs 270 electoral college votes in order to claim the presidency. As of Wednesday afternoon, Biden had 248 Electoral College votes to Trump's 214.Just as it did in 2016, the outcome of the race will likely hinge on the results of three states — Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. As of Wednesday afternoon, the race in Michigan and Pennsylvania is too close to call. The Associated Press projects Biden will win Wisconsin, and its 10 electoral votes. Michigan (16 electoral votes) appears poised to offer close to a final count in the hours ahead. However, officials in Pennsylvania have cautioned that due to a high volume of mail-in votes, it may take several days to determine a winner of their 20 electoral votes.In 2016, Trump won Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin by about 100,000 combined votes.During a virtual press conference on Wednesday, the state's chief election official, Meagan Wolfe, said that nearly all jurisdictions have posted initial vote counts. That count will remain unofficial until the election is certified on Dec. 1.Trump campaign manager Bill Stepien said in a statement Wednesday that the President plans to request a recount in Wisconsin.According to Wisconsin law, a candidate can request a recount if the margin of victory is within 1%. Those recounts are held at the county level.The western swing state of Nevada (six electoral votes) also remained too close to call. Nevada won't resume counting ballots until Thursday morning, and still needs to tally mail ballots received on Election Day. The state expanded mail-in voting for the 2020 election and will also continue to count mail-in ballots for the next week.Finally, though the majority of votes have been counted in Georgia (16 electoral college votes) and North Carolina (15 votes), the margins remain razor-thin. Trump currently holds narrow leads in both states.The state of Alaska, whose polls closed at midnight ET, also remains too close to call, but polling has indicated that Trump is favored in the state.In a virtual press conference on Wednesday morning, Biden campaign manager Jen O'Malley Dillon said her campaign is "on track" to claim the presidency. She said the Biden campaign believes it will prevail in Michigan, Wisconsin and Nevada, citing large numbers of outstanding mail-in ballots, which tend to skew Democratic.Though Michigan, Nevada and Wisconsin are yet to be called, should Biden claim those three states, he would reach the threshold of 270 electoral college votes needed to clinch the presidency.The Biden campaign also decried Trump's decision to falsely declare victory in a White House speech early Wednesday morning. In a statement, Biden campaign manager Jen O'Malley Dillon called Trump's comments "outrageous, unprecedented and incorrect." 3113

The House Intelligence Committee on Saturday released a Democratic memo in redacted form that seeks to undercut Republican claims of FBI surveillance abuses.The committee made the Democratic memo public after the White House signed off following negotiations between the FBI and the committee's top Democrat, Rep. Adam Schiff of California, over what in the document should be redacted.Earlier this month, the White House objected to releasing the memo, saying that sensitive material had to be removed first.  523

The Motorcycle Rally in Sturgis, South Dakota, was expected to bring thousands to the small South Dakota town despite the spread of the coronavirus. The Sturgis Police department reported a total of 92 non-traffic arrests, 60 traffic arrests and 24 parking citations through Monday morning. The rally is three days into its nine-day run.While 92 non-traffic arrests were up by 22 from this time last year, traffic-related arrests were down by 19 from a year ago.The department released a breakdown of the arrests from the rally. Many of the arrests stemmed from driving while intoxicated (19) and drug possession or paraphernalia (47). 643

The polling industry has a lot on the line heading into Tuesday's midterm election.Critics blamed pollsters when voters were caught off guard by Donald Trump's election in 2016. Old cries of "don't believe the polls" became fevered shouts. And the president has encouraged distrust by calling certain polls "fake" and claiming they are used to "suppress" the vote.Although there is no evidence to suggest that is true, there is persistent and widespread suspicion about polling, according to, you guessed it, a McClatchy-Marist poll. And it exists on both sides, albeit in different forms."I think Democrats may have felt let down by the polls but don't think it was an intentional error. I think many Republicans believe the polling errors of 2016 were intentional," GOP pollster and co-founder of Echelon Insights Kristen Soltis Anderson told CNN.So can the industry regain trust?Since 2016 there's been a whole lot of self-reflection in the polling world. Pollsters have tweaked their techniques; pundits have become more cautious when talking about polls; and news outlets have conducted some fascinating experiments.On Tuesday, all the efforts are being put to the test."Some pollsters would disagree with this, but the way that the public generally views whether or not polling is accurate is whether or not it gets the results of the election right," CNN analyst Harry Enten said on "Reliable Sources.""I'm not necessarily sure that's fair," Enten said, "but I do think that there is more pressure on pollsters this year to get it right given the president's rhetoric and given what happened in 2016."Many, though not all, 2016 polls underestimated support for Trump. This effect was particularly pronounced at the state level, where there were embarrassing "misses," showing Hillary Clinton with safe leads in states Trump actually carried.Most national polls accurately showed Clinton winning the popular vote. But reporters and commentators made lots of mistakes in their interpretations of the polls. Readers and viewers did, too. Many people discounted the margin and other factors and made faulty assumptions that Trump would lose to Clinton.There were other problems, too. Predictive features on websites gained lots of traffic before the election but caused lots of consternation afterward. HuffPost's model infamously showed Clinton with a 98 percent chance of winning. "We blew it," the site admitted afterward.But just as importantly, HuffPost's Natalie Jackson tried to explain why.Other news outlets have also tried to be more transparent and remind voters of what polls cannot convey.In special elections since 2016, Democrats have repeatedly outperformed polls of their races.The top example was the Virginia governors' race. "Ralph Northam was favored by three points. He ended up winning by nine," Enten said.But past outcomes are not an indicator of future results."I think many pollsters and forecasters have tried to be much more intentional about explaining uncertainty and being humble about what data can and can't tell us," Anderson said. "Because I think there was a big sense that in 2016, there was more certainty conveyed than may have been justified by the available data."So political pros and reporters are communicating poll results differently this time. Time magazine's Molly Ball, who has a no-predictions rule for herself, said that even people who do make predictions are adding more caveats: There's "less of the, 'Well, the needle shows this' and more of, 'Here's what it doesn't show, here's what we should always remember can happen about probabilities.'"Early voting has been explosive in the midterms, indicating above-average enthusiasm among both Democrats and Republicans. Pollsters have to make assumptions about turnout when contacting "likely voters," and this is a difficult election to forecast.The 2018 electorate is "a universe that doesn't exist yet," Democratic pollster Margie Omero said. "I mean, people don't know whether they're going to vote, some people."They may tell a pollster that they're sure to vote, but never make it to the ballot box. Or they might change who they're voting for.Conversely, certain subsets of voters may have a big impact on the final results without really showing up in the pre-election polling. If pollsters assume relatively low youth turnout, but lots of young people vote for the first time, that could cause big surprises in certain races.The vast majority of people who are called by pollsters decline to participate, so the researchers have to make a huge number of phone calls, bend over backwards to reach a representative sample of people, and weight their results accordingly.Some polls are higher quality than others. Most news outlets tend to favor live interviewers, as opposed to computerized systems, and a mix of landline and cell phone calls. But some outlets are wading into web-based polling. CNN's polling standards preclude reporting on web polls.This fall The New York Times pulled back the curtain by conducting "live polling" and publishing the results in real time, call by call. Working with Siena College, the surveyors made 2,822,889 calls and completed 96 polls of House and Senate races."We wanted to demystify polling for people," said Nate Cohn of The Times' Upshot blog."From our point of view, it's almost a miracle how accurate polls usually are, given all the challenges," Cohn said in an interview with CNN.He emphasized that polls are "very fuzzy things." And the real-time polling showed this to the public. The researchers sought to interview about 500 people for each race that was examined.In Iowa's fourth congressional district, for example, 14,636 calls resulted in 423 interviews.The results showed the incumbent, far-right congressman Steve King, with 47% support, and his Democratic challenger J.D. Scholten with 42%.The Times characterized this as a "slight edge" for King, with lots of room for error. "The margin of sampling error on the overall lead is 10 points, roughly twice as large as the margin for a single candidate's vote share," the Times explained on its website.Cohn's final pre-election story noted that "even modest late shifts among undecided voters or a slightly unexpected turnout could significantly affect results."That's the kind of language that lots of polling experts are incorporating into their stories and live shots, especially in the wake of the 2016 election."With polling, you never actually get to the truth," Cohn said. "You inch towards it, and you think you end up within plus or minus 5 points of it at the end."As Enten put it, "polls are tools," not meant to be perfect. But that message needs to be reinforced through the news media. 6753

来源：资阳报