重庆肾有小结石需要处理吗重庆结石一般要多少费用,重庆肾结石几天能排出,膀胱结石手术大概需要多少钱重庆,排结石正确的跳跃姿势重庆,胆囊结石只能切除胆囊吗重庆,重庆结石手术价格,重庆肾结石掉到输尿管怎么治疗了

A Florida family is mourning the loss of their puppy Zeus, who died while protecting two of their four children from a venomous snake.Oriley Richardson, 10, was playing in his family's backyard in Webster on September 23 when the 9-month-old pit bull suddenly jumped towards him, his mother Gina Richardson told CNN on Sunday. Oriley noticed the pup attacking something on the ground, but thought it was a rope.It was a coral snake. And Zeus was doing his best to keep it away from Oriley.As the dog struggled to keep the snake at bay, Orion, 11, stepped into the backyard to change Zeus' water.That's when Zeus decided to lay down on the snake, using his body weight to smother the deadly predator and prevent it from harming the boys.Orion noticed that Zeus' eyes looked "bugged out," Richardson said. That's when they turned him over and discovered the snake, which had bitten Zeus four times before he bit off and swallowed its head.The family rushed Zeus to a nearby animal hospital, where staff immediately administered anti-venom.Sadly, it was too late. Zeus died the following day -- the same day as Oriley's birthday."I just started bawling," Richardson said. "My kids woke up and heard me crying and then they too started crying. We were all an emotional wreck."The family, including Sega, Zeus' mom, went to the hospital to say goodbye."Sega goes over to Zeus' head and puts her paws up on the table and takes a sniff," said Richardson. "Her ears came back, she got down, she instantly jumped on the sofa next to me and put her head on my thigh in sorrow. At that moment not only was my family broken, but his own mother was broken."Richardson said she feels "forever grateful" to Zeus and considers him a hero. "I feel like I may have lost one of my children had he not been there," she said.Oriley is especially saddened over Zeus' death. "He was a good boy and I loved him with all my heart," he said. "I played with him all the time. I feel sad and I miss him."Gary Richardson, the boys' father, said he hopes Zeus' selfless act will help change public perception of pit bulls."He was my best friend," said Gary Richardson. "I'm torn between wanting to be happy that this situation has brought awareness to his breed and their kind and loving nature, and the sorrow of having lost him." 2313

A historic Oklahoma trial that will test whether a state can make a pharmaceutical company pay for the opioid epidemic will resume Wednesday with the testimony of the father of Austin Box, a 22-year-old linebacker for the Sooners who died of an overdose.Oklahoma Attorney General Mike Hunter in opening statements Tuesday accused drugmakers of a "cynical, deceitful, multimillion-dollar brainwashing campaign to establish opioid analgesics as the magic drug."The trial is expected to lay a road map for other states and municipalities in holding drugmakers accountable for what Hunter told the court was "the worst man-made public health crisis in the history of our country and the state -- the prescription opioid epidemic.""To put it bluntly," he said, "this crisis is devastating Oklahoma."Outside court, Hunter told reporters, "Our evidence is going to show clearly and irrefutably that these companies worked together and that Johnson & Johnson was in it up to their neck."Hunter told the court that 4,653 Oklahomans died of unintentional overdoses involving prescription opioids from 2007 to 2017, and that there were more than 28,000 admissions for opioid and heroin treatment through state services from 2012 to 2018.Oklahoma ranked seventh in the nation for prescription pain reliever abuse for children between the ages of 12 and 17 in 2013, and hundreds of babies are diagnosed with opioid-related neonatal abstinence syndrome each year."The pain, anguish and heartbreak (of) Oklahoma families, businesses, communities and individual Oklahomans is almost impossible to comprehend," Hunter told the court."How did this happened? At the end of the day, your honor, I have a short, one-word answer: greed."The attorney general said evidence will show that drug companies "in their zeal to provide a magic drug ... ignored centuries of experienced, well-documented scientific histories of deadly addiction epidemics.""Judge, money may not be the root of all evil, but I've learned this. ... Money can make people and businesses do very bad things."Hunter and his team have focused their efforts on Johnson & Johnson, alleging the company acted as a drug "kingpin," created a public nuisance and cost the state billions of dollars, destroying thousands of lives in the process. Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiary company, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, have vehemently denied the allegations and said the public nuisance accusation is being misused.Defense lawyer Larry Ottaway, in laying out the case for Johnson & Johnson and Janssen, cited John Adams' famous quote -- "Facts are stubborn things" -- to criticize allegations made by the state of Oklahoma.Ottaway said that in 2009, when Janssen said opioids were rarely addictive, the Food and Drug Administration also said the drugs "rarely caused addiction." He played a video that encouraged children to avoid taking the prescription drugs of others and concluded, "Jansen is not marketing opioids to kids."After the lunch break, Ottaway said he would not demean or question the pain of addiction, but called serious chronic pain "a soul-stealing, life-robbing thief.""It leads to depression," he said. "It leads to suicide."One in five American adults suffer from chronic pain, according to the CDC, which estimates 0 billion in losses to pain each year, Ottaway said."Janssen did not invent this disease," he said, but is trying to treat it.He noted the opioid deaths reflected in the state's chart did not differentiate between those taken as prescribed. He cited the CDC report the chart is based on as concluding that "states as regulators have the responsibility and authority to monitor and correct illegal prescribers."Ottaway cited a CDC report that stated, "Public health interventions to reduce prescription drug addiction must strike a balance between reducing misuse and abuse and safeguarding legitimate access to treatment."Referring to bouts of chronic pain, he said, "it is the memory of what it was like to be pain free that gets us through those times. I want everyone to think of what it would be like if, instead of going away, that pain stayed with a person every day, every hour, every week, every year and never went away."Ottoway concluded his opening Tuesday afternoon, noting that the total documented cases of addictions or death attributed to one of the Janssen medications in the case amounted to "zero.""Janssen's conduct was not a nuisance," he told the court. "They provided medically necessary medications. ... They were lawfully (prescribed) by doctors in the state of Oklahoma."He said the state needs to prove that Janssen's marketing statements were misleading, that doctors acted on that and that patients took the drug as prescribed and became addicted or died."How much proof of that will you hear in this case? None," Ottaway said.In a statement ahead of the trial, Janssen said its "marketing and promotion of these important prescription pain medications were appropriate and responsible. The FDA-approved labels for these prescription pain medications provide clear information about their risks and benefits. The allegations made against our company are baseless and unsubstantiated."Brad Beckworth, a private attorney hired by the state, told the court the far-reaching opioid crisis caused by prescription drugs breaks up marriages, rips apart families, has cost the nation 0 billion and "tears apart our community here in Oklahoma at the very seams.""This opioid crisis, this public health crisis we're in," he said, "it is a man-made crisis, but the evidence will show this crisis is a drug company-made crisis, and one of the causes is sitting right here to my right -- Janssen and Johnson & Johnson. Make no mistake about it."The drugmakers marketed their lethal products to anyone and everyone, Beckworth said.He said the damage was staggering: 135 opioid pills were available for every adult in Cleveland County, Oklahoma -- the site of the trial; 139,359 years of life were lost as a result of overdose deaths of prescription opioids; 149,183 sales visits were made to doctors in Oklahoma between 1999 and 2005.Beckworth likened Johnson & Johnson to OxyContin maker Purdue Pharma, and said the drug giants were in a competition over opioids."If you oversupply," he repeated over and over, "people die."Quoting a song from the musical "Annie Get Your Gun" -- "Anything you can do, I can do better" -- Beckworth described Johnson & Johnson as mirroring Purdue in finding ways to get people to start taking its drug and keep taking it."Johnson & Johnson was in a race with Purdue to do the same things," he said.The state's first witness, Dr. Julio Rojas, whose specialty is treatment of substance abuse disorders, testified that opioid addiction drastically changes the brain and can be fatal.Hunter has said his team scoured millions of documents from Big Pharma and conducted hundreds of depositions of officials that will prove his case. "We are even more convinced than we were when we began this enterprise that these companies are the proximate cause for the epidemic in our state and in our country," he said.The attorney general has long considered himself a Reagan Republican who believes in big business. But he said this case has made it clear to him that sometimes "companies do bad things" and when they do, the chief law enforcement officer must act to "protect the people of their state.""When thousands of people die from drug overdoses attributable to prescription drugs, when you have hundreds of thousands of people who are addicted," Hunter said, "public nuisance law is the best and most efficient way for you to protect the people of your state."Hunter filed the case in the summer of 2017. He scored two major settlements ahead of the trial: 0 million from Purdue Pharma, and another million from Teva Pharmaceuticals, one of the biggest makers of generic drugs. The companies settled without admission of any wrongdoing.The Oklahoma trial is the first major trial of nearly 2,000 cases around the country in which states, cities and hard-hit local municipalities are seeking to hold opioid makers accountable for the epidemic that has left hundreds of thousands of Americans dead and strapped resources in every state.The case is being heard by state Judge Thad Balkman."It's always important when it's the first trial of this sort," said Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond. "It could provide a road map for other states in pursuing relief from the companies they want to hold responsible."He said legal scholars were paying close attention to it because of the precedent the case could set, including affecting a federal trial later this year that has folded together more than 1,500 cases. He said Purdue and Teva clearly didn't want the Oklahoma case to reach trial due to the potential of being held responsible for billions of dollars in damages if they had gone before the judge.Tobias also said the Oklahoma attorney general's decision to pursue a public nuisance accusation against Johnson & Johnson is an interesting one because the charge is typically reserved for environmental cases, such as toxins spilling into a river by a company."This is an interesting twist on the idea of public nuisance," Tobias said.In a statement to CNN, Johnson & Johnson vowed to defend itself vigorously. The company said public nuisance disputes in Oklahoma have often been limited to those "involving property or public spaces -- for example, to remedy an intrusion from an overgrown hedge.""The State ignores this well-established law and now argues that public nuisance allows them to compel any party allegedly contributing in any measure to a social problem to fund all programs that state administrators dream up to address it," the company said. "This is not and should not be the law. It threatens every company and industry doing business in the State of Oklahoma."In one filing, the Oklahoma attorney general said his case will demonstrate that Johnson & Johnson "acted as the kingpin behind this Public Health Emergency, profiting at every stage.""The public," Hunter said, "deserves to know the face and name of the source, supplier and kingpin responsible for flooding and infecting this country with an unprecedented surplus of deadly drugs..."Johnson & Johnson is best known for its baby powder, but the company for years marketed the extended-use opioid pill Nucynta, which it sold for billion in 2015.Hunter said the public deserves to know whether the company deliberately targeted children, the elderly and veterans for opioid painkillers, and whether it blocked legislation and regulatory action aimed at limiting opioid availability. In its statement, Johnson & Johnson said the company "did not market opioids to children, and the State's suggestion to the contrary is false and reckless."Hunter also alleges that Johnson & Johnson used two subsidiaries, Tasmanian Alkaloids and Noramco, that "created, grew, imported and supplied to J&J and its other co-conspirators, including Purdue, the narcotic raw materials necessary to manufacture the opioid pain medications thrust upon the unsuspecting public since the 1990s."Johnson & Johnson called such accusations false. "The State ignores basic facts. Johnson & Johnson did not manufacture, sell, or market the FDA-approved medicines made by other companies that used 11488

WASHINGTON – When the House of Representatives begins its public impeachment hearings, it will be a rare event – only the fourth time involving a president. Presidents Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton all faced varying degrees of the impeachment process. Now, so will President Donald Trump. “It is a political event,” said Georgetown Law Professor Victoria Nourse. She says while it is a high-profile event, she cautions to not call it “political theater.” “Impeachment was the last gasp, right? If someone did something completely antithetical to the nature of the Republic, if they were essentially unfit to serve in office, the founders wanted to have a backstop remedy, other than an election,” Nourse said. Here’s how the process will unfold: 1. Several House committees will hold public hearings. It’s up to the judiciary committee to decide if the full House will vote on impeachment. 2. Democrats hold the majority in the House– there are 235 of them. At least 218 representatives need to vote for impeachment for it to move on to the Senate. 3. The Senate holds the impeachment trial and acts as a jury. 4. Republicans have the majority in that chamber— 53 seats. An impeachment conviction requires a two-thirds majority vote. There are three offenses that are considered impeachable: - Treason - Bribery - High crimes and misdemeanors The Constitution does not define what high crimes and misdemeanors are, so it’s open to interpretation. “What it has to be is something that is very serious to the conduct of the nation's democracy,” Nourse said. That’s what is dividing Congressional Democrats and Republicans now: does President Trump’s actions involving Ukraine rise to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors? 1769

A federal judge will sentence Paul Manafort on Thursday for defrauding banks and the government and failing to pay taxes on millions of dollars in income he earned from Ukrainian political consulting -- charges that stemmed from special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.The penalty may be steep enough to keep the longtime lobbyist and former Trump campaign chairman in prison for the rest of his life.Prosecutors say that Manafort, 69, deserves between 19 and 25 years in prison as well as millions of dollars in fines and restitution for the crimes, for which a jury convicted him after a three-week trial last summer. Manafort has shown little remorse, they say, and even lied under oath following a plea deal after the trial."The defendant blames everyone from the special counsel's office to his Ukrainian clients for his own criminal choices," prosecutors wrote in a final court filing this week to Judge T.S. Ellis in Alexandria, Virginia.In many ways, the Manafort case -- which reached back almost a decade to track the movement of money from his Ukrainian political consulting work, through the time he was broke and working for Trump in 2016 -- has shaped Mueller's actions for almost two years.Manafort's was the first indictment Mueller announced in late 2017 and it used the criminal prosecution to ratchet up pressure on him throughout 2018 as they sought his cooperation on matters central to their probe. At one point, after securing Manafort's longtime deputy Rick Gates as a witness against him, prosecutors split his case in two, putting the more clear-cut financial crimes indictment in the fast-moving Northern Virginia federal court. Manafort's conviction at trial was a major win for Mueller -- the only official certification from an impartial group of citizens that Mueller had uncovered major crime.The eight crimes for which Manafort will be sentenced on Thursday include five convictions of tax fraud from 2010 through 2014, hiding his foreign bank accounts from federal authorities in 2012 and defrauding two banks for more than million in loans intended for real estate. At his trial, one juror refused to join the other 11 to convict him on 10 additional foreign banking and bank fraud charges. Prosecutors later dropped those counts.Manafort did not testify in his own defense at his trial, which 2411

A judge ordered President Donald Trump to pay million to a collection of nonprofit organizations as part of a settlement with the New York state attorney general's office to resolve a civil lawsuit that alleged "persistent" violations of charities law that included unlawful coordination with the 2016 Trump presidential campaign, according to a court filing Thursday.Filed in June 2018, the lawsuit alleged that the President and his three eldest children -- Don Jr., Ivanka and Eric -- violated federal and state campaign finance laws and abused the Donald J. Trump Foundation's tax-exempt status. According to the lawsuit, the Trumps allowed the foundation to be used "as little more than a checkbook to serve Mr. Trump's business and political interests."The settlement comes in the wake of an agreement by the foundation in December to dissolve under judicial supervision.Attorneys for the charity had said that "all of the money raised by the Foundation went to charitable causes to assist those most in need," and accused the attorney general's office of political motivation, citing campaign trail comments made by Attorney General Letitia James, who took office in January.Trump himself had vowed to fight the lawsuit, 1243