昌吉男性下体不硬怎么回事啊昌吉正规人流一共下来要多少钱,昌吉那家医院做流产手术做的好,昌吉治妇科在那家好,昌吉没有来月经是怎么回事,昌吉同房几天可以验出怀孕,昌吉市佳美医院无痛引产好不好,昌吉好的妇科医院有那些

Smoke masks. Eye drops. No outdoor exercise. This is how Californians are trying to cope with wildfires choking the state, but experts say an increase in serious health problems may be almost inevitable for vulnerable residents as the disasters become more commonplace.Research suggests children, the elderly and those with existing health problems are most at risk.Short-term exposure to wildfire smoke can worsen existing asthma and lung disease, leading to emergency room treatment or hospitalization, studies have shown.Increases in doctor visits or hospital treatment for respiratory infections, bronchitis and pneumonia in otherwise healthy people also have been found during and after wildfires.RELATED: Missing-persons list tops 600 in Camp FireSome studies also have found increases in ER visits for heart attacks and strokes in people with existing heart disease on heavy smoke days during previous California wildfires, echoing research on potential risks from urban air pollution.For most healthy people, exposure to wildfire smoke is just an annoyance, causing burning eyes, scratchy throats or chest discomfort that all disappear when the smoke clears.But doctors, scientists and public health officials are concerned that the changing face of wildfires will pose a much broader health hazard."Wildfire season used to be June to late September. Now it seems to be happening all year round. We need to be adapting to that," Dr. Wayne Cascio, a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency cardiologist, said this week.In an overview published earlier this year, Cascio wrote that the increasing frequency of large wildland fires, urban expansion into wooded areas and an aging population are all increasing the number of people at risk for health problems from fires.Wood smoke contains some of the same toxic chemicals as urban air pollution, along with tiny particles of vapor and soot 30 times thinner than a human hair. These can infiltrate the bloodstream, potentially causing inflammation and blood vessel damage even in healthy people, research on urban air pollution has shown. Studies have linked heart attacks and cancer with long-term exposure to air pollution.Whether exposure to wildfire smoke carries the same risks is uncertain, and determining harm from smog versus wildfire smoke can be tricky, especially with wind-swept California wildfires spreading thick smoke hundreds of miles away into smoggy big cities."That is the big question," said Dr. John Balmes, a University of California, San Francisco, professor of medicine who studies air pollution."Very little is known about the long-term effects of wildfire smoke because it's hard to study populations years after a wildfire," Balmes said.Decreased lung function has been found in healthy firefighters during fire season. They tend to recover but federal legislation signed this year will establish a U.S. registry tracking firefighters and potential risks for various cancers, including lung cancer. Some previous studies suggested a risk.Balmes noted that increased lung cancer rates have been found in women in developing countries who spend every day cooking over wood fires.That kind of extreme exposure doesn't typically happen with wildfires, but experts worry about the kinds of health damage that may emerge for firefighters and residents with these blazes occurring so often.Whether that includes more cancer is unknown. "We're concerned about that," Balmes said.Regular folks breathing in all that smoke worry about the risks too.Smoke from the fire that decimated the Northern California city of Paradise darkened skies this week in San Francisco, nearly 200 miles southwest, and the air smelled "like you were camping," said Michael Northover, a contractor.He and his 14-year-old son have first-time sinus infections that Northover blames on the smoke."We're all kind of feeling it," Northover said.The smoke was so thick in San Francisco, the skyline was barely visible from across the Bay. The city's iconic open-air cable cars that are popular with tourists were pulled off the streets Thursday because of the bad air.An Environmental Protection Agency website said air quality in Sacramento was "hazardous" Thursday and San Francisco's was "very unhealthy." Many people walking around the cities wore face masks.Most schools in San Francisco, Sacramento, Oakland and Folsom said they would be closed Friday. At least six universities in Northern California canceled classes Thursday.At Chico State University, 11 miles (18 kilometers) from Paradise, ash fell this week and classes were canceled until after Thanksgiving."It's kind of freaky to see your whole town wearing air masks and trying to get out of smoke," said freshman Mason West, 18. "You can see the particles. Obviously, it's probably not good to be breathing that stuff in."West returned home this week to Santa Rosa, hard hit by last year's wine country fires, only to find it shrouded in smoke from the Paradise fire 100 miles (160 kilometers) away. West's family had to evacuate last year for a week, but their home was spared."It's as bad here as it was in Chico," West said. "It almost feels like you just can't get away from it."Smoke has been so thick in Santa Rosa that researchers postponed a door-to-door survey there for a study of health effects of last year's fire."We didn't feel we could justify our volunteer interns going knocking on doors when all the air quality alerts were saying stay indoors," said Irva Hertz-Picciotto, a public health researcher at the University of California, Davis. The study includes an online survey of households affected by last year's fire, with responses from about 6,000 people so far.Preliminary data show widespread respiratory problems, eye irritations, anxiety, depression and sleep problems around the time of the fire and months later."Conventional thinking is that these effects related to fires are transient. It's not entirely clear that's the case," Hertz-Picciotto said.Researchers also will be analyzing cord blood and placentas collected from a few dozen women who were pregnant during the fire, seeking evidence of stress markers or exposure to smoke chemicals.They hope to continue the study for years, seeking evidence of long-term physical and emotional harms to fire evacuees and their children.Other studies have linked emotional stress in pregnant women to developmental problems in their children and "this was quite a stress," Hertz-Picciotto said.It's a kind of stress that many people need to prepare for as the climate warms and wildfires proliferate, she said."Any of us could wake up tomorrow and lose everything we own," she said. "It's pretty scary."___Follow AP Medical Writer Lindsey Tanner at https://twitter.com/LindseyTanner . Her work can be found here .___The Associated Press Health & Science Department receives supportfrom the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content. 7036

She's a policy adviser bearing sensitive new details on sanctions to the South Koreans. She's a loyal family member who won't entertain questions about her father's purported infidelities. And she's a US figurehead bearing goodwill at an international sporting event.But inside the White House, Ivanka Trump's unique stature -- along with that of her husband, Jared Kushner -- is causing tension. Some of their colleagues chafe at the pair's favorable standing, and the boss, chief of staff John Kelly, has worked to instill a military-style hierarchy to the West Wing.Just as Kushner's struggles to obtain a permanent security clearance have highlighted his unusual position in the administration, Ivanka Trump's visit this week to South Korea -- her highest-profile solo trip yet -- underscored the unavoidable conflict she juggles. Not since she temporarily filled her father's seat at the G20 summit last year in Germany -- stirring external criticism -- has she taken such a high-profile assignment.  1018

Special counsel Robert Mueller's team could reveal tantalizing new details in its investigation into possible Russian collusion on Friday thanks to a pair of court filing deadlines involving President Donald Trump's former campaign chairman Paul Manafort and former lawyer Michael Cohen.Mueller's office has a Friday deadline to explain to the court why it accused Manafort of lying to investigators and breaking his cooperation deal. Separately, the special counsel's office and federal prosecutors in New York have to provide memos to recommend a sentence for Cohen -- filings that are expected to detail how he has cooperated in multiple investigations.The memos from Mueller come the same week that the special counsel's office said in court Tuesday that former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn provided "substantial assistance" to the special counsel's office and should not receive jail time.In addition, former FBI Director James Comey is testifying behind closed doors on Friday before the House Judiciary and Oversight committees for a Republican-led probe into the origins of the FBI's Russia investigation. Also Friday, George Papadopoulos -- the first person to plead guilty in the Mueller probe -- is being released from prison after serving a two-week sentence.It all adds up to one of the busiest weeks in the 19-month Mueller investigation -- and potentially one of the most revealing.  1428

Six White House officials have violated the Hatch Act, according to a letter from the Office of the Special Counsel to Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington Executive Director Noah Bookbinder.The six officials are White House principal deputy press secretary Raj Shah, White House deputy director of communications Jessica Ditto, executive assistant to the President Madeleine Westerhout, former special assistant to the President and director of media affairs Helen Aguirre Ferré, press secretary for the Vice President Alyssa Farah and Office of Management and Budget deputy communications Director Jacob Wood.The Hatch Act limits certain political activities of federal employees in an attempt to prevent the federal government from affecting elections or operating in a partisan manner. This includes sending partisan messages from social media accounts used for official government business.All six violated the Hatch Act by using their Twitter accounts, which they use for official purposes, to tweet messages considered partisan by OSC. Four of the six tweeted messages that included "#MAGA" or the slogan "Make America Great Again!" Shah tweeted a message from his account citing research from the Republican National Committee. Ditto retweeted Shah's message with RNC research.OSC found that these messages violated the Hatch Act because they use the political slogan of a current candidate, President Donald Trump, who has announced that he will be running for re-election in 2020. Tweeting those slogans from an account used for official purposes as a federal employee is considered political activity, the letter states. In Shah's and Ditto's cases, they highlighted research conducted by a political party, which OSC considered engaging in prohibited political activity.OSC issued warning letters to all six officials and warned that further engagement in behavior considered to be "prohibited political activity while employed in a position covered by the Hatch Act" will be considered "a willful and knowing violation of the law, which could result in further action," the letter states.OSC does not comment on open or closed Hatch Act investigations but confirmed to CNN that the letter to Bookbinder was authentic. CREW, the organization Bookbinder runs, submitted Hatch Act complaints to OSC about 10 White House officials that were addressed in the letter. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment from CNN.The Office of the Special Counsel enforces the Hatch Act. The act, however, is a guideline, so violations are not considered crimes. Punishment can range from a simple reprimand to the loss of a job.But OSC has little power to discipline senior White House appointees. If a senior White House official appointed by the President is found in violation of the Hatch Act, and OSC determines disciplinary action is required, "OSC can only send a report to the President alerting him of the violation," said Zachary Kurz, communications director for the Office of the Special Counsel. "It is up to him to impose any discipline."Nine Trump administration officials have been cited for violating the Hatch Act as a result of complaints from Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington , including Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley, deputy assistant to the President and communications Director for the Office of the First Lady Stephanie Grisham and White House director of social media Dan Scavino, according to a news release from the organization. 3539

Somebody call the manager — according to New York Times/Siena College polling, Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden has the "Karen" vote locked down.On Monday, The New York Times released data from two months of polling that showed how respondents planned to vote, which they made sortable by common first names — and according to polling, women named Karen planned to vote for Biden by a 60% to 40% margin.The support for Biden among women named Karen represented the largest split of any of the top 10 male and female names recorded by The Times. Men named Richard represented the biggest advantage in the top 10 lists for President Donald Trump, as they supported the President 64% to 36%.Interestingly, men named "Donald" were much more likely to support Trump by a wide margin — 68% to 19% — while men named "Joseph" were evenly split between the candidates at 45%.The names also seem to represent the candidates splits among genders — on Sunday, Don Levy, the Director of the Siena College Research Institute, said that Trump leads by eight points among men, while Biden leads by 18 points among women."Karen" is the nickname most often given to white women — particularly those who are the subject of viral videos — who respond to issues of race in problematic ways.Though the "Karen" meme has murky origins, the term exploded into the mainstream lexicon in 2020 after several videos featuring white women confronting people of color went viral. Among them was a video of a white woman who called police on a Black birdwatcher who had asked the women to leash her dog in New York's Central Park, and a California CEO who accosted a man who had stenciled the words "Black Lives Matter" on a home he was renting.In San Francisco, a law proposed this year called the CAREN Act would make it illegal to make racially prejudiced 911 calls within the city limits.The Times conducted its poll with more than 17,000 likely voters, and its list only included names with more than 30 respondents.Click here to see the New York Times' entire name database. 2065