济南强直样发作济南强直脊柱炎要注意,济南强直36岁,济南强直性脊椎炎的按摩,山东强直性脊柱炎遗传检查,北京强直患者怎么运动,济南强直性脊柱炎血液检测,济南强制性脊柱炎对性生活有影响吗

It was supposed to be a raucous, week-long, open floor debate on immigration -- the President's signature issue and such a contentious topic that Democrats shut the government down over it just a month ago.Instead, it was the incredible shrinking immigration debate, which lasted roughly one hour on the floor and ended without a single amendment passing to protect DACA recipients or send a cent of funding for President Donald Trump's border wall."I'm ready to move on," said Louisiana Republican Sen. John Kennedy. "We wasted a whole week here. And I'm ready to move on. There are other issues in front of us."Fingers were pointed in all directions as members retreated from the floor, defeated, frustrated and downright mad that after weeks of negotiations, the best chance they had to broker a deal ended without any resolution for a population everyone agreed they had wanted to help.A group of bipartisan lawmakers -- the same group responsible for helping end a government shutdown weeks before -- fumed at the White House's treatment of their proposal, which they argued could have inched toward passage, had the White House stayed on the sidelines rather than actively lobbied against them.On the floor of the Senate, Sen. Susan Collins, a moderate Republican from Maine, was frustrated that the amendment her group had brokered without Sen. Chuck Schumer, the Democratic leader, was being referred to as the Schumer amendment. The name undermined the entire point of her group's efforts: that it had been reached by the middle, not by party leaders. Collins could be heard telling colleagues that the move was "so wrong."Sen. Mike Rounds, a Republican from South Dakota, acknowledged "there were a few games being played.""You don't forget 'em, but you just roll with them," Rounds said.Just hours after senators had reached an agreement on a plan that provided a path to citizenship for DACA recipients in exchange for billion in border security, the administration began their effort to undermine the amendment. President Donald Trump issued a veto threat. And in a briefing call with reporters Thursday, two administration officials, one of them a White House official, called the bill "outrageous" and "irresponsible," and argued it would "put many innocent lives at risk.""The bill is so spectacularly poorly drafted, I mean unless you imagine it was drafted for the purpose of gutting immigration enforcement," the White House official said, before the officials criticized Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, who fought back."I could care less about what an anonymous White House official says. I'm looking for leadership from the White House, not demagoguery," Graham told reporters.Sen. Chris Coons, a Democrat from Delaware, said he blamed the White House "a great deal.""It is striking to me that the White House and the Department of Homeland security actively and aggressively campaigned against the McCain-Coons bill and the bipartisan Rounds-King bill and yet both of those bills got more votes significantly then the White House- initiated Grassley bill," Coons said.Sen. Lisa Murkowski, a Republican from Alaska, lamented that the White House had missed an opportunity."I fear that you've got some within the White House that have not yet figured out that legislation almost by its very definition is a compromise product and compromise doesn't mean getting four Republicans together and figuring out what it is that those four agree on, it is broader," she said.GOP efforts to kill amendment 3535

It has been 11 years since the federal minimum wage has increased, and Congress is weighing if now is the time to give minimum wage employees a raise.One economist cautions that now might not be the best time.“The big problem then is if you fundamentally raise the cost of their labor by raising the federal minimum wage in states where that will have an impact, then you’re further increasing the businesses’ cost,” said Ryan Bourne, economist from the Kato Institute. “Which is likely to make more businesses fail and actually result in fewer jobs being available for low-wage workers.”According to the Cato Institute, 29 states and the District of Columbia have minimum wages that are above the federal minimum of .25.“This seems to be a particularly bad time to raise the cost of hiring people by having a higher hourly wage rate,” Bourne said. “It might deter some of the adjustment we need to live with this virus.”But fellow economist Ben Zipperer of the Economic Policy Institute disagrees with Bourne’s assessment.“That kind of concern has always been raised when we’re talking about the minimum wage, and it doesn’t seem to actually play out in reality,” Zipperer said.Zipperer argues that raising the minimum wage could boost economic activity. He added that a minimum wage hike, while not a panacea, would put the economy in the right direction.“Giving people more money to have more money to spend, that’s probably one of the most effective policies to have during a kind of depression,” he said. 1519

Instant soup -- often sold as "ramen" in the United States -- is cheap, tasty and wildly popular among hungry college students. But new research suggests that the products may put young children at risk.The soups cause about one in five childhood scald burns, according to research to be presented Monday at the American Academy of Pediatrics National Conference. Those findings have led some experts to question the safety of the meals, which often come in microwavable cups."It's important for us to remember, and for parents to remember, that these are just thin containers with boiling water in them," said Dr. Courtney Allen, a pediatric emergency fellow at Emory University who led the research."I think there's an assumption that these are safer than soups coming out of a stove," she said, "when, in fact, they're not." 835

Interior Department Secretary Ryan Zinke signed an order Friday morning aiming to expand access for hunters and fishers to public lands and monuments.In what is being described as an "expansive" secretarial order, Zinke's rule would ultimately allow broader access across the board to hunters and fishers on public lands managed by the Interior Department, according to the order.A section of the order also amends the national monument management plan to include or expand hunting and fishing opportunities to the "extent practicable under the law."The order cites a 2007 executive order from President George W. Bush to "facilitate the expansion and enhancement of hunting opportunities and the management of game species and their habitat." It directs agencies to to create a report and plan to streamline how best to enhance and expand access to hunting and fishing on public lands.The Interior Department oversees national parks, wildlife refuges and other federal lands.The secretarial order also aims to expand educational outreach for hunting and fishing to "under served" communities such as minorities and veterans as well as increase volunteer access to federal lands."Today's secretarial order is the latest example of how the Trump administration is actively moving to support hunting and other forms of outdoor recreation on public lands," Zinke said in a statement."Hunting and fishing is a cornerstone of the American tradition and hunters and fishers of America are the backbone of land and wildlife conservation," he said.Interior said Obama administration policies were too restrictive."Through management plans made under the previous administration, which did not appreciate access to hunting and target shooting like this administration does, access and usage has been restricted," said Interior spokeswoman Heather Swift.Zinke's rule will not have to go through a formal rule-making process.It is the second major action from Interior in the last few weeks.In August, Zinke recommended shrinking the boundaries of a handful of national monuments, but stopped short of suggesting the elimination of any federal designations following a review ordered by President Donald Trump.At Trump's direction, Zinke earlier this year launched a review of 27 national monuments, a controversial move that could undo protections for millions of acres of federal lands, as well as limits on oil and gas or other energy production. Interior and the White House have so far resisted releasing the contents of Zinke's full recommendations. 2552

In hospitals, one bacterial species is becoming increasingly tolerant to the alcohols used in hand sanitizers, according to research published Wednesday in the journal Science Translational Medicine.Globally, hospitals use isopropyl or ethyl alcohol-based disinfectants, such as hand rubs, to prevent patients from becoming sick from many germs. These are the same active ingredients found in hand sanitizers available for personal use and at schools -- but that doesn't mean people should give up on them.The bacterium Enterococcus faecium resides in our guts, but if encountered in a hospital, it can cause various complicated infections affecting the abdomen, skin, urinary tract and blood. This particular bug is a member of the Enterococci family, which ranks as the fourth and fifth leading cause of sepsis, a life-threatening bloodstream infection, in North America and Europe, respectively.Many hospital-acquired infections have decreased or been kept in check by Australia's strict hygiene practices that rely on alcohol-based hand sanitizers. Yet drug-resistant E. faecium infections have increased in Australian hospitals over time, according to the study authors.This alarming pattern prompted them to investigate whether E. faecium might be developing resistance to the alcohols used in hand rubs. 1343