中山上大号屁股出血是咋回事中山突然便血的原因,中山痔疮早期怎么治疗,中山肛旁脓肿中医治疗,中山外痔手术最好的医院,中山肛瘘手术哪里做?,中山痔疮 初期,中山便秘原因

The video streaming service Netflix has been indicted by a grand jury in Texas over the film “Cuties,” alleging the company used “lewd” images."Cuties" is a French film that follows the story of an 11-year-old Senegalese immigrant in France who rebels against her family's Muslim traditions and joins a free-spirited dance crew.The film, directed by Ma?mouna Doucouré and originally called “Mignonnes”, won a directing award at Sundance Film Festival earlier this year.A Tyler County, Texas grand jury moved to return an indictment against Netflix last month, according to multiple media reports.The complaint alleges Netflix knowingly promoted visual material which “depicts the lewd exhibition of the genitals or public area of a clothed or partially clothed child who was younger than 18 years of age at the time the visual material was created, which appeals to the prurient interest in sex, and has no serious, literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.”In response, Netflix stated “‘Cuties’ is a social commentary against the sexualization of young children,” according to a statement in Deadline. “This charge is without merit and we stand by the film.”Netflix was reportedly served a summons October 1.Earlier this summer Netflix was forced to apologize for what they called “inappropriate art work” used to promote the movie on their service.The main image Netflix originally used shows the four lead actresses, all girls, wearing black and turquoise dance outfits revealing their stomachs and most of their legs, while posed mid-dance.The images used in France for the film show the girls walking down the street holding shopping bags.The film is recommended for 16+, according to Netflix. The image and description for the film have been updated in Netflix.The poster sparked outrage online, and with some comparing the poster to pedophilia. In the days following the release of the artwork, thousands had signed a Change.org petition calling for the film to be removed from Netflix. The film is now available on the service.Doucouré said the film is based in part on her own childhood experiences, and those of girls growing up today.“This is most of all an uncompromising portrait of an 11-year-old girl plunged in a world that imposes a series of dictates on her.” She said in an interview with Cineuropa.She continued that it is important to not judge these girls, but to understand them, listen to them and give them a voice. 2458

The travel industry is still reeling from the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic as millions of people have lost their travel-related jobs. Now, Congress is debating a bill that would provide thousands of dollars in travel tax credits to families."This could be used for airfare, for hotel stays, for meals and attractions within a certain distance away from home, let's say." says Tori Emerson Barnes with the U.S. Travel Association.Modeled after the homebuyer tax credit that was created in the recession of 2008, Barnes says, if passed, this financial incentive would be crucial toward putting the travel industry and the millions of people it employs back to work."Post 9/11, it took about 18 months for the travel industry to come back. From an economic standpoint, this is nine times worse than 9/11, so really what we have to do is get people moving again to get the economy back," says Barnes.The travel tax credit would pay back families 50% of their travel expenses up to ,000. The refund would be for travel expenses made between the time of the bill's enactment and the end of 2021."We know that we need to get people traveling again in a health and safe way so we think that establishing an individual travel tax credit that can help motivate folks and push them a little bit into the market will go a long way. We’ve been working with members of Congress on both sides of the aisle and administration," says Barnes.Chris Gahl of Visit Indy says the travel tax credit would be huge for businesses in Indianapolis."The tourism eco-system is made up of lots of different businesses. Most consumers would think of hotels, airlines, museums, restaurants and bars. But there are also companies that clean linens for the hotels, flower companies," says Gahl.As for easing travelers concerns amid COVID-19, Gahl says, "From Indiana’s perspective, from the capital of Indianapolis, we have taken great strides in putting people first and foremost and the health of our residents and subsequently our visitors.""We all believe that there needs to be appropriate sanitation, there needs to be appropriate barriers in place and we support the use of masks. You know, we think a phased and layered approach is critical to the health and safety of the American public but we don’t think you have to pick between the public health or the economic health of the country," says Barnes.In the Indianapolis area, Visit Indy says more than 83,000 people rely on tourism for their jobs."This goes well beyond the glossiness of hotels and restaurants and wanting a getaway. There's real people, real Americans who are working and depending on tourism for a paycheck," says Gahl.The US Travel Association hopes Congress votes on the bill by early August. 2754

The top U.S. public health agency stirred confusion by posting — and then taking down — an apparent change in its position on how easily the coronavirus can spread from person to person through the air.But officials at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention say their position has not really changed and that the post last week on the agency’s website was an error that has been taken down.It was “an honest mistake” that happened when a draft update was posted before going through a full editing and approval process, said Dr. Jay Butler, the CDC’s deputy director for infectious diseases.The post suggested that the agency believes the virus can hang in the air and spread over an extended distance. But the agency continues to believe larger and heavier droplets that come from coughing or sneezing are the primary means of transmission, Butler said.Most CDC guidance about social distancing is built around that idea, saying that about 6 feet is a safe buffer between people who are not wearing masks.In interviews, CDC officials have acknowledged growing evidence that the virus can sometimes be transmitted on even smaller, aerosolized particles or droplets that spread over a wider area. Certain case clusters have been tied to events in which the virus appeared to have spread through the air in, for example, a choir practice. But such incidents did not appear to be common.Public health experts urge people to wear masks, which can stop or reduce contact with both larger droplets and aerosolized particles.But for months, agency officials said little about aerosolized particles. So when the CDC quietly posted an update Friday that discussed the particles in more detail, the agency’s position appeared to have changed. The post said the virus can remain suspended in the air and drift more than 6 feet. It also emphasized the importance of indoor ventilation and seemed to describe the coronavirus as the kind of germ that can spread widely through the air.The post caused widespread discussion in public health circles because of its implications. It could mean, for example, that hospitals might have to place infected people in rooms that are specially designed to prevent air from flowing to other parts of the hospital.But the CDC is not advising any changes in how far people stay away from each other, how they are housed at hospitals or other measures, Butler said.The CDC has come under attack for past revisions of guidance during the pandemic, some of which were driven by political pressure by the Trump administration.Butler said there was no external political pressure behind the change in this instance. “This was an internal issue,. And we’re working hard to address it and make sure it doesn’t happen again,” he said.In a statement released Monday, the CDC said the revisions to the “How COVID-19 Spreads” page happened “without appropriate in-house technical review.”“We are reviewing our process and tightening criteria for review of all guidance and updates before they are posted to the CDC website,” the statement said.At least one expert said the episode could further chip away at public confidence in the CDC.“The consistent inconsistency in this administration’s guidance on COVID-19 has severely compromised the nation’s trust in our public health agencies,” said Dr. Howard Koh, a Harvard University public health professor who was a high-ranking official in the Department of Health and Human Services during the Obama administration.“To rectify the latest challenge, the CDC must acknowledge that growing scientific evidence indicates the importance of airborne transmission through aerosols, making mask wearing even more critical as we head into the difficult fall and winter season,” Koh said in a statement.___The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content. 3964

The student-athletes have been working too hard for their season to be cancelled. #WeWantToPlay https://t.co/lI3CCKZ4ID— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 10, 2020 179

The United States Supreme Court is expected to rule on several major cases next week impacting everything from abortion rights to the presidential election. Traditionally, the court issues all of it's rulings by the end of June to go on recess by early July. It's unclear this year however if the Supreme Court will extend its rulings if they are behind because of the pandemic. The Supreme Court said in advance what days justices will issue opinions, but would not announce which specific opinions will be announced on those days. Rulings typically come down around 10 a.m. ET.EXPECTED CASE #1 SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE CHANGES?In Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, the ruling could allow students in religious schools the ability to seek private scholarships funded through state income-tax credits. For years such programs were thought to be incompatible with Montana's constitutional ban on public aid to religious schools, however the Supreme Court could allow the program to exist. Because similar bans exist in 38 states, the ruling could change the definition of the separation of church and state. EXPECTED CASE #2CHANGE TO ABORTION RIGHTS?In June Medical Services LLC v. Russo, the ruling could impact the future of abortion rights across the country. The ruling examines whether a Louisiana law, which requires abortion providers to have admitting privileges in nearby hospitals, is constitutional. Abortion-rights activists say it will lead to clinics being shut down because most providers don't work with hospitals. More importantly, the ruling could tell anti-abortion leaders across the country that the High Court may be open to changes to Roe v Wade in the future. EXPECTED CASE #3ELECTORAL COLLEGE CONFUSION?In Colorado Department of State v. Baca, the ruling could result in major confusion in the 2020 election. The case is out of Colorado where in 2016, state electors to the electoral college attempted to vote for someone other than the winner of Colorado, Hillary Clinton. The electors were removed and replaced with someone to deliver the actual result, however it raised questions over how much power do these electors really have. EXPECTED CASE #4PRESIDENT TRUMP TAX RETURNS?In Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP and Trump v. Deutsche Bank, the question is whether the president has to comply with subpoenas for personal records. Does the power of the presidency allow President Donald Trump to say "no" when it comes to revealing his tax returns? If the Supreme Court rules against President Trump, it could create a new controversy for the President ahead of the election. 2615