中山华都肠医院在哪中山看脱肛的费用是多少,中山经常拉稀是怎么回事,中山华都医院收费好吗,中山肛裂医院挂号,中山痔疮的治疗方法及预防,中山痔疮是什么原因,中山痔疮怎么治疗费用

House Democrats held a heated debate Tuesday over a push to impose term limits?on some of their leaders, ultimately deciding to table the discussion until incoming freshmen members can take part in the conversation next month."There's some strong feelings in the room, but we're not going to deal with it today," Rep. Debbie Dingell of Michigan said while leaving the caucus meeting.House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California, as she seeks to shore up support for her speaker bid, is in active conversations with Rep. Ed Perlmutter of Colorado, a leader of the small group of Democrats attempting to block her from the speakership because they want to see new leaders at the top.Perlmutter and his allies are pushing for Pelosi to back a proposal for term limits on senior Democratic leadership positions. While the talks at one point also included term limits for lower-level leadership roles and committee chairs, sources close to the discussion say the conversation has narrowed to a focus on the top three leadership positions.Broadly, the idea of term limits is a contentious topic among Democrats, where a divide exists between those eager to see a new generation of leaders and those who say seniority and experience matter.Incoming House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland, who's been in Congress for three decades and served as majority leader when Democrats last held power, passionately decried the idea of term limits on Tuesday.Hoyer said six times that he doesn't support term limits and noted he had repeatedly cosponsored legislation in the past that called for repealing term limits for the presidency."I'm against term limits, because I have a term limit. It's a two-year term limit," Hoyer told reporters. "Every year the citizens that I represent and the members in this House have to re-up my contract."Asked how he feels about Pelosi entertaining the idea of term limits in her negotiations, Hoyer was frank."She's not negotiating for me," he said.Multiple Democrats said the debate in the caucus meeting Tuesday was a broad discussion over the idea of term limits in general, rather than any specific proposal with positions and a set number of terms in mind.Emerging from the meeting, many members expressed some openness to the idea but wanted to see a concrete proposal first."I don't think it's a bad idea. I don't see any downside," said Rep. Bill Pascrell, a New Jersey Democrat. "It keeps people looking forward. I tend to support it right now.""My conceptual thought on this, I think the American people hired us to be the majority in part to bring some change to Congress," said Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, an Illinois Democrat. "And therefore we have to figure out how we can put more people in positions of responsibility so they can gain skills to assume leadership in the future."Pelosi, Hoyer and Rep. James Clyburn of South Carolina have been the top three House Democrats for more than a decade, and the trio was recently nominated by the caucus to maintain their positions in the next Congress -- despite some opposition in the party to their long-running places at the top.If Pelosi ultimately supports some sort of term limit, it's unclear how many votes she would win among her detractors, but it could potentially help her get close to or over the 218-vote threshold she needs to win the speakership on the floor.Pelosi, who explored the idea of term limits for committee chairs in 2015, told reporters last week she was "sympathetic" to the concerns of those who'd like to see limits but said it was a matter to be debated by the caucus.Even if Pelosi supports a proposal, it would need to be voted on by the entire caucus, which is already divided on the broader idea of term limits.Some of that opposition can be seen in the Congressional Black Caucus."The CBC has had, it's no secret, a long history of supporting seniority," said Rep. Joyce Beatty of Ohio, who recently elected vice chairwoman of the caucus. "Let's not change the rules when you have women who have finally gotten there, when you have African-Americans -- and why do we make a big deal at this point in time in history that we want to change the rules?"Noting the concerns voiced in Tuesday's meeting, Beatty said she felt confident that "Pelosi will work in the best interest of the entire caucus and not just a minority of the caucus."Rep. Cedric Richmond of Louisiana, chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, said he's against all term limits, describing the idea as "a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.""She's talking to those guys, but that doesn't mean the caucus has to vote for it," Richmond said, referring to Perlmutter and his allies. "And I think that all she's committing is that she'll support it or something, so we'll see what happens. But at some point those guys got to put all this silliness to bed so we can start governing."While term limits is an idea that could potentially get some Pelosi opponents on board for her speaker bid, others say they won't be deterred from seeking a change at the top.Rep. Kurt Schrader, an Oregon Democrat who's an outspoken critic of Pelosi, said term limits wouldn't be enough to tamp down his quest to see her go."I don't see it happening, frankly," he said of the term limits idea. "Blowback has been significant, as you might imagine. I'm anticipating that we still have the votes to stop her from becoming speaker." 5439

I wrote my dog an obituary because of course I did. He was the best boy. pic.twitter.com/FKmqeivtq9— Sallie Hammett (@SallieGHammett) September 22, 2020 160

How accurate are the coronavirus tests used in the U.S.?Months into the outbreak, no one really knows how well many of the screening tests work, and experts at top medical centers say it is time to do the studies to find out.When the new virus began spreading, the Food and Drug Administration used its emergency powers to OK scores of quickly devised tests, based mainly on a small number of lab studies showing they could successfully detect the virus.That’s very different from the large patient studies that can take weeks or months, which experts say are needed to provide a true sense of testing accuracy.The FDA’s speedy response came after it was initially criticized for delaying the launch of new tests during a crisis and after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention stumbled in getting its own test out to states.But with the U.S. outbreak nearly certain to stretch on for months or even years, some experts want the FDA to demand better evidence of the tests’ accuracy so doctors know how many infections might be missed.There have been more than 2 million confirmed coronavirus cases in the U.S. and more than 115,000 deaths, according to data compiled by Johns Hopkins University. Cases in nearly half of U.S. states are rising.In recent weeks, preliminary findings have flagged potential problems with some COVID-19 tests, including one used daily at the White House. Faulty tests could leave many thousands of Americans with the incorrect assumption that they are virus-free, contributing to new flare-ups of the disease as communities reopen.“In the beginning, the FDA was under a lot of pressure to get these tests onto the marketplace,” said Dr. Steven Woloshin of Dartmouth College, who wrote about the issue in the New England Journal of Medicine last week. “But now that there are plenty of tests out there, it’s time for them to raise the bar.”The FDA said in a statement that it has already asked multiple test makers to do follow-up accuracy studies, although it didn’t say for how many of the more than 110 authorized screening tests. The agency also said it is tracking reports of problems. Accuracy has also been an issue with blood tests that look for signs of past infections.No screening test is 100% accurate. So details on accuracy are routinely provided for tests of all types, including seasonal flu, hepatitis, HIV and cancers. For example, rapid flu tests are known to miss 20% or more of all cases, a factor doctors weigh when treating patients who have symptoms but test negative.For now, most COVID-19 tests in the U.S. don’t give data on real-world performance, including how often the tests falsely clear patients of infection or falsely detect the virus. That information is lacking for all but a few of the roughly 80 commercial screening tests available, according to an Associated Press review.The government’s emergency authorization process “requires a lower level of evidence,” the agency said. Makers need only show that a test “may be effective” instead of the usual requirement to demonstrate “safety and effectiveness.” They would have to meet that higher threshold once the U.S. government declares the emergency over.Many of the commercial test makers submitted results from 60 samples, the minimum number required and mostly used lab-produced specimens of the virus. The FDA now recommends the use of nasal swabs or other real samples from people screened for coronavirus.Experts say larger patient studies patients are needed to assess a test’s true performance.Lab testing bears little resemblance to actual — sometimes imperfect — conditions at hospitals, clinics and testing sites noted Dr. Robert Kaplan of Stanford University.“You’re testing people in parking lots, the patients themselves are extremely anxious and often unable to follow instructions,” said Kaplan, a former associate director of the National Institutes of Health.Kaplan and others say those differences could explain why some tests are not performing as expected.Last month, the FDA warned doctors of a potential accuracy problem with Abbott Laboratories’ rapid ID Now test, which delivers results in roughly 15 minutes. The test has been lauded by President Donald Trump and used to screen the president, his staff and visitors to the White House.The FDA alert followed a preliminary report by New York University that found Abbott’s test missed between a third to one-half of infections caught by a rival test in patients screened for the virus.Abbott rejected the findings, saying the researchers did not follow the instructions for using its test. The company pointed to alternate patient studies, including its own, that have found the test successfully detects between 91% and 95% or more of virus cases when compared to other tests.But similar problems with ID NOW’s accuracy have been flagged in preliminary reports by researchers at Stanford University, Loyola University and the Cleveland Clinic.For now, the FDA is requiring Abbott to conduct follow-up studies in several different patient groups.The FDA’s emergency standards “are still high but there is a significant difference in the body of work that what would go into a submission under the normal process,” said Abbott vice president John Hackett. “Our normal process takes years to bring these out.”Requiring bigger studies of all coronavirus tests could provide valuable information, but it could also strain the FDA’s already stretched staff and resources, said Dr. Daniel Schultz, former director of the FDA’s medical device center.Dr. Colin West of the Mayo Clinic worries doctors and patients have put too much confidence in the current crop of tests, when an unknown number of patients with COVID-19 are likely receiving false negative results.Even a modest error rate can have grave consequences during an outbreak like COVID-19. West gives the example of a test that is 95% accurate at detecting the virus and is used on 1 million people. That would still result in 50,000 people being incorrectly told that they don’t have the virus.“The negative test does not mean that I’m off the hook,” West said. “We just need to maintain that level of vigilance until we have a better sense of how good these tests really can be.”___Follow Matthew Perrone on Twitter: @AP_FDAwriter.___Follow AP pandemic coverage at http://apnews.com/VirusOutbreak and https://apnews.com/UnderstandingtheOutbreak.___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. 6604

I keep telling you, it's #HotVampireSummer. This just proves my point. Congratulations to Stephenie Meyer and Midnight Sun! pic.twitter.com/txNf0ipnm6— NOVL ?? (@TheNovl) August 13, 2020 194

IMPERIAL BEACH, Calif. (KGTV) -- The city of Imperial Beach voted to create a committee to take a look at their contract with the San Diego County Sheriff’s Department and the department’s use of force policies. During a city council meeting Wednesday night, the council also passed a Black Lives Matter proclamation.The committee will be tasked with looking to see if there are any necessary changes that should or could potentially be made when it comes to spending, looking at the possibility of redirecting funds to other community services. The council agreed that this committee should also make sure the sheriff’s department can still ensure public safety.The vote also came with the condition that the city will hire a consultant to advise them and help with the review.The council agreed to come back with their findings and any recommended changes in 90 days. 877