中山混合痔好的医院(中山华都医院靠谱吗好吗) (今日更新中)

The future of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program got murkier Tuesday when the Texas attorney general made good on a threat to challenge it in court.The lawsuit throws a wrench in an already-complicated legal morass for the DACA program, which protects young undocumented immigrants who came to the US as children and which President Donald Trump has been blocked from ending, for the time being, by other federal courts.The lawsuit has the potential to create a headache for the Justice Department and courts as it could potentially conflict with rulings from judges in three separate judicial regions of the country who have blocked the end of DACA and could force the government to take an awkward position in the case.It may also potentially seal the issue's path to the Supreme Court.Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and six other states on Tuesday filed a lawsuit challenging the lawfulness of DACA, arguing that former President Barack Obama's initial creation of DACA in 2012 violated the Constitution and federal law.The case was also re-assigned late Tuesday to District Judge Andrew Hanen, the judge who initially issued the nationwide ruling preventing DACA from being expanded through a similar program in 2014. Hanen was seen as particularly unfriendly to DACA based on his ruling in the related case, and advocates feared a DACA challenge before him would likely be decided the same way. His ruling ended up remaining in place after a Supreme Court challenge deadlocked 4-4 while awaiting a new justice after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia.The move follows through on a threat from Paxton and what was originally nine other states to challenge DACA in court as part of a lawsuit regarding a similar but broader program that expanded upon DACA to include parents. Paxton issued an ultimatum to Trump: End DACA himself or defend it in court and face the prospect it is overturned by a judge that had already rejected the program's expansion in that other lawsuit.Under Paxton's threat, Trump and his administration decided to end the program in September, with a wind-down period ostensibly to allow Congress to act to save it legislatively. After the administration said they would rescind the program, Paxton backed off and allowed the other lawsuit to be dispensed with.But multiple lawsuits were filed challenging the way Trump ended the program -- resulting in multiple federal judges putting the brakes on the move and ordering the Department of Homeland Security to resume processing renewals for the roughly 700,000 participants in the program. A federal judge in DC last week went a step further, saying the department had to resume accepting new applications unless it issued a new legal justification for ending the program that passed muster within 90 days.The Trump administration had used the possibility of a court immediately terminating DACA in response to such a lawsuit from Paxton as the justification for ending the program altogether -- a justification the federal judge in DC found flimsy.Congress, meanwhile, has failed to reach consensus on how to preserve the program with legislation, and the court rulings preserving the program only served to further take the pressure off lawmakers.The states challenging DACA are Texas, Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, South Carolina and West Virginia.Tuesday's move leaves plenty of questions going forward -- including whether the Justice Department will defend DACA in court in Texas or allow another entity to argue in its favor. The ruling could also have implications for the DC case and whether the administration's legal reasoning gains credence.If the Texas court were to also issue a nationwide ruling in favor of the termination of DACA, it could set up dueling nationwide decisions that would likely end up at the nation's highest court."The first three courts have ruled in favor of DACA recipients," said Stephen Yale-Loehr, a Cornell Law School professor and attorney with Miller Mayer. "If this lawsuit goes the other way, the Supreme Court may have to decide the issue." 4126

The Food and Drug Administration on Wednesday authorized the first rapid coronavirus test that doesn’t need any special computer equipment to get results.The 15-minute test from Abbott Laboratories will sell for , giving it a competitive edge over similar tests that need to be popped into a small machine. The size of a credit card, the self-contained test is based on the same technology used to test for the flu, strep throat and other infections.It’s the latest cheaper, simpler test to hit the U.S. market, providing new options to expand testing as schools and businesses struggle to reopen and flu season approaches. The FDA also recently greenlighted a saliva test from Yale University that bypasses some of the supplies that have led to testing bottlenecks.Both tests have limitations and neither can be done at home. Several companies are developing rapid, at-home tests, but none have yet won approval. Abbott’s new test still requires a nasal swab by a health worker, like most older coronavirus tests. The Yale saliva test eliminates the need for a swab, but can only be run at high-grade laboratories.And in general, rapid tests like Abbott’s are less accurate than lab-developed tests. The FDA said in a statement announcing the decision that negative results with Abbott’s test may need to be confirmed with a lab test in some cases. The agency granted Abbott’s test an emergency use authorization late Wednesday for patients with suspected COVID-19.The two additions should help expand the number of available tests. The U.S. is now testing about 690,000 people per day, down from a peak of 850,000 daily tests late last month. Many public health experts believe the country will soon need to test vastly more people to find those who are infected, isolate them and contain the virus.The FDA noted that Abbott’s test could be used in a doctor’s office, emergency room or some schools. “Given the simple nature of this test, it is likely that these tests could be made broadly available,” the FDA said.Since the start of the pandemic, nasal swab tests that are sent to a lab have been the standard for COVID-19 screening. While considered highly accurate, the tests rely on expensive, specialized machines and chemicals. Shortages of those supplies have led to repeated delays in reporting results, especially during a spike in cases last month.Government and health experts view rapid tests that can be run outside the laboratory system as key to boosting capacity.“Those screening tests are what we need in schools, workplaces and nursing homes in order to catch asymptomatic spreaders,” said Dr. Jonathan Quick of the Rockefeller Foundation, in an interview earlier this month. The nonprofit group has called for the U.S. to conduct about 4 millions per day by October, mostly rapid, point-of-care tests.Abbott’s BinaxNOW is the fourth rapid test that detects COVID-19 antigens, proteins found on the surface of the coronavirus, rather than the virus itself. It’s considered a faster, though sometimes less precise, screening method. The other tests need to be inserted into a small machine.Inside the Abbott test is a specially coated strip that interacts with COVID-19 antigens. The patient’s nasal swab is inserted into the card and a few drops of a chemical solution are added. Markings appear on the card to indicate whether the sample is positive or negative — much like a pregnancy test.Two other makers of antigen tests — Quidel and Becton Dickinson have said they haven’t been able to meet demand for the tests. A third, LumiraDx, plans to begin shipping its recently approved antigen tests by the end of this month. Abbott expects to begin shipping tests in September, reaching 50 million tests a month in October.The influx of antigen tests will go a long way toward meeting the Trump administration’s projection that 90 million COVID-19 tests a month will be available by September if needed. But U.S. “testing czar” Adm. Brett Giroir has stressed that the U.S. can contain the outbreak with far fewer tests.“That’s the capacity ... we do not need that many tests to safely and sensibly reopen,” Giroir told reporters on a recent call. He pointed to several key indicators that have been falling, including new infections and hospitalizations, even as testing has slowed.Earlier this month, the FDA authorized Yale’s saliva-based test, which is expected to cut the time and cost compared with similar tests. It’s the fifth COVID-19 saliva tests OK’d by regulators. All require lab processing.Developed by Yale’s School of Public Health, SalivaDirect can use any sterile container to collect a sample, not the special tube needed with earlier tests, and requires less chemicals. Outside experts welcomed the new approach but noted its limitations.“It’s not a rapid test, it’s a laboratory-based test that will still be prone to the same massive delays as any other test,” said Dr. Michael Mina of Harvard University.___Follow Matthew Perrone on Twitter: @ AP_FDAwriter.___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. 5201

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention was simply trying to warn Americans about the dangers posed by ticks and the diseases they spread. Instead, they ended up unintentionally ruining some of their followers' appetites.Tick-borne illnesses are on the rise, so the CDC has been pushing Americans to check for ticks after spending time outdoors. On Friday, the agency reminded its followers just how small those the pests can be, tweeting two photos of a poppy seed muffin."Ticks can be the size of a poppy seed. Can you spot all 5 ticks in this photo?" the CDC tweeted.  591

The Detroit Lions have issued a statement in response to reports coach Matt Patricia was indicted on sex assault in a case that was ultimately dismissed.Court records for Cameron County, Texas show Patricia and Gregory Dietrich were indicted in August 1996 on sex assault charges.The case was dismissed in January 1997.The Lions have released the following statements from Matt Patricia and from Lions' owner Martha Firestone Ford, Bob Quinn and Rod Wood.Matt Patricia: 482

The Department of Homeland Security formally requested that the Pentagon extend the deployment of active-duty troops on the southern border Friday, potentially extending their deployment 45 days beyond the original deadline of December 15."Given the ongoing threat at our Southern border -- today the Department of Homeland Security submitted a request for assistance to the Department of Defense to extend its support through January 31, 2019," Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman Katie Waldman told CNN in a statement."This request refines support to ensure it remains aligned with the current situation, the nature of the mission, and (Customs and Border Protection) operational requirements," she added.The Pentagon confirmed receipt of the request but said Secretary of Defense James Mattis had yet to sign off on it:"We have received the Request for Assistance from the Department of Homeland Security, it is with the Secretary (of Defense) for consideration."There are currently some 5,600 troops at the border, divided among Texas, California and Arizona.President Donald Trump sent the troops after spending the weeks leading up to the midterm elections decrying a procession of migrants that was still thousands of miles from the US border. Last week, Trump granted the troops new powers to aid in "crowd control, temporary detention and cursory search" while protecting Customs and Border Protection personnel from the migrants, should they engage in violence.Defense officials have suggested that some of the troops, primarily engineers involved in enhancing infrastructure at points of entry, could be drawn down in the relative near term as those tasks are completed.Two officials tell CNN that the number of trumps assigned to the mission is likely to drop to 4,000 as a result.Other functions, including helicopter support to help move Customs and Border Protection personnel to different areas along the border, are likely to continue.The deployment's extension means the Pentagon's initial cost estimate of million for the border deployment is likely to increase as that estimate was based on the mission ending on December 15. 2175

来源：资阳报