中山痔疮都有啥症状(中山痔疮大便时疼吗) (今日更新中)

SAN DIEGO (KGTV) - Students spent Friday gathering their belongings and saying goodbye to their peers at the Art Institute of San Diego.The school's operator, the for-profit Argosy University, shut down the campus after court documents alleged it misused millions of dollars in federal funds. The move left many students angry and wondering what's next. "I feel so empty," said Marjan Razavi, about six months from graduating and ,000 in debt. "I lose my job and my education at the same time."The Institute's closure is the latest for-profit run school to abruptly shut down in San Diego. In 2018, Brightwood College closed its doors. In 2016, the giant I.T.T. Technical Institute shuttered. Derek Abbey runs the Veterans Center at San Diego State University, a population he says the for-profits target because of their education benefits. Abbey said the schools often make grand job promises, but charge higher tuition than public universities (a federal study showed double), but spend a lot of that money on advertising. "They're getting out in front of the populations that they expect are going to come to their school, and often times those are under represented populations that don't know the higher education systems," Abbey said. Abbey teaches the alternative options like attending community college and transferring to a public university - many now offering the convenience of online classes. About twenty colleges participated in a transfer fair at the art institute building Friday. Students also can request loan forgiveness, however that would involve canceling some, or all, of the credits they've earned so far. Correction: An earlier version of this story incorrectly stated that Coleman University was a for-profit college. It was a non-profit college. 1787

SAN DIEGO (KGTV) - The City of San Diego has more than 2,300 jobs vacant but is struggling to fill them.The jobs run the gamut from 9-1-1 dispatchers to water utility workers to swimming pool managers to civil engineers. The list of vacant positions came to light after the city Audit Committee discussed struggles with worker retention and recruitment at its meeting this week. "We need to do something about that," Councilman Scott Sherman said. "Change the culture and get it to where employees are really looking forward to going to work and like being where they are."Michael Zucchet, who heads the Municipal Employees Association, says the city is losing workers to other agencies in this county and others because they offer better pay and retirement benefits, such as a pension. He says the problem has gotten worse since the unemployment rate has dropped to a near-historic low 3.5 percent. The city in 2012 switched most new employees to a 401(k) style retirement plan after voters passed Proposition B. That proposition is now in legal limbo after the California Supreme Court said the city skipped a key step in the approval process. "The City of San Diego is hemorrhaging employees to other jurisdictions," Zucchet said. "We have documented people who have been city employees for a long time, have no interest in leaving, but they can't pass up a 20-30 percent pay raise in Chula Vista, Carlsbad, National City and these other places."Zucchet gave examples of current job advertisements showing accountants in Chula Vista making 20 percent more than those in the city of San Diego, senior management analysts in Encinitas earning 38 percent more, associate planners in Poway making 21 percent more, and a police service officer in Coronado makes 27 percent more. A search on the city's hiring website shows 53 jobs, but Zucchet said those positions reflect multiple openings. As of March 1, the city had 2,373 vacant positions, up about 8 percent from a year earlier. The city auditor is now investigating how the city can improve worker retention and recruitment. A July study found the city had an overall 10 percent turnover rate, but that it was 15 percent with millennials, who may be gaining experience at the city before moving on to higher paying positions. 2289

SAN DIEGO (KGTV) — The Food and Drug Administration has released new guidelines to vaccine makers with added safety measures that experts say will push back the timeline, making the release of a COVID-19 vaccine before the election highly unlikely.The guidelines lay out what it will take for companies to secure a fast-tracked authorization for a vaccine, known as an emergency use authorization or EUA.The new guidelines require vaccine makers to follow the volunteers in their clinical trials for a median of two months after their final dose.It’s an important step to see if anyone has a bad reaction, says Dr. Christian Ramers of Family Health Centers of San Diego.“Some of the safety issues that people like me are concerned about might take months actually to develop,” Dr. Ramers said. “My analysis of this is that it's the FDA standing up and saying, ‘We're going to adhere to our rigorous scientific process.’”The White House had resisted the new guidelines from the FDA for more than two weeks. After their release, President Trump described them as a “political hit job.”“New FDA Rules make it more difficult for them to speed up vaccines for approval before Election Day. Just another political hit job!” the president wrote on Twitter Tuesday night.It’s hard to gauge exactly how the two-month buffer affect the vaccine timeline because clinical trials do not start all at once; volunteers are enrolled on a rolling basis. But Dr. Sydney Wolfe of the consumer group Public Citizen said the drug makers have offered clues.“The companies one-by-one are saying, ‘We can’t get anything in until the end of November or the end of December or the beginning of January,’ and that’s a relief,” he said.In a clinical trial, half of the volunteers get the vaccine and half get a fake drug called a placebo.The updated guidelines require companies to have an estimated effectiveness of at least 50 percent, meaning there are 50 percent fewer cases of infection in the group receiving the vaccine compared to the placebo group.The guidelines also instruct companies to have a plan to continue collecting data in their clinical trial even after they get an EUA and the vaccine hits the market.“The worst thing that could happen here is something meets that minimum bar of 50% efficacy, meaning it works pretty well, but then the bottom just falls out from these clinical trials and we don't get the information we need,” he said.Dr. Ramers was initially skeptical of fast-tracking a vaccine with an EUA rather than waiting for full approval since it’s only been done once before, but he’s supportive of the process under the updated guidelines.“I think that's the best way to balance speed and safety,” he said.Still, experts like Dr. Wolfe think going with an EUA over a full approval could backfire. He points out the new guidelines allow up to half of the people in the clinical trial to be tracked for less than two months after their final dose.“All things aren’t equal [between an EUA and full approval] because you don’t have all the information and B, people know that,” he said.Dr. Wolfe is concerned the public will be reluctant to roll up their sleeves and embrace the vaccine if it just has an emergency authorization. Now that the FDA has made the EUA guidelines more rigorous, he thinks waiting for full approval might take just a few more months.The FDA’s new guidance notes that an Oct. 22 meeting of its Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee will not be to discuss specific vaccine candidates.Trump previously said he would consider overruling the FDA on its vaccine guidelines in hopes of speeding up the process. There is both health and economic pressure for a vaccine to be developed as the coronavirus continues to claim an average of 800 US lives a day, according to Johns Hopkins University data.However, Dr. Wolfe said the possibility of the president overruling the FDA is unlikely to have an impact now because the vaccine developers themselves have indicated they will follow the FDA guidelines.Additional reporting by Justin Boggs 4090

SAN DIEGO (KGTV) - Supporters of the newly passed California Prop 17, which restores the right to vote to felons on parole, believe the vote outcome may help improve public safety.For the first time in some three decades, Mancy Thompson, 56, was allowed to cast a vote in a presidential election, recently sending in his mail-in ballot from his La Mesa home."Elated. I felt like,'Yes!'" said Thompson.For decades, the answer had been "no."In 1987, high on cocaine and heroin, the active-duty Marine shot and killed a bystander during a bar fight in Oceanside. After pleading guilty and serving more than 23 years in prison, he was released on parole in 2011.He graduated from a reentry program at the local nonprofit Second Chance, and has held down jobs ever since, including positions at the nonprofit. He was on parole for seven years and not legally allowed to vote."If I am disenfranchised, I'm no longer connected. I don't have value to myself, family or community, because they don't have to listen to you," said Thompson.When he got off parole, his right to vote was restored. That right that will now be granted to some 50,000 state parolees, thanks to the passage of Prop 17.Thompson says it can help remove the stigma of the past."Now I have a right to be heard and participle in the democratic process. It's huge," said Thompson.Prop 17 supporters point to a recent parole commission report that found felons with voting rights were less likely to commit future crimes. Opponents say the right to vote shouldn't be granted until parolees have proven they're rehabilitated and allowing the parolees to vote denies justice to victims.Prop 17 passed with an unofficial 59% of the vote."If we want to help them reengage their community and be better versions of themselves ... part of that integration is being able to vote," said Thompson. 1856

SAN DIEGO (KGTV) - Students in the Julian and Warner Springs areas are staying home Tuesday thanks to the winter weather blasting the San Diego region. 159

来源：资阳报