中山内痔手术费多少钱中山拉肚子便血是什么原因,中山男性痔疮治疗方法,中山肛门长出小肉粒,中山脱肛出血较不错治疗方法,中山肛门内湿疹,中山痔疮可以做手术吗,中山肛门旁很硬

We were notified today that we have had close contact with an individual who has tested positive for COVID-19. While we have both tested negative and have no symptoms, we will be following the public health guidance of a 14 day quarantine for those who have been in contact with a pic.twitter.com/JTLvWzzRPi— Nathan Fletcher (@nathanfletcher) June 25, 2020 370

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump's former personal lawyer is planning to tell a House committee that Trump knew ahead of time that WikiLeaks had emails damaging to Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign and that Trump is a "racist," a "conman" and a "cheat."Michael Cohen suggests in prepared testimony obtained by The Associated Press that Trump also implicitly told him to lie about a Moscow real estate project. Cohen has pleaded guilty to lying to Congress about the project, which he says Trump knew about as Cohen was negotiating with Russia during the election. 585

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The coronavirus grip on the summer of 2020 is shaping up to mean different things to different people.“The picture does look different depending on where you are looking in the country,” said Dr. Caitlin Rivers, an epidemiologist with the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security.Only two states – Connecticut and Rhode Island – recorded a drop in coronavirus cases last week. In a dozen other states, mainly in the northern Plains states and the Northeast, cases are steady, including in hard-hit New York and New Jersey, which got their number of COVID-19 cases under control.However, in the other 36 states, the number of coronavirus cases is on the rise, including record-breaking numbers in Florida, Texas, Arizona and NevadaYet, Dr. Rivers says don’t call it a "second wave."“Most communities never left the first wave and so it's difficult to call it a second wave,” she said.But could a second wave of state lockdowns be on the horizon? Dr. Rivers said that can be hard to know, but that would come down to a number of factors – the main one being hospital capacity.“It's nobody's preference to reinstitute the lockdowns. They're enormously disruptive - they're costly to say the least. It's a very difficult set of circumstances,” Dr. Rivers said. “So, that's really for the worst-case crisis situation. But we can't rule it out because we also cannot allow our health care systems to become overwhelmed.”That means, there is a need to keep hospitals from reaching 90% capacity. Already, some states have paused their reopenings. In Texas, Florida and Arizona, bars were ordered to shut down again because people were congregating without masks or social distancing.Some medical experts warn that more measures may be needed."If we don't do something - and I mean really strong, on containment, surveillance, contact tracing, isolation - we're in for a very, very rough time," said epidemiologist Dr. Larry Brilliant.In the meantime, much of the protection against the virus may be left in the hands of each individual.“All of us, including those of us who live in states that are not experiencing a lot of transmission, should be spending a little bit more time at home skipping mass gatherings for example, wearing fabric face masks going out into the community and doing a really great job at hand hygiene,” Dr. Rivers said.In other words, people should not let their guard down, while the virus remains out and about. 2457

WASHINGTON (AP) — The White House said Wednesday it does not favor an immigration agreement with Congress that would involve extending protections for young immigrants for three years in exchange for three years of border wall funding.Deputy press secretary Raj Shah said the administration continues to negotiate an immigration overhaul that would address the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program that protects young immigrants from deportation, while also stopping illegal immigration and modernizing the legal immigration system.Two Republican officials briefed on the talks said the so-called "three-for-three" proposal had been floated in staff-level discussions in recent days.The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to speak publicly. The discussions were first reported by The Washington Post, which said the idea was being discussed as part of an upcoming spending bill.President Donald Trump has proposed a path to citizenship for about 1.8 million immigrants brought to the U.S. illegally as children in exchange for billion for a border wall with Mexico and other security measures, along with curbing legal immigration. Many Democrats have opposed the proposals.Trump visited the U.S.-Mexico border Tuesday to see prototypes of the barrier that he wants built. Calls to build the wall — a rallying cry of his presidential campaign — and Trump's insistence that Mexico pay for it have led to a coarsening in ties between the U.S. and its southern neighbor.Trump ended the Obama program last September, saying he believed DACA was unconstitutional. Trump pledged to work with Democrats and Republicans to protect the young immigrants, often referred to as Dreamers, from deportation. At one point he promised to accept whatever bipartisan proposal was brought to him, but negotiations broke down after Trump used offensive language to describe some countries in a meeting with lawmakers.The Department of Homeland Security is under a court order to maintain the DACA protections while supporters of the program challenge Trump's decision to end it. 2129

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration says people would drive more and be exposed to increased risk if their cars get better gas mileage, an argument intended to justify freezing Obama-era toughening of fuel standards.Transportation experts dispute the arguments, contained in a draft of the administration's proposals prepared this summer, excerpts of which were obtained by The Associated Press.The excerpts also show the administration plans to challenge California's long-standing authority to enact its own, tougher pollution and fuel standards.Revisions to the mileage requirements for 2021 through 2026 are still being worked on, the administration says, and changes could be made before the proposal is released as soon as this week.RELATED: California sues over plan to scrap car emission standardsThe Trump administration gave notice earlier this year that it would roll back tough new fuel standards put into place in the waning days of the Obama administration. Anticipating the new regulation, California and 16 other states sued the Trump administration in May.Overall, "improvements over time have better longer-term effects simply by not alienating consumers, as compared to great leaps forward" in fuel efficiency and other technology, the administration argues. It contends that freezing the mileage requirements at 2020 levels would save up to 1,000 lives per year.New vehicles would be cheaper — and heavier — if they don't have to meet more stringent fuel requirements and more people would buy them, the draft says, and that would put more drivers in safer, newer vehicles that pollute less.RELATED: EPA moves to weaken Obama-era fuel efficiency standardsAt the same time, the draft says that people will drive less if their vehicles get fewer miles per gallon, lowering the risk of crashes.David Zuby, chief research officer at the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, said he's doubtful about the administration's estimate of lives saved because other factors could affect traffic deaths, such as automakers agreeing to make automatic emergency braking standard on all models before 2022. "They're making assumptions about stuff that may or may not be the same," he said.Experts say the logic that heavier vehicles are safer doesn't hold up because lighter, newer vehicles perform as well or better than older, heavier versions in crash tests, and because the weight difference between the Obama and Trump requirements would be minimal.RELATED: President Trump, California clash over key issues"Allow me to be skeptical," said Giorgio Rizzoni, an engineering professor and director of the Center for Automotive Research at Ohio State University. "To say that safety is a direct result of somehow freezing the fuel economy mandate for a few years, I think that's a stretch."Experts say that a heavier, bigger vehicle would incur less damage in a crash with a smaller, lighter one and that fatality rates also are higher for smaller vehicles. But they also say that lighter vehicles with metals such as aluminum, magnesium, titanium and lighter, high-strength steel alloys perform as well or better than their predecessors in crash tests.Alan Taub, professor of materials science and engineering at the University of Michigan, said he would choose a 2017 Malibu over a heavier one from 20 years earlier. It's engineered better, has more features to avoid crashes and additional air bags, among other things. "You want to be in the newer vehicle," he said.RELATED: Nearly every governor with ocean coastline opposes Trump's drilling proposalAn April draft from the Trump administration said freezing the requirements at 2020 levels would save people ,900 per new vehicle. But the later draft raises that to ,100 and even as high as ,700 by 2025.Environmental groups questioned the justification for freezing the standards. Luke Tonachel, director of the clean-vehicle program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said the risk from people driving more due to higher mileage is "tiny and maybe even negligible."Under the Trump administration proposal, the fleet of new vehicles would have to average roughly 30 mpg in real-world driving, and that wouldn't change through 2026.California has had the authority under the half-century-old Clean Air Act to set its own mileage under a special rule allowing the state to curb its chronic smog problem. More than a dozen states follow California's standards, amounting to about 40 percent of the country's new-vehicle market.Asked if he thinks a freeze in U.S. mileage standards is warranted, EPA acting administrator Andrew Wheeler told a small group of reporters at EPA headquarters last week, "I think we need to go where the technology takes us" on fuel standards.Wheeler did not elaborate. Agency spokespeople did not respond when asked specifically if the EPA acting chief was making the case that modern cars could be both fuel efficient and safe.Wheeler also spoke out for what he called "a 50-state solution" that would keep the U.S car and truck market from splitting between two different mileage standards.The Department of Transportation said in a statement that the final fuel economy standards would be based on sound science. The department cautioned that a draft doesn't capture the whole picture of the proposed regulation.The draft said a 2012 analysis of fuel economy standards under the Obama administration deliberately limited the amount of mass reduction necessary under the standards. This was done "in order to avoid the appearance of adverse safety effects," the draft stated.___Krisher reported from Detroit. 5642