在中山做痔疮手术多钱中山那家医院的肛瘘好,中山看肛裂什么医院最好,中山好点的肛瘘医院,中山痔疮的费用,中山哪个医院可以做幽门螺旋杆菌检查,中山长期大便出血怎么办,中山女性便秘的原因

IMPERIAL BEACH, Calif. (KGTV) - South Bay residents have an opportunity to sound off over the sewage coming up from Mexico, leading to beach closures.The U.S. section of the International Boundary and Water Commission is holding a forum on the topic Thursday. The sewage either comes from Tijuana runoff or the Punta Bandera treatment plant."I would love to surf everyday without worry," said Imperial Beach councilwoman Paloma Aguirre. "I would love for my friends to be able to take their babies to the beach, and sit on the sand and not worry about bacteria."Meanwhile, officials in Imperial Beach and Coronado are expressing new optimism. A meeting this week identified 0 million in projects that could help: funding still unclear.The meeting starts at 5:30 p.m. Thursday at the Tijuana Estuary Meeting Room, 301 Caspian Way in Imperial Beach. 859

If success at the box office equated into Academy Award success, you would expect "Star Wars," "Wonder Woman" and "Beauty and the Beast" to do well during Sunday's Oscars. While these movies, which represented the top three movies for domestic gross at the box office in 2017, were nominated for a combined six Academy Awards, a number of movies that didn't do so well at the Box Office received more nominations. As a matter of fact, if you combined the domestic box office totals of the nine films nominated for Best Picture, the total would still be lower than "Star Wars, The Last Jedi.""The Shape of Water" came in at No. 50 at the box office in 2017 according to Box Office Mojo. "The Shape of Water" led all movies in 2017 with 13 Academy Award nominations. "The Shape of Water" grossed million and is up for top awards such as Best Picture, Best Director (Guillermo del Toro) and Best Actress (Sally Hawkins)."Dunkirk" was second behind "The Shape of Water" for Academy Award nominations with eight, including nods for Best Picture, Best Director (Christopher Nolan) and Best Score. "Dunkirk" topped all nine films nominated for Best Picture, grossing 8 million in the US, ranking No. 14. "Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri" is up for seven nominations on Sunday. The film, which is also up for Best Picture, grossed just 2,168 in its opening weekend, according to Box Office Mojo. "Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri" has since made some cash, grossing million, which made it No. 55 domestically in 2017. "Phantom Thread," which has six nominations including Best Picture, had an even more humble box office journey. It grossed 6,495 in its opening weekend, before taking in million overall. The film did not crack the top 100 domestically. "Darkest Hour" also had six nominations and is up for Best Picture, and only grossed 5,000 its opening weekend. It has since grossed million in the United States. Among movies that topped the Box Office, "Star Wars, The Last Jedi" received four Academy Award nominations. The picture was the top grossing domestic film in 2017, making 8 million. The second-best grossing film of 2017 in the United States, "Beauty and the Beast," was nominated twice. The only other film with a nomination among those in the Top 10 at the box office was "Guardian of the Galaxy." "Guardian of the Galaxy," which was the fourth-highest domestic grossing film, received a nomination for Best Visual Effects.  2548

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

In a few weeks, thousands of college students will begin their yearly right of fall by returning to the campus of Tufts University in Medford, Massachusetts, but a return to campus life this year will mean testing and quarantining for those students who chose to come back.Like colleges and universities across the country, Tufts is experimenting with a new plan that will allow more than 5,000 students to come back to campus while at the same time, instituting rigorous new guidelines in an effort to keep COVID-19 from spreading.The key to success, testing.“We wanted to test for COVID at a frequency that would catch people when they’re asymptomatic before they have a chance to spread,” explained Tuft’s President Anthony Monaco.Tufts plan for the fall is as complex as the virus itself. Students from outside the Northeast will be brought back to campus first, where they will be forced to quarantine for 14 days. Health officials expect at least a small portion of those students to test positive for COVID-19 the moment they step back on campus. Because of that, the university has constructed an extra 200 modular units of dorm space. The idea of the modular facilities is to give campus health officials a contained area to monitor students who test positive for the virus, while at the same time, keeping them out of the general population.After students from outside the Northeast are brought back to campus, students from the general area around New England will return.Every single student will be tested twice a week for COVID-19, something experts say will be a key component to safely reopening college campuses this fall. Regardless, school officials expect students to test positive for the virus throughout the fall.Researchers at Yale’s School of Public Health have been advising Tufts and hundreds of other colleges who are planning to resume some form of in-person learning this fall.“If we don’t test frequently, we give silent spreaders an opportunity to grab hold and this virus is hard to play catch-up with,” explained Professor A. David Paltiel, who recently published a study on how quickly the virus can spread through colleges if left unchecked.To study the virus, Paltiel and his colleagues used epidemic modeling to assemble hypothetical situations resembling a college campus. The study found that if you take 5,000 healthy students and add in only 10 students who have COVID-19, hundreds, if not thousands, of kids will be sick by Thanksgiving.“At that point, the only thing that keeps the virus from getting out of control is Thanksgiving break,” he said.That is why testing is key, the study found. When Paltiel took those same 5,000 kids and added in 10 students who have COVID-10, but tested every student twice a week, the study found that only about 100 students ended up catching COVID.“Many universities are planning to only test students who have symptoms, in our view that is a recipe for disaster,” he said.Only adding to the uncertainty of the situation, about 40 percent of college students said they would return to live near campus even if classes were held virtually. Paltiel and other health officials say because of that, it’s more beneficial to have students on-campus where they can be monitored and tested frequently.“It’s hard and it could be a nightmare, people who say we shouldn’t open campuses should remember the nightmare doesn’t go away,” he said. 3420

Hurricane Harvey was a big headline in 2017. A year later, many continue to recover from the storm. They’re also remembering the government’s response, as they head to the polls to cast their ballots in the upcoming midterm election.“Yes, for the last three and a half years, walking into this house has been very depressing, I would say,” says Houston homeowner Greg Roberts.It hasn’t been easy for the Roberts, who live in Houston’s Meyerland neighborhood."We got flooded out in 2015, 2016, and 2017 with Harvey, as well," Roberts says.The Roberts haven’t lived in this home since it was first flooded in 2015. Harvey brought in more flood damage.Now, the couple is raising their home's foundation higher than the levels Harvey's waters reached. "If you look up and down the streets of this neighborhood and many others, you will find many others that have been lifted or completely demolished," Roberts says.Many residents in the area are preparing for the next storm. But the past isn't lost in this election cycle.  "The topic of flooding and recovery from flooding has not left the public conscious for at least the last three years, probably before, especially the past three and a half years,” Roberts says.Roberts says it’s a major talking point for politicians in Texas.After so much flooding, the Roberts say they've already answered another tough question about their future. Why do they stay?“That's a good question,” Roberts says. “It's a person by person decision; there's no question about that. We love for years. We fought for years to get into this neighborhood. So, we just really love the areas."There were a lot of things we really love about this neighborhood, so we stuck it out. We prayed about it thought about it and took all things into consideration." 1808