济南怎么办理早泄(济南切包茎手术) (今日更新中)

The White House defended President Donald Trump's Sunday tweet that included a video of his supporters yelling the phrase "white power" at protesters at a Florida retirement community.On Sunday morning, President Donald Trump retweeted a video that was reportedly taken at The Villages, a large retirement community in central Florida. At one point in the video, a man in a golf cart adorned with Trump flags yells "white power" at anti-Trump demonstrators.The protesters can also be heard in the video shouting profanities at Trump supporters and also calling Trump a "Nazi" and "racist."Trump included a message in his retweet of the video, writing, "Thank you to the great people of The Villages." The tweet was live for more than three hours before it was deleted from his feed.Though the tweet was deleted, it sparked condemnations from some members of his own party. Sen. Tim Scott, R-South Carolina, called Trump's endorsement of the video "indefensible."In a statement on Sunday evening, White House spokesperson, Judd Deere defended the president's actions, saying that he "didn't hear" the racist language used in the video."President Trump is a big fan of The Villages. He did not hear the one statement made on the video. What he did see was tremendous enthusiasm from his many supporters," Deere said, according to CNN and The Associated Press. 1365

The Sikh community is speaking out after a Sikh Canadian minister was asked to take off his turban while going through a TSA checkpoint at Detroit Metro Airport.The incident happened in April 2017.  Navdeep Bains, Canada’s Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development, went through the TSA checkpoint once without any issues but was asked to go through additional screenings because of his turban."Once they realized my position, who I was, I was ultimately allowed to fly but for me this is an issue that speaks for discrimination and discrimination happens with many people," Bains said. The agency is now issuing a statement and the U.S. government is apologizing to Canada.TSA responded to the incident saying in part: 767

The University of Michigan Athletic Department announced Tuesday that they had to cancel its annual rivalry game against the No. 3 Ohio State Buckeyes due to a COVID-19 outbreak within its football program.In a press release, the athletic department said the decision to cancel was made after discussions with medical experts, health department officials, and university administration."The number of positive tests has continued to trend in an upward direction over the last seven days," said Warde Manuel, U-M's Donald R. Shepherd Director of Athletics, in the news release. "We have not been cleared to participate in practice at this time. Unfortunately, we will not be able to field a team due to COVID-19 positives and the associated quarantining required of close-contact individuals. This decision is disappointing for our team and coaches, but their health and safety are paramount, and it will always come first in our decision-making."Michigan says it will continue to test daily "with hopes of getting back on the practice field when cleared by medical professionals."According to the Associated Press, the Buckeyes had to cancel its Nov. 28 game against Illinois after head coach Ryan Day, other coaches, and players in the program tested positive for the coronavirus, the AP reported.On Tuesday, the American Athletic Conference announced that the regular-season football finale between No. 7 Cincinnati and No. 18 Tulsa will not happen Saturday and won't be rescheduled.The conference canceled the Dec. 12 game due to positive COVID-19 cases and contact tracing within the Bearcats' program.The AAC said the two teams would play on Dec. 19 in the American Athletic Conference title game. 1710

The Senate is set to move forward with its version of the annual defense policy bill known as the National Defense Authorization Act -- marking the latest step for a key piece of legislation that has been passed by Congress for 55 straight years.At a time where passing bills is often challenged by the deep partisan divide and competing political factions on Capitol Hill, it can be difficult to understand why the NDAA would be any different.But as the measure that sets military policy on issues such as Guantanamo Bay, buying weapons, pay raises for service members and even the endangered status of the Sage Grouse, the NDAA is considered of one the few must-pass bills left in Congress.So what makes it so important?One of the most obvious reasons is the money.The NDAA authorizes levels of defense spending -- an amount between that will total between 0 and 0 billion for the next fiscal year that begins on October 1 -- and sets the Pentagon policies under which that money will be spent.This year's bill is expected to authorize a major hike in military spending and even exceed the billion defense budget increase requested by President Donald Trump for 2018 that aimed for more aircraft and ships.In July, the House of Representatives passed their 6 billion version of the bill which included billion more in defense spending than the Trump administration requested.The Senate's bill is expected to authorize a similar amount based on the mark up completed by the armed services committee, led by Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain, in June.If the Senate's bill passes as expected then both houses of Congress will come together to vote on a final version. A vote in the Senate is scheduled Monday.But the fight over the size of the defense budget is just getting started, however, as Senate Democrats have vowed to block major increases to defense spending without equal increases to domestic programs.That fight will occur later this year over the defense appropriations bill, which is a separate piece of legislation that allocates spending for the Pentagon.In addition to authorizing increased military spending, the NDAA will set Pentagon policy on several key issues including troop level increases for the service branches and render a decision on a controversial new "Space Corps" program that was included in the House version of the bill but left out by the Senate.The program was also opposed by the White House and the Air Force.There will also be several controversial issues that will likely be left out of the NDAA including an amendment that would block Trump's ban on transgender service members and the proposed repeal of the 2001 and 2002 war authorizations that the US military uses to fight terrorism across the globe. 2776

The U.S. regulators who will decide the fate of COVID-19 vaccines are taking an unusual step: Asking outside scientists if their standards are high enough.The Food and Drug Administration may have to decide by year’s end whether to allow use of the first vaccines against the virus. Thursday, a federal advisory committee pulls back the curtain on that decision process, debating whether the guidelines FDA has set for vaccine developers are rigorous enough.“We will not cut corners, and we will only use science and data to make that determination,” FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn pledged at a meeting of the Milken Institute Wednesday.Exactly how much data his agency needs to be sure a vaccine is safe and effective is a key question for the advisers. An even bigger one: If the FDA allows emergency use of a vaccine before final testing is finished, will that destroy chances of ever learning just how well that shot -- and maybe competitors still being studied -- really work?“We can’t lose sight of the fact that it is in our societal interest to see these trials to completion,” said Dr. Luciana Borio, a former FDA acting chief scientist who will be watching the advisers’ debate.Plus, multiple vaccines are being studied -- shots made with different technologies that each have pros and cons.“The first vaccine is not necessarily the best vaccine,” cautioned Dr. M. Miles Braun, a former FDA scientist now with Georgetown University School of Medicine. If the trials aren’t allowed to finish, it may be difficult or impossible to ever know for sure.It’s a critical moment in FDA’s 114-year history. The government has spent billions to race a vaccine through a research process that usually takes years, and FDA faces unprecedented pressure from the Trump administration, fueling public skepticism that politics could overrule science.Interest is so high, FDA is airing the meeting on YouTube. Here are some key issues the committee will discuss:HOW MUCH EVIDENCE IS NEEDED?FDA is requiring manufacturers to do studies of at least 30,000 people to prove if a vaccine protects and how safe it is. Those studies must include adequate numbers of people at highest risk from COVID-19 -- older adults, minorities and anyone with underlying health problems.FDA has made clear that any vaccine must be at least 50% effective. And while the studies are designed to run for two years, companies may get enough evidence the shots are protective -- in at least some people -- to stop the trials early and seek what’s called an “emergency use authorization” for wider vaccinations.Despite White House objections, the FDA told vaccine makers earlier this month not to seek that speedier review until they’ve tracked at least half their trial participants for two months. With other vaccines, that’s about the amount of time when major side effects crop up.That’s not long enough, said the head of the non-profit ECRI Institute, which reviews medical technology for hospitals and insurers. In comments submitted to the advisory committee, ECRI’s Dr. Marcus Schabacker said FDA should require six months of follow-up.“Doing any less would simply risk too much, and the consequences may be severe,” he wrote. “A weak vaccine that loses public trust could poison the well for epidemic control for many years.”WOULD EMERGENCY USE DERAIL FULL ANSWERS ABOUT VACCINES?Normally when a study ends because of evidence that a vaccine is working, the participants who got dummy shots are offered the real thing.But if FDA allows emergency use of a COVID-19 vaccine, that’s not the same as having full proof the shot works, Borio cautioned.And if the participants in the placebo group are immediately offered the real shot, researchers may not be able to get answers about all the high-risk groups in the study — or tell how long the vaccine’s protection lasts, a process expected to take many more months.But Pfizer Inc., which with Germany’s BioNTech is developing one of the leading candidates, told FDA that if it’s granted emergency use authorization, it “would have an ethical obligation” to alert study participants who got a placebo and allow them vaccine access. The company wants FDA to look into “other scientifically and statistically sound methods” to determine long-term safety and effectiveness.Pfizer’s stance is likely to face pushback. The Infectious Diseases Society of America states that FDA’s panelists “should insist” that vaccine developers “present a compelling case” for how they will complete their trials if FDA grants early authorization of their vaccine.Clearing a vaccine based on premature or faulty data “could cause more harm” by “further eroding public confidence in all vaccines,” the group said.It’s an unprecedented dilemma. The FDA has previously allowed emergency use of only one vaccine, a decades-old shot that in 2005 was authorized to prevent anthrax poisoning.This time around, multiple COVID-19 vaccines are in the pipeline. Pfizer competitor Johnson & Johnson cautioned that early FDA clearance of one vaccine could “jeopardize integrity” of other ongoing trials if patients decide to drop out to seek the first cleared shot instead.The company asked regulators to explain what options are available to ensure completion of all ongoing COVID-19 vaccine trials.WHAT ABOUT LONG-TERM SAFETY MONITORING?Even a study of 30,000 people cannot spot a side effect that only strikes 1 in 100,000. So the government is planning extra scrutiny of every COVID-19 vaccine to hit the market.At first there will be limited doses given to just certain high-risk people -- and those early recipients are to get text messages daily for the first week after vaccination, and then weekly out to six weeks, asking how they’re feeling.FDA also will be checking databases of electronic health records and insurance claims, looking for any red flags.“There’s a kind of tracking that has to take place here on a massive basis that hasn’t taken place before,” said Dr. Jesse Goodman of Georgetown University, a former director of the FDA’s vaccine and biologics center.___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. 6274

来源：资阳报