喀什治男科病专科医院喀什治疗多少钱包皮过长,喀什那的流产医院好,喀什人流比较便宜的医院,喀什的妇科医院哪里好,喀什不手术如何治疗包皮,喀什突然硬不起来怎么办啊,喀什药流多少时间

The plane behind Lion Air's crash off Indonesia was one of Boeing's newest and most advanced jets. It was just two months old and with 800 hours under its belt, so experts are baffled as to what exactly caused the 737 MAX 8 to crash.While no information has been released yet as to why the brand-new plane crashed into the sea 13 minutes after takeoff,?FlightRadar24 has published data that shows the plane behaving erratically during takeoff. When a plane would normally be ascending in the first few minutes of flight, the Lion Air jet experienced a 726-foot drop over 21 seconds.Aviation expert Philip Butterworth-Hayes told CNN that the data was unusual -- especially since takeoffs like this are typically controlled by the plane's automatic systems."This doesn't fit an automatic flight profile," Butterworth-Hayes said while studying the data. "Unless, the aircraft was trying to correct itself at the time for a number of reasons.""This shows an unusually unstable vertical flight profile," he added."Exactly at the same time as the speed increased there was an altitude dip, which meant that at that point there was quite some loss of control."The plane, which has only been in operation since August 15, was carrying 181 passengers as well as six cabin crew members and two pilots, bound for Pangkal Pinang on the Indonesian island of Bangka.Former US National Transportation Safety Board air crash investigator and CNN aviation analyst Peter Goelz told CNN the data clearly showed issues with both the speed and altitude of the plane."There is something obviously wrong in both the air speed and the altitude which would point to the flight control systems," he said. "These are fly-by-wire systems -- highly automated -- and pilots may not be able to troubleshoot failures in a timely manner." 1818

The Motorcycle Rally in Sturgis, South Dakota, was expected to bring thousands to the small South Dakota town despite the spread of the coronavirus. The Sturgis Police department reported a total of 92 non-traffic arrests, 60 traffic arrests and 24 parking citations through Monday morning. The rally is three days into its nine-day run.While 92 non-traffic arrests were up by 22 from this time last year, traffic-related arrests were down by 19 from a year ago.The department released a breakdown of the arrests from the rally. Many of the arrests stemmed from driving while intoxicated (19) and drug possession or paraphernalia (47). 643

The polling industry has a lot on the line heading into Tuesday's midterm election.Critics blamed pollsters when voters were caught off guard by Donald Trump's election in 2016. Old cries of "don't believe the polls" became fevered shouts. And the president has encouraged distrust by calling certain polls "fake" and claiming they are used to "suppress" the vote.Although there is no evidence to suggest that is true, there is persistent and widespread suspicion about polling, according to, you guessed it, a McClatchy-Marist poll. And it exists on both sides, albeit in different forms."I think Democrats may have felt let down by the polls but don't think it was an intentional error. I think many Republicans believe the polling errors of 2016 were intentional," GOP pollster and co-founder of Echelon Insights Kristen Soltis Anderson told CNN.So can the industry regain trust?Since 2016 there's been a whole lot of self-reflection in the polling world. Pollsters have tweaked their techniques; pundits have become more cautious when talking about polls; and news outlets have conducted some fascinating experiments.On Tuesday, all the efforts are being put to the test."Some pollsters would disagree with this, but the way that the public generally views whether or not polling is accurate is whether or not it gets the results of the election right," CNN analyst Harry Enten said on "Reliable Sources.""I'm not necessarily sure that's fair," Enten said, "but I do think that there is more pressure on pollsters this year to get it right given the president's rhetoric and given what happened in 2016."Many, though not all, 2016 polls underestimated support for Trump. This effect was particularly pronounced at the state level, where there were embarrassing "misses," showing Hillary Clinton with safe leads in states Trump actually carried.Most national polls accurately showed Clinton winning the popular vote. But reporters and commentators made lots of mistakes in their interpretations of the polls. Readers and viewers did, too. Many people discounted the margin and other factors and made faulty assumptions that Trump would lose to Clinton.There were other problems, too. Predictive features on websites gained lots of traffic before the election but caused lots of consternation afterward. HuffPost's model infamously showed Clinton with a 98 percent chance of winning. "We blew it," the site admitted afterward.But just as importantly, HuffPost's Natalie Jackson tried to explain why.Other news outlets have also tried to be more transparent and remind voters of what polls cannot convey.In special elections since 2016, Democrats have repeatedly outperformed polls of their races.The top example was the Virginia governors' race. "Ralph Northam was favored by three points. He ended up winning by nine," Enten said.But past outcomes are not an indicator of future results."I think many pollsters and forecasters have tried to be much more intentional about explaining uncertainty and being humble about what data can and can't tell us," Anderson said. "Because I think there was a big sense that in 2016, there was more certainty conveyed than may have been justified by the available data."So political pros and reporters are communicating poll results differently this time. Time magazine's Molly Ball, who has a no-predictions rule for herself, said that even people who do make predictions are adding more caveats: There's "less of the, 'Well, the needle shows this' and more of, 'Here's what it doesn't show, here's what we should always remember can happen about probabilities.'"Early voting has been explosive in the midterms, indicating above-average enthusiasm among both Democrats and Republicans. Pollsters have to make assumptions about turnout when contacting "likely voters," and this is a difficult election to forecast.The 2018 electorate is "a universe that doesn't exist yet," Democratic pollster Margie Omero said. "I mean, people don't know whether they're going to vote, some people."They may tell a pollster that they're sure to vote, but never make it to the ballot box. Or they might change who they're voting for.Conversely, certain subsets of voters may have a big impact on the final results without really showing up in the pre-election polling. If pollsters assume relatively low youth turnout, but lots of young people vote for the first time, that could cause big surprises in certain races.The vast majority of people who are called by pollsters decline to participate, so the researchers have to make a huge number of phone calls, bend over backwards to reach a representative sample of people, and weight their results accordingly.Some polls are higher quality than others. Most news outlets tend to favor live interviewers, as opposed to computerized systems, and a mix of landline and cell phone calls. But some outlets are wading into web-based polling. CNN's polling standards preclude reporting on web polls.This fall The New York Times pulled back the curtain by conducting "live polling" and publishing the results in real time, call by call. Working with Siena College, the surveyors made 2,822,889 calls and completed 96 polls of House and Senate races."We wanted to demystify polling for people," said Nate Cohn of The Times' Upshot blog."From our point of view, it's almost a miracle how accurate polls usually are, given all the challenges," Cohn said in an interview with CNN.He emphasized that polls are "very fuzzy things." And the real-time polling showed this to the public. The researchers sought to interview about 500 people for each race that was examined.In Iowa's fourth congressional district, for example, 14,636 calls resulted in 423 interviews.The results showed the incumbent, far-right congressman Steve King, with 47% support, and his Democratic challenger J.D. Scholten with 42%.The Times characterized this as a "slight edge" for King, with lots of room for error. "The margin of sampling error on the overall lead is 10 points, roughly twice as large as the margin for a single candidate's vote share," the Times explained on its website.Cohn's final pre-election story noted that "even modest late shifts among undecided voters or a slightly unexpected turnout could significantly affect results."That's the kind of language that lots of polling experts are incorporating into their stories and live shots, especially in the wake of the 2016 election."With polling, you never actually get to the truth," Cohn said. "You inch towards it, and you think you end up within plus or minus 5 points of it at the end."As Enten put it, "polls are tools," not meant to be perfect. But that message needs to be reinforced through the news media. 6753

The quadrennial inauguration of a president generally draws hundreds of thousands of people to the Washington Mall in DC. But in January, President-elect Joe Biden expects that number to be much lower.As the inauguration stage is being built outside the US Capitol, Biden said he expects his inauguration to look akin to the 2020 Democratic National Convention, which was held virtually."First and foremost in my objective is to keep America safe but still allow people to celebrate," Biden said. "To celebrate and see one another celebrating."Some other traditional elements to Inauguration Day, like the parade and balls, appear to be scrapped.“There will probably not be a gigantic inaugural parade,” Biden said.Other Inauguration Day events, such as the signing ceremony and luncheon the new president has with congressional leaders, are still unknown. As of now, the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies is unaware of any restrictions related to the pandemic. Those wishing to get a spot to view Biden’s inauguration can still request tickets to the event through their member of Congress.Another sign that the pomp and circumstance of this year’s inauguration will look different is this could be the first time in US history that a presidential inauguration fails to result in a peaceful transfer of power. Outgoing President Donald Trump has continued to allege the election was stolen from him despite dozens of failed lawsuits and no formal prosecutions of widespread fraud.It has been a long-standing tradition that the incoming and outgoing president meet at the White House and travel to the Capitol together before the inauguration.Trump has suggested that Biden would only be able enter the White House after the inauguration if he can “prove” he received 81 million votes.Three weeks ago, a joint statement released by federal and state officials described the presidential election as the “most secure in American history.”In response to the letter, Trump fired US election security head Chris Krebs.In an interview with CNN on Thursday, Biden said he is hopeful Trump will attend the inauguration."I think it would be important only in one sense, not in a personal sense, important in the sense that we are able to demonstrate the end of this chaos that he's created, that there is peaceful transfer of power with the competing parties standing there, shaking hands and moving on,” Biden said. 2436

The Netflix series "13 Reasons Why" increased the suicide risk of suicidal teens treated in a psychiatric emergency department, according to a University of Michigan study.Upon release, the show received backlash for its depiction of suicide, as some critics said it glorified those who took their own lives. In addition, another study showed that the show was tied to a rise in online searches about suicide.“This show has been a real phenomenon, especially among teenagers,” Victor Hong, M.D., medical director of psychiatric emergency services at Michigan Medicine, said in a release. “Its depiction of teen suicide has raised great concern among parents, health providers and educators.” Half of the 87 youths, mostly teens ages 13 to 17, who participated in the survey between 2017 and 2018 had watched at least one episode of the show. Among the 43 who watched it, about half said it heightened their suicide risk.“Our study doesn’t confirm that the show is increasing suicide risk, but it confirms that we should definitely be concerned about its impact on impressionable and vulnerable youth,” Hong said.According to the study, very few parents of those in the sample had watched the series themselves and some were not even aware that their child had watched it. “The data from our sample of teens demonstrated that kids who were at high risk of suicide did not reach out to adults,” Hong said. “They mostly watched the show alone or talked to friends, but they weren’t talking to parents, teachers or school counselors.For more information on the study, click here. 1613