喀什勃起困难和勃起不坚(喀什如何检查精子质量低) (今日更新中)

KANSAS CITY, Mo. — Missouri Gov. Mike Parson announced changes Thursday in guidance for how teachers, staff and students will be classified in possible exposures to a COVID-19 case.During his weekly remarks, Parson acknowledged the recent spike in cases in the state has placed strain on schools, and after working with officials at the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education and the Missouri Department of Health and Services, released guidance that clears the way for those in close contact to a COVID-19 case can continue to report to school.The new guidance for schools states that, in schools with mask mandates, appropriately wearing a mask can now prevent individuals from being identified as a close contact and those individuals can continue going to school if they do not show symptoms of COVID-19.The governor cited low transmission seen in schools across the state when proper COVID-19 protocols are in place and advice from a leading pediatric infectious disease researcher at Washington University and St. Louis Children's Hospital, Dr. Rachel Orscheln.Orscheln said that social distancing, cohorting, hand sanitation practices and mask-wearing are helping prevent transmission of COVID-19 in schools and that the experts will continue to monitor and adapt advice.Dr. Margie Vandeven, the state education commissioner, said that the amount of students and staff having to quarantine because of being considered in close contact with COVID-19 is causing staffing issues in schools. She also said that the quarantines were causing students to miss opportunities for social and emotional growth in the classroom.Vandeven said that nearby states like Iowa and Nebraska have put similar practices in place and have not seen increased transmission of the virus in schools.Parson added that when students have to stay home in quarantine, it prevents parents from going to work and that he hopes the change will help healthcare workers who are already experiencing strained staffing across the state.“We know that COVID-19 is not going away soon, so it is important that we continue to evaluate the guidance we’re issuing at the state level to make sure our procedures are sustainable for the next several months,” Parson said in a release announcing the new guidelines. “We have been working hard with DESE and DHSS to find a solution that allows us to continue providing the high-quality education our students deserve while still keeping them, our teachers, and all school staff members safe.”This story was originally published by Katelyn Brown on KSHB in Kansas City, Missouri. 2616

JAMUL, Calif. (KGTV) — An East County couple who lost their home in the Valley Fire is dreaming of a rebuild and a new, fireproof home.Earlier this month, Irving and Anita Beeman shot cellphone video of the imposing smoke plumes behind their home on West Boundary Truck Trail. It didn’t take long for the fast-moving flames of the Valley Fire to reach a nearby canyon."Just like a waterfall, it was a 'firefall' down the hill. Amazing and scary," said Irving.Anita left first. Irving got out soon after, after loading up a truck bed full of belongings. He took a photo showing his property, as it began burning."My house was there and then it turned orange. Then it was a yellow ball just slightly bigger than a house. I didn’t have the heart to look back, so I just drove away," said Irving.But there was no escaping the charred reality when the couple returned. Their home of 20 years, along with two vehicles, were destroyed by the fire."Defeated. You look at it and go, 'Where do we start?'" asked Anita.They’ve just started the cleanup process, expected to take months. Their home was insured, and the couple is already envisioning the rebuild and a fire-resistant home."I don’t ever want to see my house burn down again," said Irving.Irving has sketched out this drawing of a fire-resistant home."Half of it will be in a hillside on our property. Half of it will be open space and under a concrete patio roof ... an awful lot of concrete, walls, and floors," said Irving.A water feature will encircle their home. During fire conditions, water could be pushed from their patio roof, raining down the front of the house."Peace of mind that I don't have worry every year about fire coming through," said Anita.Irving says he hasn't done extensive research on it yet but doesn't believe his idea will cost any more than a building a conventional home.A GoFundMe campaign has been set up to help the couple with their rebuild.ABC 10News San Diego is partnering up with sister ABC stations across California to help families in need by hosting a Day of Giving for Western Wildfires on Thursday, Sept. 17.From 4 a.m. to 7 p.m., we will be taking calls and donations by dialing 866-499-GIVE (4483) or visiting redcross.org/abc. 2233

Judge Amy Coney Barrett remained tight-lipped on how she would rule in politically-charged Supreme Court cases in early questioning during her confirmation hearings on Tuesday morning, citing judicial precedence.Barrett is President Donald Trump's third Supreme Court nominee, and Trump has said that he would only nominate judges that would roll back abortion rights and end the public health care system set up by the Affordable Care Act. And while her judicial history indicates that Barrett fits those qualifications, she continually avoided answering specific qualifications about looming Supreme Court cases.Barrett was asked her views on several politically-charged topics which the Supreme Court could potentially influence, including:2020 ElectionWhen asked by Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-VT, if she would recuse herself should the upcoming election spark a Supreme Court decision, Barrett clarified that she had not made a "commitment to anyone...on how she would decide a case."Barrett later said she would consider the legal requirements of recusal from the eight other Supreme Court judges should the election spark a case.Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-MN, asked Barrett specifically about President Donald Trump's call to have "poll watchers" observe voters ahead of election day and check for fraud — an action that legal experts worry could suppress turnout.When asked if it would be illegal for those "poll watchers" to "intimidate" voters, Barrett said she would not comment on hypothetical cases.AbortionWhen asked repeatedly by Feinstein if she agrees with Justice Antonin Scalia if Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided and that it "can and should be overruled," Barrett attempted to sidestep the answer."If I express a view on a precedent one way or another, whether I say 'I love it or I hate it,' it signals to litigants that I might tilt one way or another in a given case," she said.She later clarified that she does not have an "agenda." She added that her agenda is to "stick to the rule of law."The Affordable Care ActCommittee Chairman Lindsey Graham asked Barrett directly if she would recuse herself from any Affordable Care Act cases, given Trump's call to dismantle the law and her past writings critical on Supreme Court decisions upholding the law. Barrett said she would follow typical recusal procedures should she be asked by the other justices.Later, Feinstein asked Barrett if she had any "thoughts" on an upcoming ACA case, California v. Texas. The Supreme Court will hear arguments on that case on Nov. 10.Barrett said she would not share any thoughts on the case.Finally, Barrett told Sen. Chuck Grassley that she had not been directed by any politicians to strike down the law.Gun controlBarrett was asked directly by Feinstein how she would rule in the event a case regarding gun control came before the court. She said she would "look carefully at text, look...applying law as I best determine it."LGBTQ+ rightsFeinstein also asked Barrett how she would rule in cases regarding LGBTQ+ rights. During the questioning, Barrett said she found both "racism" and "discrimination on sexual preference" to be "abhorrent."According to GLAAD, the term "sexual preference" implies that a person's sexuality is a "choice," meaning it can be cured. The organization prefers the term "sexual orientation."Voting rightsSen. Dick Durbin, D-Illinois, spent a large amount of his time comparing recent Supreme Court decisions on voting rights to decisions on the Second Amendment, noting that some felons in America retain the right to a firearm but lose their right to vote.Durbin related that anecdote to rulings Barrett has made regarding a felon's right to firearms. Barrett accused Durbin of taking her ruling out of context. She later added that she does not have an "agenda" when it comes to certain cases, though Durbin argued that all judges are shaped by their own values and experiences._____________Questioning took place in a marathon-length session on Tuesday, with all 22 members on Senate Judiciary Committee being granted the opportunity to question Barrett for 30 minutes at a time. Members will get an additional 20 minutes of questioning on Wednesday.On Monday, lawmakers were each granted 10 minutes to deliver an opening statement, all of which fell along party lines.Democrats said Barrett's nomination would threaten healthcare for millions of Americans, citing past criticisms of previous Supreme Court rulings that upheld the Affordable Care Act that Barrett has published. They also argued that Republicans were "rushing" Barrett's nomination ahead of election day to, as Sen. Kamala Harris put it, "bypass the will of the American people."Many Democrats took issue with hearings even being held amid a pandemic, claiming Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham had taken lax measures to not require lawmakers to be tested and lambasting Republicans for putting Capitol Building staff at risk. Sen. Thom Tillis, R-NC, who was recently isolated due to the coronavirus, submitted a letter to Graham from his doctor claiming he was following CDC guidelines. They also argued that their time would be better spent working on stimulus legislation.Most Republicans used the time to champion Barrett's character as a working mother of nine children and argue that it was their Constitutional duty to fill the open seat because they control both the Senate and the White House.Following the committee members' opening statements, Barrett delivered her own statement, in which she paid homage to her mentors and Conservative icon, Justice Antonin Scalia, and to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, saying she was "forever grateful for the path she marked and the life she led."Graham has said he hopes to have confirmation hearings completely wrapped up by Thursday. He added that Republicans are on track to wrap up the process by the end of the month —just a week before election day. 5909

KEARNY MESA (KGTV): A San Diego surfer is making a name for himself on the Professional Big Wave World Tour. He's now using his newfound fame to help kids in Southern California hospitals.Jo Jo Roper is in his first year on tour. Just before Thanksgiving, he shredded a 60-foot wave in Portugal."That feeling, it's hard to describe," Roper says of surfing waves that big. "Sometimes you black out, to be honest, you don't even remember what happened."Roper says he remembers everything from the wave this week. It was the fulfillment of a lifelong dream and years of preparation."It's really difficult," he says. "So when you line one up, it's that much more rewarding to kick out a wave."Roper comes from a family of pro surfers. His dad, Joe Roper, surfed professionally in the '70s and '80s. He stopped when he had kids, and says it's a thrill to watch Jo Jo pick up the family mantle."He's taken it to another level," says Joe Roper. "I'm so proud of him."Jo Jo is giving his parents a lot to be proud of outside of surfing. He's starting working with City of Hope Hospital in Los Angeles. It helps treat kids with cancer. "These kids are stronger than anything I've ever done," he says. "What they go through is on a whole other level of what's amazing. I'm just trying to bring some joy to them."Jo Jo has the kids decorate his surfboards with their handprints and signatures. He looks at them for inspiration when he's riding the big waves."It's very heartwarming for me," he says. "It gives me a bigger purpose when I'm sitting in the line-up. I look down and have all these kids on my side. It's awesome."Jo Jo will auction off the boards he uses on the pro tour later this year. The money will go to City of Hope. He calls it his "Go Big, Give Hope" plan. 1783

Just three weeks before facing voters, Sen. Kamala Harris questioned Judge Amy Coney Barrett for 30 minutes during Barrett’s Supreme Court confirmation hearing on Tuesday.Harris, Joe Biden’s running mate and Democratic candidate for vice president, largely used her allotted time to point toward President Donald Trump’s campaign goal of eliminating the Affordable Care Act.Democrats, like Harris, have zeroed in on their belief that Barrett would vote to dismantle the Affordable Care Act, which was passed by a Democratic Congress and signed by President Barack Obama nearly a decade ago.Just one week after the election, the Supreme Court will hear another GOP-led challenge to the law. In 2012, the Affordable Care Act was “saved” in a 5-4 ruling by the Supreme Court as justices said that the law should stand as it levied a tax penalty for those without health care. In 2017, the individual mandate was struck down, meaning there is no longer a tax penalty component to Obamacare. Now the argument comes back to the Supreme Court, as Republicans claim the court's previous ruling is moot given there is no longer a tax penalty.Harris pointed to a previous op-ed pinned by Barrett when she was a law professor at Notre Dame to claim Barrett would rule against Obamacare. Barrett wrote that the Affordable Care Act should have been overturned in 2012."You've already opined the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act. And that position satisfied the president's promise to only nominate judges who would tear down the Affordable Care Act,” Harris said.Barrett fired back, and added that she has made no commitment to the Trump administration on overturning the act.“Question would be figuring out whether Congress, assuming that the mandate is unconstitutional now, whether that consistent with your intent,” Barrett said.Harris then pressed Barrett on her views on Roe vs. Wade. Barrett said multiple times throughout the hearing that she would not offer an opinion on the 1970s-era ruling that largely has kept abortion legal throughout the US.“I would suggest that we not pretend that we don't know how this nominee views a woman's right to choose,” Harris said.Harris was questioned by Mike Pence at last week’s vice presidential debate on whether her and Biden would be supportive of expanding the Supreme Court. Harris avoided the question, and Biden had largely avoided the question until last night, stating he was not supportive of expanding the Supreme Court. 2487

来源：资阳报