梅州医治女性附件炎梅州女子打胎总共要多少钱,梅州尿道炎的原因,梅州处女膜修复注意,梅州做可视人流需多少钱,梅州怀孕52天能做人流么,梅州哪家医院打胎正规,梅州尿道炎治疗专科医院

Actress Roseanne Barr threw Twitter off the rails late Friday after she tweeted her support of a right-wing conspiracy theory."President Trump has freed so many children held in bondage to pimps all over this world. Hundreds each month. He has broken up trafficking rings in high places everywhere. notice that. I disagree on some things, but give him benefit of doubt-4 now," she tweeted. 397

According to President Donald Trump, the tragic Texas church shooting that left 26 people dead was "a mental health problem at the highest level."If you ask mental health researchers, such mass shootings are much more complicated than that.On Sunday, 26-year-old Devin Kelley sprayed bullets across the sanctuary of First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas, about 30 miles east of San Antonio. The youngest killed at the church was 17 months old; the oldest was 77 years old."We have a lot of mental health problems in our country, as do other countries, but this isn't a guns situation," Trump said during a joint news conference Monday in Tokyo."This is a mental health problem at the highest level," he said. "It's a very, very sad event."Trump's response to the Texas church shooting echoed previous comments he has made on gun violence. In 2015, Trump said he was opposed to tightening gun laws in the United States but was in favor of addressing mental health to prevent shootings.Yet various epidemiological studies over the past two decades show that the vast majority of people with severe mental illnesses, such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or severe depression, are no more likely to be violent than anyone else.Rather, people with severe mental illnesses are more than 10 times more likely to be victims of violent crime than the general population. And, only about 3% to 5% of violent acts can be attributed to individuals living with a serious mental illness, according to the US Department of Health and Human Services.But those statistics have "almost nothing to do with mass casualty shootings," said Jeffrey Swanson, a professor in psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Duke University who specializes in gun violence and mental illness.So exactly how are mental health and gun violence intertwined, and what is needed to end the violence?Gun violence and mental illness are public health problems "that intersect at the edges" but have very little overlap, Swanson told CNN last year.There's no doubt that America's systems of care for mental health are overburdened, expensive and inaccessible for many who need them, he said. But when it comes to gun violence among this community, suicide tends to occur at higher rates than homicides, he said."If we back up and think about firearm-related injuries and mortality as a public health problem, it turns out there is a mental health-related story, and it's suicide," he said. "If we had better mental health care and could get people better access and break down barriers to care, then yes, we might reduce gun violence by a lot but it would be from reducing suicides."Otherwise, mental illness is just one "highly unspecific" factor that may contribute to gun violence, along with being young, white and male, or a history of violence, Swanson said.Instead of policies that restrict gun access based solely on mental illness diagnoses or because a person has made contact with the judicial system or health care agencies due to mental illness, the American Psychological Association, the National Alliance on Mental Illness and other advocacy groups have called for gun access criteria based on more subtle indicators of potentially dangerous behavior.Those indicators -- such as having past or pending violent misdemeanor convictions or charges, domestic violence restraining orders or multiple DUI convictions -- have been largely informed by the work of Swanson and others.Swanson supports intervention at the point of purchase through comprehensive background checks -- but to make background checks work, criteria for inclusion on the database should be based on other indicators of risk besides mental health history, such as those indicators of aggressive, impulsive or risky behavior."A history of violent behavior is a far better predictor of future violence than mental illness," he said.Calling gun violence a mental health issue is to scapegoat and stigmatize people with mental illness, he said."It's kind of a canard, a convenient explanation that exploits the tremendous fear people have with these horrifying mass shootings," he said. "If people fear those with mental illness they're going to treat them with scorn and support public policies that restrict their liberties."After all, mental illness affects millions of adults across the country.In 2015, there were an estimated 43.4 million adults in the United States with some form of mental illness within the past year, which represented 17.9% of adults nationwide, according to the National Institute of Mental Health.The American Psychological Association recommends prohibiting firearms for high-risk groups, such as domestic violence offenders or persons convicted of violent misdemeanor crimes."Reducing the incidence of gun violence will require interventions through multiple systems, including legal, public health, public safety, community, and health. Increasing the availability of data and funding will help inform and evaluate policies designed to reduce gun violence," according to the association's website.Swanson and his colleagues examined the proportion of people in the United States with impulsive angry behavior who own or carry guns and have a diagnosable mental illness in a paper published in the journal Behavioral Sciences & the Law in 2015.They conducted household surveys with 9,282 people from February 2001 to April 2003, excluding people who carried guns for work, resulting in a response rate of 70.9%.An analysis of the survey results estimated that nearly one in 10 adults has access to firearms and has a problem with anger and impulsive aggressive behavior.These people were more likely to be male, younger and married and to live in outlying areas around metropolitan centers rather than in central cities, Swanson and his colleagues wrote in their paper.They were significantly more likely to meet diagnostic criteria for a wide range of mental disorders, including depression, bipolar and anxiety disorders, PTSD, intermittent explosive disorder, pathological gambling, eating disorder, alcohol and illicit drug use disorders, and a range of personality disorders.What's more, despite evidence of "considerable psychopathology" in many of these respondents, only a very small proportion, 8% to 10%, were ever hospitalized for a mental health problem."Because only a small proportion of persons with this risky combination have ever been involuntarily hospitalized for a mental health problem, most will not be subject to existing mental health-related legal restrictions on firearms resulting from a history of involuntary commitment," Swanson and his colleagues wrote in the paper's abstract.As for Texas gunman Kelley, the state denied him a license to carry a gun, Gov. Greg Abbott said, citing the director of Texas' Department of Public Safety."So how was it that he was able to get a gun? By all the facts that we seem to know, he was not supposed to have access to a gun," Abbott told CNN's Chris Cuomo. "So how did this happen?"On Monday, Trump said his "thoughts and prayers" were with the victims and their families but did not suggest plans to take any legislative or other policy action to address the shooting. 7228

Ahead of the election, many social media sites are tightening things up. Many platforms are trying to make sure what you're searching for, what you're seeing and what you're reading is factual.Pick a platform or a search engine and it's not hard to find what you're looking for.“Remember in 2016, no one took social media seriously on either side,” said Jason Mollica, a professor of communications at American University in Washington DC.He teaches digital and social media analytics and public relations. He analyzes just how we communicate. These days, a lot of our conversing is over the internet. As the election inches closer, Mollica and his students are watching and discussing what's happening on social media platforms.“It’s not that much different but the stakes are higher, not from the perspective of voting but as in what these socia lnetworks are trying to do or not do it the wake of what happened in 2016,” Mollica said.Take Facebook for instance. The social site has been under scrutiny and they know it. Mark Zuckerberg posted from his own account about what changes the site is making, including informational posts about voting and how and where to vote. Facebook will block new political ads in the final week before the election, and they say they'll be working with officials to remove misinformation about voting.There are also rules against COVID-19 threats surrounding voting.Twitter is also taking a stand. Mollica says you might see something trending but if there's a problematic post, the original content will likely be pulled.“We’re not gonna allow this content to continue is something is shared by Joe Biden or Donald Trump or any political party,” Mollica said. “They’re going to make sure it’s taken down because they want to mitigate the negative news or the false news that comes out from certain accounts.”Twitter says it has election teams focusing on integrity, and the company is launching initiatives to help users find original sources of information. You'll also be able to report misleading information.“This isn’t censorship,” Mollica said. “This is something where social networks are saying, ‘Look, we understand we’re a news cycle.’ At least from Twitter’s perspective, they share news. They want to be a place where people get news. They’re looking… from a standpoint of you wouldn’t see that on a television station necessarily, why should you see that on twitter?”And Google, the site many turn to to search for anything and everything, has modified its autocomplete policies, removing predictions that could be viewed as claims for or against a specific party. And that is no easy task.“Think of a search giant like google. They can’t pull content off the internet but they can definitely take key words from search results and say we’re not going to show those to people,” Mollica said.Donald McLaughlin, co-founder of the Denver Based CP-Cyper said, it’s not that internet content is missing. Google has just made information harder to find. McLaughlin says, however, it doesn't mean that you can't find it on other search platforms.“Use a different search engine,” McLaughlin said. “There is Bing, DuckDuckGo, a few others that are meant to be less persuasive, less filtered that will give you exactly what you search for versus what they want you to see or what they think you want.”“So, Google trying to mitigate it somehow is a great start but you think about it’s basically putting a small cork in a huge hole and it’s still leaking and you can’t really stop it,” Mollica said.Most experts would agree it’s unfortunate that it has come to this.“We’ve gotten to a place now where misinformation does spread like wildfire on social media. People will sensationalize to get likes to get people to follow them and really doing the research to vet whether something is true or not is very important,” Mollica said.He says that's true whether you're buying a car, or voting. And while the internet giants can only do so much, it’s a big step on the keyboard as we move toward the election. 4053

After struggling to ramp up coronavirus testing, the U.S. can now screen several million people daily, thanks to a growing supply of rapid tests. But the boom comes with a new challenge: keeping track of the results.All U.S. testing sites are legally required to report their results, positive and negative, to public health agencies. But state health officials say many rapid tests are going unreported, which means some new COVID-19 infections may not be counted.And the situation could get worse, experts say. The federal government is shipping more than 100 million of the newest rapid tests to states for use in public schools, assisted living centers and other new testing sites.“Schools certainly don’t have the capacity to report these tests,” said Dr. Jeffrey Engel of the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists. “If it’s done at all it’s likely going to be paper-based, very slow and incomplete.”Early in the outbreak, nearly all U.S. testing relied on genetic tests that could only be developed at high-tech laboratories. Even under the best circumstances, people had to wait about two to three days to get results. Experts pushed for more “point-of-care” rapid testing that could be done in doctors offices, clinics and other sites to quickly find people who are infected, get them into quarantine and stop the spread.Beginning in the summer, cheaper, 15-minute tests — which detect viral proteins called antigens on a nasal swab — became available. The first versions still needed to be processed using portable readers. The millions of new tests from Abbott Laboratories now going out to states are even easier to use: they’re about the size of a credit card and can be developed with a few drops of chemical solution.Federal health officials say about half of the nation’s daily testing capacity now consists of rapid tests.Large hospitals and laboratories electronically feed their results to state health departments, but there is no standardized way to report the rapid tests that are often done elsewhere. And state officials have often been unable to track where these tests are being shipped and whether results are being reported.In Minnesota, officials created a special team to try and get more testing data from nursing homes, schools and other newer testing sites, only to be deluged by faxes and paper files.“It’s definitely a challenge because now we have to do many more things manually than we were with electronic reporting,” said Kristen Ehresmann, of the Minnesota Department of Health.Even before Abbott’s newest BinaxNOW rapid tests hit the market last month, undercounting was a concern.Competitors Quidel and Becton Dickinson have together shipped well over 35 million of their own quick tests since June. But that massive influx of tests hasn’t showed up in national testing numbers, which have mostly ranged between 750,000 and 950,000 daily tests for months.Besides tallying new cases, COVID-19 testing numbers are used to calculate a key metric on the outbreak: the percentage of tests positive for COVID-19. The World Health Organization recommends countries test enough people to drive their percent of positives below 5%. And the U.S. has mostly been hovering around or below that rate since mid-September, a point that President Donald Trump and his top aides have touted to argue that the nation has turned the corner on the outbreak. The figure is down from a peak of 22% in April.But some disease-tracking specialists are skeptical. Engel said his group’s members think they aren’t getting all the results.“So it may be a false conclusion,” he said.One of the challenges to an accurate count: States have wildly different approaches. Some states lump all types of tests together in one report, some don’t tabulate the quick antigen tests at all and others don’t publicize their system. Because antigen tests are more prone to false negatives and sometimes require retesting, most health experts say they should be recorded and analyzed separately. But currently the vast majority of states do not do that and post the results online.The federal government is allocating the tests to states based on their population, rather than helping them develop a strategy based on the size and severity of their outbreaks.“That’s just lazy” said Dr. Michael Mina of Harvard University. “Most states won’t have the expertise to figure out how to use these most appropriately.”Instead, Mina said the federal government should direct the limited test supplies to key hot spots around the country, driving down infections in the hardest-hit communities. Keeping tighter control would also ensure test results are quickly reported.Johns Hopkins University researcher Gigi Gronvall agrees health officials need to carefully consider where and when to deploy the tests. Eventually, methods for tracking the tests will catch up, she said.“I think having the tools to determine if someone is infectious is a higher priority,” she said.___AP data journalist Nicky Forster contributed to this story___Follow Matthew Perrone on Twitter: @AP_FDAwriter___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. 5285

A man in Florida called police while Collier County Sheriff's deputies were chasing him Tuesday morning.The sheriff's office report said it all started because the suspect acted suspiciously. The sheriff's deputy went up to the car and smelled a smell similar to marijuana.The deputy spotted a baggie that contained a green leafy substance. The suspect then grabbed the bag, put it in his mouth, and sped away."I need help, please," said Aric Frydberg, the man who was arrested after the 7-mile pursuit on U.S. 41. "There's a police officer chasing me," he added.Fort Myers-based WFTX obtained the 911 call. The operator tried numerous times to get Frydberg to pull over.But during the phone call, Frydberg tried to get the operator to make some calls on his behalf. The first set of calls was to his parents."Call my mom, call my mom," said Frydberg. "Please call my mom," he added while on the phone.Then he took it a step further and wanted to speak to the president.  "Donald Trump is a close friend of mine," said Frydberg. "We made a deal," he added while he was trying to convince the operator.Frydberg then changed gears and tried a different strategy.  "My mom called me and said she was in a car accident in Homestead," he said. "My flesh and blood was in a car accident and I have to stop and help you," Frydberg added.Deputies eventually got him off the road and phone.The report goes on to say the deputies searched the car and found glass pipes with burnt leafy residue on them. They later field tested the particles and it tested positive for marijuana.Frydberg is being charged with tampering with evidence, resisting an officer, and two counts of battery of an officer. 1744