阜阳治扁平疣的多少钱阜阳市哪里可以治疗湿疹,阜阳哪有看皮炎的医院,阜阳皮肤白斑的中医治疗,阜阳市皮肤痒病,阜阳看痘痘到医院,阜阳怎么样治疗灰趾甲,阜阳市颍泉区去痤疮医院

ABBOTT PARK, Ill. – As the coronavirus continues to spread and the need for more testing grows with it, labs across the U.S. are racing to get approval for their tests for COVID-19. The company Abbott is one of them. “Abbott was able to get an emergency use authorization for a new test, molecular test for the SARS-coronavirus-2,” said John Hackett, Jr., the Divisional Vice President of Applied Research and Technology at Abbott. Researchers inside their Illinois lab created a test that can be used with the company’s testing system, called “m2000 RealTime.” That’s key because the company says that system is already widely available in hospitals and testing labs around the country. “These are in hospitals and academic centers and this is where the test volume is,” Hackett said. The speed in regulatory approval from the FDA for the test was unprecedented. The company said that, normally, it can take several years to get a test approved; this one happened in a matter of weeks. Their testing system can run through 470 patient tests per day. “This is a massive impact when you think about trying to get results back to the physicians,” Hackett said. “This is actionable information - either a person's infected or they're not.” About 150,000 tests are now on their way to hospitals and labs in 18 states – including New York, California and Washington – some of the hardest hit by COVID-19. The company plans to be producing a million tests a week by the end of this month. Other companies, including those in California and Texas, have similar authorizations from the FDA and are hoping to provide more tests. “The key thing here is to get to a point where we can change the trajectory, reduce the trajectory, reduce the number of new infections that are occurring,” Hackett said.It’s a change they hope might put a dent in the coronavirus pandemic. 1872

Pedro Rios says the idea that immigrants are coming to this country solely to be a burden to the United States is absolutely false. Rios is the Executive Director of American Friends Service Committee – a national organization that has worked on immigration and border issues for 42 years. He says he is against a new rule that disqualifies immigrants from a green card if they use certain government benefits, because he says it's causing people to drop out of benefit services they do qualify for. “In this case, prenatal care is not a targeted benefit. However, someone might decide to stop receiving that care simply because they fear that it would place them at the crosshairs of some sort of immigration enforcement operation,” Rios said. Dulce Garcia, an immigration attorney and DACA recipient, agrees with Rios. She says the rule has a two-fold impact: it denies more people the ability to qualify as a legal permanent resident, and now people are afraid of accessing other public benefits. She knows from personal experience when her family had to live inside a car and with very little food. “We’re going to see more people like my parents who were afraid of accessing public benefits and decided to risk our health essentially by remaining unsheltered and by struggling with food,” Garcia said. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is a food program that's among those included in the rule. If immigrants collect those benefits more than 12 months in three years, they can't get a green card - and become a permanent resident. “We all fall on hard times. My family fell on hard times, and I wish that we would have had people telling us ‘it’s OK, it’s OK to receive help’ so that we would be safe.” As the executive director of Border Angels, a nonprofit that advocates for the immigrant community, Garcia says she tries to empower immigrants with accurate information so they know what benefits they’re still eligible for. However, there are people in favor of the rule, like Agnes Gibboney, who was born in Hungary. Her family entered the U.S. in 1970. “When we immigrated to the U.S., my parents had to sign a document stating they would not apply for any public assistance. That my father could support my mother, my brother and myself,” Gibboney said. Gibboney says she doesn't like the idea of immigrants using taxpayer dollars for services. “The importance of being fully vetted is for the government to know who is coming into this country. To make sure you are of good moral standing, to make sure you’re going to be a good citizen, and make sure that you’re gonna be a plus to this country,” Gibboney said. When it announced the new rule, the Department of Homeland Security called self-sufficiency a core American value. On the other hand, Rios says public benefits might be necessary in order for some immigrants to eventually become self-sufficient.“What we’ve seen in the past is when their needs aren’t being met, then it’s harder for them to support themselves in other ways,” Rios said.  3052

Colorado Gov. Jared Polis signed an executive order on Thursday that granted pardons to people who have been convicted of possessing one ounce or less of marijuana. “We are finally cleaning up some of the inequities of the past by pardoning 2,732 convictions for Coloradans who simply had an ounce of marijuana or less," Polis said. "It’s ridiculous how being written up for smoking a joint in the 1970s has followed some Coloradans throughout their lives and gotten in the way of their success."This pardon applies to all state-level convictions of possession for one ounce or less of marijuana. Read the full executive order here. Polis said too many Coloradans have "been followed their entire lives by a conviction for something that is no longer a crime, and these convictions have impacted their job status, housing, and countless other areas of their lives."In June, Polis signed the bipartisan HB 20-1424 Social Equity Licensees In Regulated Marijuana, which was sponsored by Rep. James Coleman, Sen. Julie Gonzales and Sen. Vicki Marble, including an amendment sponsored by Sen. Gonzales. This authorizes the governor to grant pardons to people who were convicted of possessing up to two ounces of marijuana. Individuals who fall in this category don't need to apply for the pardon. Those who were convicted of municipal marijuana crimes, or individuals arrested or issued a summons without a conviction, aren't included in the pardons. This new law went into effect in October. This story was originally published by Stephanie Butzer on thedenverchannel.com. 1592

It’s a beautiful, sunny day in Fort Collins, Colorado. Maybe you want to take your shirt off. Well now, men and women both can show a little skin in the city. Or actually… anywhere in Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, New Mexico, Kansas or Oklahoma. That’s because of a recent court decision, one the city of Fort Collins decided not to fight. It’s a big deal for Brit Hoagland and many women who say it’s their right to wear or not wear a shirt. “Addressing small parts of inequality can make a big difference in how people are treated on a day to day basis, and I thought free the nipple was just one small step closer to how it should be,” said Hoagland. Brit, along with co-plaintiff Samantha Six, sued the city of Fort Collins for the right to go topless in public. It’s part of the #FreeTheNipple movement you might have seen trending on Instagram. Andy McNulty is their attorney and says the law is an attack on equal rights. “Any law that says, ‘Women are prohibited from,’ is unconstitutional and really just intolerable in a society that should treat women as equal to men,” said McNulty. “Everybody should be able to be comfortable on a hot day and if that means taking their shirt of so be it. No matter how you look, you should have the same freedom at the person next to you. And it’s also about equality,” said Hoagland. “They had been advocating for a while, trying to get the Fort Collins City Council to get rid of a female topless ban in Fort Collins. They’d been unsuccessful, and they wanted to see if we would be willing to represent them in a legal challenge to that ordinance,” said McNulty. After the courts ruled in favor of nudity, the city appealed to the federal 10th Circuit of Appeals. That court also ruled in favor of topless women. Fort Collins decided they were not going to try and win at the US Supreme Court. “I think the council as they articulated in their 4-3 vote, really just thought as a matter of priority, no guarantee of success or that the supreme court would even take it up, that the money was just better spent on other city priorities,” said Tyler Marr, deputy director of information for the city of Fort Collins. And that means laws banning women from being topless are not enforceable in all six states in the 10th District. “We made a huge impact way beyond Fort Collins, and we were just trying to start a conversation. And that conversation reached to so many more people. It’s a miraculous achievement I didn’t think I would see in my lifetime let alone so soon,” said Hoagland. But that’s not to say there aren’t some mixed feelings. “I guess as a woman, I mean, I do think we deserve equal rights in everything, so I guess that would count too. But I think if women do choose to do that, they might be asking for a little bit of trouble,” said Peg Williams of Boulder, Colorado. “Just seems like a contradictory of laws a woman can expose her breasts, but a man can’t go in an alley behind a dumpster and take a pee without coming up on criminal charges,” said George Langel of Fort Collins. However, it’s not all bare breasts and roses. In 2017 the 7th circuit of appeals ruled to uphold Chicago’s topless ban. That means there’s two districts in the country with opposing views on the matter. If more lawsuits pop up around the country, the supreme court may have to rule on the issue after all. McNulty says it’s an important issue about equality and how we look at women. “The idea that women’s bodies are purely sexual is something that, it was perpetuated by this law. By getting rid of this law, we are saying women are more than just a sexual object and their bodies are more than just a sexual object. They’re human beings just like men.” “Our win can show that even in other places that, there’s still hope, and that things can change maybe from a different angle,” said Hoagland. And they think that, is a battle worth fighting. 3927

LAKE POWELL, Utah — A baby from St. George has set the record for the youngest child to water-ski, his family says.Casey and Mindi Humpherys posted a photo and a video of 6-month-old Rich skiing at Lake Powell on Instagram earlier this week, captioned "I went water skiing for my 6 month birthday. Apparently that’s a big deal… #worldrecord" on an account dedicated to photos of the boy growing up and going on outdoor adventures. His parents, on their own individual Instagram accounts, specified that Rich was six months and four days old at the time — beating the youngest-known record by six days. The previous record was set by Auburn Absher in 2016 at six months and 10 days old, according to reports from BuzzFeed and ABC News. No official records are available for the youngest child to water-ski."Take one look at this kid and tell me he isn’t having the time of his life! Such a little stud!" his dad added. This story originally reported by Spencer Burt on fox13now.com. 1028