濮阳东方医院治疗阳痿咨询电话濮阳东方看男科病非常便宜,濮阳东方医院看男科病收费标准,濮阳东方医院男科收费与服务,濮阳东方医院妇科技术值得信任,濮阳东方在线咨询,濮阳东方医院口碑很高,濮阳东方妇科线上咨询挂号

This holiday season, you may be stocking up on canned drinks for parties and guests. Well, you'll want to clean off those cans before handing them out!Investigator reporter Jace Larson tested soda cans for bacteria, and what he found was pretty gross.The cans tested came from a variety of places, including grocery stores, convenience stores, vending machines and cans stored in a home. All but one of the cans tested had mold on it.The highest mold count was 600 colonies of mold. That can came from a grocery store.This type of exposure could make people with compromised immune systems or lung disease sick.To put that number of colonies into perspective-- a flooded home could have 2,000-plus colonies of mold, while a condemned home could have roughly levels around 36,000.However, microbiologist Helene Ver Eecke, with the Metropolitan State University of Denver, says the 600 colonies of mold isn’t really a cause for concern.“Regular microbial load that we are constantly dosing ourselves with everything that we touch with everything we breathe,” Ver Eecke says. “It's just part of being human.”One soda can did test for bacteria levels that would be slightly concerning. The can—purchased from a convenience store--had the highest levels, with 3,700 bacteria colonies on it.But compared to dry cereal mixes, which can have up to 100,000 bacteria colonies and deemed safe to consume by FDA standards, the colonies found on that can were significantly less."There was one sample that came from a convenience store that had a higher bacterial count than samples, which makes sense because they were probably stocked probably appropriate for people to wear gloves when stocking," explains Ver Eecke.If you’re worried about the amount of bacteria, Ver Eecke recommends seeking other options."There may be other options for you a bottle or other things to try to help keep you safe." 1901

Top Republicans on Capitol Hill have made a concerted decision in their Russia inquiries: They are staying away from digging into the finances of President Donald Trump and his family.Six Republican leaders of key committees told CNN they see little reason to pursue those lines of inquiry or made no commitments to do so -- even as Democrats say determining whether there was a financial link between Trump, his family, his business and Russians is essential to understanding whether there was any collusion in the 2016 elections.Republicans have resisted calls to issue subpoenas for bank records, seeking Trump's tax returns or sending letters to witnesses to determine whether there were any Trump financial links to Russian actors -- calling the push nothing more than a Democratic fishing expedition.  820

Top North Korean officials warned the United States in a letter that denuclearization talks are "again at stake and may fall apart," sources familiar with the process told CNN.The letter was delivered to US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who abruptly canceled his fourth trip to Pyongyang, hours before he was scheduled to depart with his new special envoy Stephen Biegun on Friday, sources said.Three sources with direct knowledge of the North Korean position on denuclearization said the letter stated that Kim's regime felt that the process couldn't move forward because "the US is still not ready to meet (North Korean) expectations in terms of taking a step forward to sign a peace treaty."The US has so far been unwilling to replace the armistice agreement that ended the Korean War with a permanent, legally binding peace treaty, which would require the approval of two-thirds of the US Senate.If a compromise cannot be reached and nascent talks crumble, Pyongyang could resume "nuclear and missile activities," the sources said.The existence of the letter, sent to Pompeo by Kim Yong Chol, the former head of North Korea's spy agency, was first reported by the Washington Post.The Post, which characterized the letter as a "secret" communication, said it wasn't clear how Kim had gotten the letter to Pompeo, but suggested that it may have been sent through its UN mission.However, Pompeo has been relying on other backchannels, as opposed to dealing directly with his diplomatic counterpart North Korean Foreign Minister Ri Yong Ho, one source said."Before and after Pompeo became the Secretary of State, he seemed to be more interested in maintaining and engaging with Kim Yong Chol through a backdoor channel, rather than with his formal counterpart Ri Yong Ho," said the source. 1809

There are options when it comes to getting a car. You can lease or buy, and now, you can get a car subscription.Luxury car makers like BMW, Jaguar, and Cadillac offer subscription services to their high-end cars, but it’s set you back a couple thousand. That’s why Ford is offering a more affordable service with used vehicles."You're going to be looking at around 0 monthly subscription cost, but that's inclusive of the vehicle the driving insurance your maintenance,” explains Allison Braley with Canvas, Ford’s subscription service. “You don't have to worry about out-of-pocket maintenance costs. There's no down payment."  Braley says it's an all-inclusive bundle, unlike with a lease. Many subscription services don’t' have a down payment or require car insurance. "A lease is great solution for people who know what kind of car they want for two to three years or more,” Braley says.  Through subscriptions, you pay a fee to swap out a car. For example, when winter comes around and you want to trade in your sedan for an SUV, with Canvas you pay a fee to swap cars.  FiveCentNickel.com says, on average, a car owner will spend ,200 a year on maintenance.  If your car breaks down or needs an oil change, most subscription services will pay for out of pocket maintenance. Subscription services are great if you want convenience, flexibility and a lifestyle where you change vehicle often.However, convenience often comes with a price. If you’re on a budget, financial expert Jonathan Duong says it may not be worth it. 1572

They’ve been fighting in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania over the cutoff date for counting mailed ballots, and in North Carolina over witness requirements. Ohio is grappling with drop boxes for ballots as Texas faces a court challenge over extra days of early voting.Measuring the anxiety over the November election is as simple as tallying the hundreds of voting-related lawsuits filed across the country in recent months. The cases concern the fundamentals of the American voting process, including how ballots are cast and counted, during an election made unique by the coronavirus pandemic and by a president who refuses to commit to accepting the results.The lawsuits are all the more important because President Donald Trump has raised the prospect that the election may wind up before a Supreme Court with a decidedly Republican tilt if his latest nominee is confirmed.“This is a president who has expressed his opposition to access to mail ballots and has also seemed to almost foreshadow the inevitability that this election will be one decided by the courts,” said Kristen Clarke, executive director of the National Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.That opposition was on display Tuesday during the first presidential debate when Trump launched into an extended argument against mail voting, claiming without evidence that it is ripe for fraud and suggesting mail ballots may be “manipulated.”“This is going to be a fraud like you’ve never seen,” the president said of the massive shift to mail voting prompted by the pandemic.The lawsuits are a likely precursor for what will come afterward. Republicans say they have retained outside law firms, along with thousands of volunteer lawyers at the ready. Democrats have announced a legal war room of heavyweights, including a pair of former solicitors general.The race is already regarded as the most litigated in American history, due in large part to the massive expansion of mail and absentee voting. Loyola Law School professor Justin Levitt, a former Justice Department elections official, has tallied some 260 lawsuits arising from the coronavirus. The Republication National Committee says it’s involved in more than 40 lawsuits, and a website operated by a chief Democrat lawyer lists active cases worth watching in about 15 states.Democrats are focusing their efforts on multiple core areas — securing free postage for mail ballots, reforming signature-match laws, allowing ballot collection by third-parties like community organizations and ensuring that ballots postmarked by Election Day can count. Republicans warn that those same requests open the door to voter fraud and confusion and are countering efforts to relax rules on how voters cast ballots this November.“We’re trying to prevent chaos in the process,” RNC chief counsel Justin Riemer said in an interview. “Nothing creates more chaos than rewriting a bunch of rules at the last minute.”But there have been no broad-based, sweeping examples of voter fraud during past presidential elections, including in 2016, when Trump claimed the contest would be rigged and Russians sought to meddle in the outcome.Some of the disputes are unfolding in states not traditionally thought of as election battlegrounds, such as Montana, where there is a highly competitive U.S. Senate race on the ballot. A judge Wednesday rejected an effort by Trump’s reelection campaign and Republican groups to block counties from holding the general election mostly by mail.But most of the closely watched cases are in states perceived as up-for-grabs in 2020 and probably crucial to the race.That includes Ohio, where a coalition of voting groups and Democrats have sued to force an expansion of ballot drop boxes from more than just one per county. Separately on Monday, a federal judge rejected changes to the state’s signature-matching requirement for ballots and ballot applications, handing a win to the state’s Republican election chief who has been engulfed with litigation this election season.In Arizona, a judge’s ruling that voters who forget to sign their early ballots have up to five days after the election to fix the problem is now on appeal before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld a six-day extension for counting absentee ballots in Wisconsin as long as they are postmarked by Election Day. The ruling gave Democrats in the state at least a temporary victory in a case that could nonetheless by appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. In neighboring Michigan, the GOP is suing to try to overturn a decision that lets the state count absentee ballots up to 14 days after the election.In battleground North Carolina, where voters are already struggling with rules requiring witness signatures on absentee ballots, the RNC and Trump’s campaign committee have sued over new election guidance that will permit ballots with incomplete witness information to be fixed without the voter having to fill out a new blank ballot.In Iowa, the Trump campaign and Republican groups have won a series of sweeping legal victories in their attempts to limit absentee voting, with judges throwing out tens of thousands of absentee ballot applications in three counties. This week, another judge upheld a new Republican-backed law that will make it harder for counties to process absentee ballot applications.Pennsylvania has been a particular hive of activity.Republican lawmakers asked the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday to put a hold on a ruling by the state’s highest court that extends the deadline for receiving and counting mailed-in ballots. Republicans also object to a portion of the state court’s ruling that orders counties to count ballots that arrive during the three-day extension period even if they lack a postmark or legible postmark.Meanwhile in federal court, Republicans are suing to, among other things, outlaw drop boxes or other sites used to collect mail-in ballots.The Supreme Court itself has already been asked to get involved in several cases, as it did in April, when conservative justices blocked Democratic efforts to extend absentee voting in Wisconsin during the primary.There is, of course, precedent for an election that ends in the courts. In 2000, the Supreme Court settled a recount dispute in Florida, effectively handing the election to Republican George W. Bush.Barry Richard, a Florida lawyer who represented Bush during that litigation, said there’s no guarantee the Supreme Court will want to get involved again, or that any lawsuit over the election will present a compelling issue for the bench to address.One significant difference between then and now, he said, is that neither candidate raised the prospect of not accepting the results.“There was never any question, in 2000, about the essential integrity of the system. Neither candidate challenged it,” Richard said. “Nobody even talked about whether or not the losing candidate would accept the results of the election. That was just assumed.”_____Follow Eric Tucker on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/etuckerAP 7075