濮阳东方医院治疗早泄技术值得信任(濮阳东方妇科评价高专业) (今日更新中)

The risk of homelessness looms large for many across the country as people deal with job loss and economic uncertainty brought on by the coronavirus pandemic.The National Alliance to End Homelessness estimates, right now, there are 567,000 people who call the streets their home, a number that has only risen since March.There are shelters, soup kitchens, and myriad charities to help, but the group Foundations for Social Change, a charitable organization based in Vancouver, Canada, suggests one source of help trumps the rest: money.“Sometimes a little bit of a hand up can mean all the difference in whether or not someone is going to stabilize and get into housing or not,” said chief public policy officer for the Colorado Coalition for the Homeless Cathy Alderman.It might seem like an obvious solution, but it is challenged by the preconceived notion that people battling homelessness might squander the money or spend it on harmful habits like alcohol, drugs, or cigarettes.“I think it’s not surprising at all that people who are struggling with the cost of living and forced to sleep outside would use dollars given to them to get inside into a home,” said Alderman.In September, Foundations for Social Change wrapped up nearly two years of research that suggests those in less fortunate circumstances would use money to help secure food and housing, rather than illicit substances.Back in 2018, the group gave 50 people battling homelessness in Vancouver a lump sum of ,700, without restriction, to see what they would spend it on, and they compared the findings to a group of 60 homeless individuals who were not given any lump sum.Foundations for Social Change found that in the first month, the group that received the payment, 70 percent of them were able to access a sustainable food source that they maintained for the rest of the year. They also found stable housing at a rate that outpaced those who had not received the payments by 12 months.The researchers also found that spending on items like drugs, alcohol, and cigarettes decreased by 39 percent.“The key findings were phenomenal and were even well beyond my expectations,” said one of the head researchers, Dr. Jiaying Zhao. “This actually is counter to our common assumptions of how these folks will spend their money and cash, so that was very good to see.”“I would save a third, spend a third on things I know I needed, and then give a third away,” said Benjamin Dunning, who was homeless for nearly five years following the Great Recession in 2008. “There just wasn’t any work available and I was like, 'well, better dig in for the long haul.'"Dunning says following an injury that prevented him from working he was no longer able to afford rent in the Denver suburb where he lived. He says he moved from shelter to shelter, trying to weather the storm before he was able to find a community of other people in a similar situation that offered a little more stability and a consistent roof over his head.“One thing I found out is [the homeless people I was around] were just like my neighbors in the suburbs,” said Dunning. “Most of them were people who had gotten stuck on hard times and trying to figure out how to deal with it.”The study by Foundations for Social Change focused on people who had been homeless for a year or less and who had been screened for a low risk of mental health challenges and substance abuse. So, Dr. Zhao says this is not a silver bullet, but an encouraging sign to help solve an issue that has several layers of complexity. 3546

The Senate on Wednesday will hold a hearing regarding the safety of vaccines, which will feature appearances by Surgeon General Dr. Jerome Adams and National Institutes of Health Director Dr. Francis Collins.The hearing, hosted by the Senate HELP Committee, will discuss the role of vaccines in preventing infectious disease outbreaks and protecting public health.Wednesday's hearing will also include information on a potential COVID-19 vaccine.Top U.S. health experts like Dr. Anthony Fauci say they are cautiously optimistic that there will be enough evidence to grant Emergency Use Authorization to top vaccine candidates by the end of 2020. However, recent polls indicate that some Americans remain skeptical about vaccines.A recent CBS News poll indicates that just 21% of American voters would receive a COVID-19 if one were made available at no cost. That's down from about 30% earlier this year. Two-thirds of those polled say they feel a vaccine would be "rushed" if a vaccine were made available this year.Fauci has said that if a potential vaccine is 75% effective against the virus, it still may not be effective in promoting inoculation levels necessary for "herd immunity" in the U.S. due to Americans' ongoing skepticism about vaccines.Nine vaccine makers banded together to sign a pledge on Tuesday to say that they will not seek Emergency Use Authorization for their vaccine candidates until scientific methods prove they are safe for widespread use. 1476

The wild ride on Wall Street just got crazier.The Dow dropped about 345 points, or 1.4%, on Tuesday, completely reversing a 244-point gain from early in the day. The selloff followed Monday's 670-point spike.The Nasdaq plunged nearly 3% -- wiping out nearly all of Monday's huge gains for the tech sector. The Nasdaq is now up just 1.5% on the year.Facebook, Twitter, Tesla and Nvidia all fell sharply. Netflix tumbled 6%, its biggest decline in two years."We started bleeding when large tech got hit hard," said Art Hogan, chief market strategist at B. Riley B.Investors poured money into bonds Tuesday. The 10-year Treasury yield slipped to 2.77%, the lowest since early February.But the sinking yields also narrowed the closely-watched gap between short and long-term rates, known as the yield curve."That has persistently been a signal of an economic slowdown," said Hogan. "I don't think that's the case here."A "flattening" yield curve also makes it harder for banks to make money on the difference between what they lend out and pay interest on. Bank of America, Wells Fargo and PNC fell more than 2% apiece.The-CNN-Wire 1135

The Senate voted Wednesday to pass a measure that would repeal changes to net neutrality rules that were recently adopted?by the Republican-controlled Federal Communications Commission.The measure, which was backed by all 49 Democrats and Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and John Kennedy of Louisiana, will be sent to the GOP-led House, where it'll likely go nowhere -- and President Donald Trump is unlikely to back it.While Collins' support had been public leading up to the vote, Murkowski's and Kennedy's "yes" vote came as a surprise to some.Democrats used the Congressional Review Act to force a vote -- a law that allows Congress to repeal agency rules and regulations on a simple majority vote, instead of a 60-vote threshold needed to break procedural hurdles on most legislation, the kinds of traditional roadblocks where Senate leadership could typically hold up such a proposal.Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer spoke after the vote to begin debate earlier Wednesday, arguing that "at stake is the future of the Internet.""That fundamental equality of access is what has made the internet so dynamic," he said on the Senate floor. "Net neutrality protected everyone ... that era, the era of an open Internet, will unfortunately soon come to an end."He continued: "The Democratic position is very simple. Let's treat the internet like the public good that it is."The FCC voted in December to repeal Obama-era protections. The net neutrality rules, approved by the same organization two years earlier, prohibited Internet service providers -- such as Comcast and Verizon -- from speeding up or slowing down traffic from specific websites and apps.Democrats argued the new FCC rules give too much power to Internet service providers, which they fear will throttle down speeds for some websites and services while ramping it up for others who pay more.Schumer said in an earlier statement, "The repeal of net neutrality is not only a blow to the average consumer, but it is a blow to public schools, rural Americans, communities of color and small businesses. A vote against this resolution will be a vote to protect large corporations and special interests, leaving the American public to pay the price."While Democrats recognize they are unlikely to reverse the FCC's rule, they see the issue as a key policy desire that energizes their base voters, a top priority ahead of the midterm elections. 2456

The wild is calling, and we're answering. Reserve yours 7.13.20. #FordBronco pic.twitter.com/2LEDH5FNtr— Ford Motor Company (@Ford) June 29, 2020 153

来源：资阳报