濮阳东方医院妇科技术先进(濮阳市东方医院价格合理) (今日更新中)

WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal appeals court ruled Thursday that the Trump administration endangered public health by keeping a widely used pesticide on the market despite extensive scientific evidence that even tiny levels of exposure can harm babies' brains.The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ordered the Environmental Protection Agency to remove chlorpyrifos from sale in the United States within 60 days.A coalition of farmworkers and environmental groups sued last year after then-EPA chief Scott Pruitt reversed an Obama-era effort to ban chlorpyrifos, which is widely sprayed on citrus fruit, apples and other crops. The attorneys general for several states joined the case against EPA, including California, New York and Massachusetts.RELATED: EPA Chief Scott Pruitt quits amid ethics scandalsIn a split decision, the court said Thursday that Pruitt, a Republican forced to resign earlier this summer amid ethics scandals, violated federal law by ignoring the conclusions of agency scientists that chlorpyrifos is harmful."The panel held that there was no justification for the EPA's decision in its 2017 order to maintain a tolerance for chlorpyrifos in the face of scientific evidence that its residue on food causes neurodevelopmental damage to children," Judge Jed S. Rakoff wrote in the court's opinion.Michael Abboud, spokesman for acting EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler, said the agency was reviewing the decision, but it had been unable to "fully evaluate the pesticide using the best available, transparent science."RELATED: Trump administration wants to lower emissions standards for carsEPA could potentially appeal to the Supreme Court since one member of the three-judge panel dissented from the majority ruling.Environmental groups and public health advocates celebrated the court's action as a major success."Some things are too sacred to play politics with, and our kids top the list," said Erik Olson, senior director of health and food at the Natural Resources Defense Council. "The court has made it clear that children's health must come before powerful polluters. This is a victory for parents everywhere who want to feed their kids fruits and veggies without fear it's harming their brains or poisoning communities."The attorneys general of California and New York also claimed victory.RELATED: EPA Pushes Back Against Asbestos Comeback Claims"This is one more example of how then-EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt skirted the law and endangered the health of our children — in this case, all because he refused to curb pesticide levels found in food," Attorney General Xavier Becerra of California said in a statement.Chlorpyrifos was created by Dow Chemical Co. in the 1960s. It remains among the most widely used agricultural pesticides in the United States, with the chemical giant selling about 5 million pounds domestically each year through its subsidiary Dow AgroSciences.Dow did not respond to an email seeking comment. In past statements, the company has contended the chemical helps American farmers feed the world "with full respect for human health and the environment."Chlorpyrifos belongs to a family of organophosphate pesticides that are chemically similar to a chemical warfare agent developed by Nazi Germany before World War II.As a result of its wide use as a pesticide over the past four decades, traces of chlorpyrifos are commonly found in sources of drinking water. A 2012 study at the University of California at Berkeley found that 87 percent of umbilical-cord blood samples tested from newborn babies contained detectable levels of the pesticide.Under pressure from federal regulators, Dow voluntarily withdrew chlorpyrifos for use as a home insecticide in 2000. EPA also placed "no-spray" buffer zones around sensitive sites, such as schools, in 2012.In October 2015, the Obama administration proposed banning the pesticide's use on food. A risk assessment memo issued by nine EPA scientists concluded: "There is a breadth of information available on the potential adverse neurodevelopmental effects in infants and children as a result of prenatal exposure to chlorpyrifos."Federal law requires EPA to ensure that pesticides used on food in the United States are safe for human consumption — especially children, who are typically far more sensitive to the negative effects of poisons.Shortly after his appointment by President Donald Trump in 2017, Pruitt announced he was reversing the Obama administration effort to ban chlorpyrifos, adopting Dow's position that the science showing chlorpyrifos is harmful was inconclusive and flawed.The Associated Press reported in June 2017 that Pruitt announced his agency's reversal on chlorpyrifos just 20 days after his official schedule showed a meeting with Dow CEO Andrew Liveris. At the time, Liveris headed a White House manufacturing working group, and his company had written a million check to help underwrite Trump's inaugural festivities.Following AP's report, then-EPA spokeswoman Liz Bowman said that March 9, 2017, meeting on Pruitt's schedule never happened. Bowman said the two men had instead shared only a "brief introduction in passing" while attending the same industry conference at a Houston hotel and that they never discussed chlorpyrifos.However, internal EPA emails released earlier this year following a public records lawsuit filed by The Sierra Club suggest the two men shared more than a quick handshake.Little more than a week after the conference and before Pruitt announced his decision, the EPA chief's scheduler reached out to Liveris' executive assistant to schedule a follow-up meeting."Hope this email finds you well!" wrote Sydney Hupp, Pruitt's assistant, on March 20, 2017. "I am reaching out today about setting up a meeting to continue the discussion between Dow Chemical and Administrator Scott Pruitt. My apologies for the delay in getting this email into you — it has been a crazy time over here!"Subsequent emails show Hupp and Liveris' office discussing several potential dates that the Dow CEO might come to Pruitt's office at EPA headquarters, but it is not clear from the documents whether the two men ever linked up.Liveris announced his retirement from Dow in March of this year.Pruitt resigned July 6 amid more than a dozen ethics investigations focused on such issues as outsized security spending, first-class flights and a sweetheart condo lease for a Capitol Hill condo linked to an energy lobbyist.Bowman, who left EPA in May to work for GOP Sen. Joni Ernest of Iowa, declined to comment on her earlier characterization of the March 2017 interaction between Pruitt and Liveris or what "discussion" the internal email was referring to."I don't work for EPA anymore," Bowman said.___Follow Associated Press investigative reporter Michael Biesecker at http://twitter.com/mbieseck 6863

Warner Bros. is fast-tracking "Wonder Woman 3" after "Wonder Woman 1984" made .7 million in theaters opening weekend in the United States during the coronavirus pandemic.The newest movie, which debuted in theaters and streamed on HBO Max on the same day, exceeding box office projections during the coronavirus pandemic, Warner Bros. said in a statement.The third movie will be written and directed by Patty Jenkins and will again star Gal Gadot."As fans around the world continue to embrace Diana Prince, driving the strong opening weekend performance of Wonder Woman 1984, we are excited to be able to continue her story with our real-life Wonder Women – Gal and Patty – who will return to conclude the long-planned theatrical trilogy," said Toby Emmerich, Chairman, Warner Bros. Pictures Group, in the statement.Although Warner Bros. did not share how many viewers watched on HBO Max, they did say that nearly half of the platform's subscribers viewed the movie on its first day on the streaming platform.Internationally, the movie grossed million. 1066

VISTA, Calif. (KGTV) -- The San Diego District Attorney is expected to decide later this week whether there should be a new trial in the case of Kellen Winslow Junior.Tuesday morning, the judge declared a mistrial after the jury said it was deadlocked on eight remaining counts. The counts include kidnapping, forcible rape and forcible oral copulation involving a hitchhiker last year in Encinitas and forcible rape and rape of an unconscious person for an alleged attack on a teenager at a party in Scripps Ranch back in 2003 when she was 17 and Winslow was 19. The other counts the jury deadlocked on are willful cruelty to an elder and battery against an elder. The prosecutor said the jurors were leaning toward conviction. "On each one of the counts, there were a majority of jurors who voted in favor of guilt. They voted 10-2 in favor of guilt on forcible sodomy of Jane Doe 2. They voted 10-2 in favor of guilt for the forcible rape of Jane Doe 4. They voted 10-2 in favor of guilt on the counts of elder abuse and elder battery regarding Jane Doe 5 and then they voted 8-4 in favor of guilt on the rape of an unconscious person for Jane Doe 4 and they voted 7-5 in favor of guilt on the kidnap for rape, forcible oral copulation and and forcible rape of Jane Doe 1," said Prosecutor Dan Owens. Defense attorneys said the deadlocked jury shows there were credibility issues among the accusers. RELATED: Winslow II found guilty of rape, lewd conduct, indecent exposure"Credibility is the issue in this case. There was no corroborating evidence whatsoever, it's just people's word," said defense attorney Brian Watkins. The case involved 12 counts and the testimony of 5 women."We were always concerned about trying the cases together. Our position was always that these cases would not be able to stand alone. We fought to keep the cases separate. We lost that battle. We took on all these cases at once and we still prevailed to the point that we did not get convicted of everything and we have more litigation to do," said Watkins. Monday afternoon, the jury convicted Winslow of raping a 58-year-old homeless woman in Encinitas last year. Jurors also found the former NFL tight end guilty of indecent exposure and lewd conduct involving two other women. He was acquitted of a second count of lewd conduct involving one of those women. Watkins said they'll appeal the three convictions. "We won't be satisfied until he's exonerated and he's back home with his family," said Watkins. RELATED: Jurors request clarifications from judge as Winslow deliberations continueWinslow is facing 9 years in prison on the convictions, but if he had been convicted of raping more than one woman he could've been sentenced to life in prison. "Right now, he's facing eight years in state prison, life time sex offender registration for the forcible rape of Jane Doe 2. He'd be facing an additional 6 months for each 1 of the misdemeanor counts of indecent exposure and lewd acts committed against Jane Does 3 and 5, for a total of potentially 9 years in prison," said Owens. Sentencing is on hold until a decision is made about a new trial. Winslow's father, Kellen Winslow Senior, a Chargers Hall of Famer attended every day of the trial, but declined to talk to the media. A hearing is scheduled for 10 a.m. Friday on setting a new trial. "Ten jurors did feel very strongly that he had committed forcible sexual offenses against more than one victim, that would lead to a lifetime prison term and that will be another factor we will consider very strongly in determining how to proceed with the case," said Owens. 3618

Voters in Colorado have rejected a measure that would have added buffer zones for new oil and gas drilling areas.The passage of Proposition 112 would have banned drilling of wells within 2,500 feet of occupied buildings, water sources and other "vulnerable" areas. But voters rejected it, with 57% of the state's voters saying no.If approved, Colorado's flourishing oil industry would've been dealt a major blow because a chunk of the surging Denver-Julesburg, or DJ, basin in Colorado, would suddenly become off limits. 528

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump and Democratic rival Joe Biden faced inquisitive voters on separate stages in different cities Thursday night in a substitute for the debate that was meant to be.Here's how some of the rhetoric compared with the facts in the prime-time events and a day of campaigning:ECONOMYTRUMP, answering questions in Miami on NBC: “We had the greatest economy in the history of our country.”THE FACTS: The numbers show it wasn’t the greatest in U.S. history.Did the U.S. have the most jobs on record before the pandemic? Sure, the population had grown. The 3.5% unemployment rate before the recession was at a half-century low, but the percentage of people working or searching for jobs was still below a 2000 peak.Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Romer looked at Trump’s economic growth record this month. Growth under Trump averaged 2.48% annually before the pandemic, only slightly better than the 2.41% gains achieved during Barack Obama’s second term. By contrast, the economic expansion that began in 1982 during Ronald Reagan’s presidency averaged 4.2% a year.So Trump is wrong.___ELECTION FRAUDTRUMP: “When I see thousands of ballots dumped in a garbage can and they happen to have my name on it? I’m not happy about it.” — from Miami.THE FACTS: Nobody has seen that. Contrary to Trump’s repeated, baseless attacks on voting security, voting and election fraud is vanishingly rare. No cases involving thousands of ballots dumped in the trash have been reported in this election.Trump has cited a case of military ballots marked for him being thrown in the trash in Pennsylvania as evidence of a possible plot to steal the election. But he leaves out the details: County election officials say that the seven ballots, along with two unopened ones, were accidentally tossed in an elections office in a Republican-controlled county by a single contract worker and that authorities were swiftly called.The Brennan Center for Justice in 2017 ranked the risk of ballot fraud at 0.00004% to 0.0009%, based on studies of past elections.In the five states that regularly send ballots to all voters, there have been no major cases of fraud or difficulty counting the votes.___CRIMEBIDEN, answering questions in Philadelphia on ABC: “The crime bill itself did not have mandatory sentences, except for two things, it had three strikes and you’re out, which I voted against in the crime bill.”THE FACTS: That's misleading. He is understating the impact of the bill and the influence he brought to bear in getting it passed into law.Biden wrote and voted for that sweeping 1994 crime bill, which included money for more prisons, authorized the federal death penalty and called for a mandatory life sentence for three-time violent offenders – the so-called three strikes provision.He did call the three-strikes rule “wacko” at one point, even as he was helping to write the bill. Whatever his reservations about certain provisions, he ultimately voted for the legislation, which included the three-strikes rule and has come to be seen in the Black Lives Matter era as a heavy-handed and discriminatory tool of the justice system.___TROOPSBIDEN in Philadelphia, on U.S. troops in Afghanistan: “They have more people there now, by the way, then when I left, when we left in Afghanistan.”THE FACTS: Not so.The U.S. now has about 5,000 troops in Afghanistan. The troop level did not dip below 8,400 before President Barack Obama left office. The U.S. had about 8,500 troops in Afghanistan during Trump’s first several months in office.The number of troops in Afghanistan reached 100,000 in 2010, before Obama took office. Obama did withdraw thousands of troops during his two terms, but he was unable to fulfill promises to decrease the number of troops to 5,500 toward the final years of his presidency.___CORONAVIRUSTRUMP: "Just the other day they came out with a statement that 85% of the people that wear masks catch it so ... that’s what I heard and that’s what I saw.” — town-hall event in Miami.TRUMP, on his rallies: “What I do is outside is a big thing. And if you look at those, people, they really are wearing masks. I’ll tell you, I looked last night in Iowa — there were many, many people wearing masks. But then you see CDC comes out with a statement that 85% of the people wearing masks catch it.” — Fox Business interview.TRUMP, looking out over his crowd: “Look at all the masks. You know, they keep saying, ‘nobody wears a mask, wear the mask.’ Although then they come out with things today. Did you see CDC? That 85% of the people wearing a mask catch it, OK?” — remarks at rally during the day in Greenville, North Carolina.THE FACTS: He's botching the study's findings, repeatedly. The study cited, by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, did not find that 85% of mask wearers catch COVID-19. If that were the case, the majority of Americans would be infected.It found something quite different: that 85% of the small group of COVID-19 patients surveyed — about 150 on this question — reported they had worn a mask often or always around the time they would have become infected.The group's exposure to potentially infected people in the community varied. Most reported shopping or being in a home with multiple people. But they were twice as likely to have eaten at a restaurant, where masks are set aside for the meal, than were uninfected people in a control group.Most studies have shown that wearing masks reduces the transmission of the virus by blocking respiratory droplets. Several studies have also shown that masks could offer some protection for the people who wear them.The findings were in a CDC Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, published last month.___TRUMP, reacting to the news that people associated with the Biden campaign on a recent flight with Harris tested positive for COVID-19: “We extend our best wishes, which is more than they did to me, but that’s OK.” — Greenville rally.THE FACTS: That’s false.Hours after Trump’s early morning announcement on Oct. 2 that he had tested positive, both Biden and Harris sent their wishes for a quick recovery via Twitter.“Jill and I send our thoughts to President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump for a swift recovery,” Biden wrote. “We will continue to pray for the health and safety of the president and his family.”Harris tweeted a similar message “wishing President Trump and the First Lady a full and speedy recovery. We’re keeping them and the entire Trump family in our thoughts.”The Biden campaign at the time also announced it would stop running negative ads, with the candidate tweeting that “this cannot be a partisan moment” after the news that Trump was going to Walter Reed National Military Medical Center for treatment of his coronavirus infection. Biden’s camp resumed the advertising after Trump was released from Walter Reed.At least three people connected to Biden’s campaign have tested positive for the coronavirus, leading the campaign to suspend in-person events for Harris through Monday. 7044

来源：资阳报