濮阳东方医院治阳痿技术安全放心(濮阳东方医院男科治早泄评价很好) (今日更新中)

SAN DIEGO (KGTV) — As temperatures warm up, there is some early research suggesting air conditioning units could increase the risk of spreading COVID-19.One team of researchers swabbed several kinds of air conditioning units and found traces of the virus on one out of every four samples.One of the authors, University of Oregon professor Dr. Kevin Van Den Wymelenberg, said the research “does give us some pause.”Air conditioning units bring in little outside air, particularly when temperatures are very hot, posing a risk that viral particles could be recirculated into rooms, Van Den Wymelenberg said.However, just because the study found traces of the virus in A/C units, it doesn’t prove people can actually get sick from the contaminated air because it’s not yet clear how many viral particles it takes to infect someone, he noted.“Nobody knows what that minimum threshold is so we need to take as many precautions as possible,” he said.Dr. Edward Nardell, a professor in the Departments of Environmental Health and Immunology and Infectious Diseases at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, said air conditioning units can generate air currents that can carry large particles farther, similar to what researchers found contributed to the spread of the novel coronavirus disease in an air-conditioned restaurant in Guangzhou, China."You are not socially distanced as much, but you're re-breathing the same air that someone else just exhaled," Nardell said. "We call it rebreathed air fraction, and if someone is infectious, often asymptomatic, you're going to be rebreathing their small particles."This week, a group of 239 scientists from 32 countries asked the World Health Organization to update its COVID-19 guidance to reflect that the virus is airborne.On Thursday, the WHO released updated guidance acknowledging that airborne transmission can’t be ruled out, but stopped short of confirming that the virus spreads through the air.Instead, the WHO said the virus primarily spreads through droplet transmission, where larger particles come out of an infected person’s mouth, then fall quickly to the ground or onto surfaces. In airborne transmission, the particles stay floating for a long time.“I think they’re underweighting the importance of this airborne route based on the best available information,” said UC Berkeley Professor Emeritus William Nazaroff, one of the signatories of the letter to the WHO.He said in a poorly ventilated room, particles might linger for 30 minutes to an hour.Scientists say one of the best ways to protect yourself is to open windows, to increase the circulation of fresh air.Scientists say upgraded air filters in AC units and standalone air purifiers could also help.Germicidal lamps may also be effective, Nardell said. The technology is almost 100 years old, and has been proven effective in protecting against tuberculosis infection.The lamps, which shine ultraviolet light, are set up to shine horizontally, high up in the room to kill floating pathogens.Nardell said the technology can be deployed cheaply and easily in a number of settings.Additional reporting by Lauren Rozyla at WFTS 3159

SAN DIEGO (KGTV) -- As drugmakers race to develop a vaccine against the coronavirus, several legal questions are emerging: could the government require people to get it? Could people who refuse to roll up their sleeves get banned from stores or lose their jobs?The short answer is yes, according to Dov Fox, a law professor and the director of the Center for Health Law Policy and Bioethics at the University of San Diego.“States can compel vaccinations in more or less intrusive ways,” he said in an interview. “They can limit access to schools or services or jobs if people don’t get vaccinated. They could force them to pay a fine or even lock them up in jail.”Fox noted authorities in the United States have never attempted to jail people for refusing to vaccinate, but other countries like France have adopted the aggressive tactic.The legal precedent dates back to 1905. In a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case, Jacobson v. Massachusetts, the court ruled Massachusetts had the authority to fine people who refused vaccinations for smallpox.That case formed the legal basis for vaccine requirements at schools, and has been upheld in subsequent decisions.“Courts have found that when medical necessity requires it, the public health outweighs the individual rights and liberties at stake,” Fox said.In 2019, New York City passed an ordinance that fined people who refused a measles vaccination.That said, recent protests over face coverings show there could be significant backlash to a vaccine mandate, Fox said. Just because states have the power to do it, doesn’t mean it’s the best public policy, he added.Although states would have the authority to mandate vaccinations, there’s more doubt about whether Congress could enact a federal requirement.The most likely federal vaccination requirement would come in the form of a tax penalty, but Fox said given the current composition of the Supreme Court, a federal vaccine requirement would likely be found unconstitutional.Opponents of a federal mandate would cite the Supreme Court’s 2012 decision on the Affordable Care Act, Fox said. In that case, the justices ruled that Congress could not use its powers to regulate interstate commerce to require people to buy health insurance, even though the ACA’s individual mandate was ultimately upheld on separate grounds.That means the U.S. could have a patchwork of different vaccine requirements in different states.States that explore a vaccine requirement should only do so if the vaccine is widely and readily available, Fox said.“Otherwise you create an underclass of people who are less safe and without access to the basic means of society,” he said.States would need to allow exemptions for people with legitimate medical risks, like pregnancy, but not exemptions on religious or philosophical grounds, he said.“Religious exemptions are not constitutionally required by the First Amendment’s Free Exercise clause, provided that the vaccine mandates don’t single out religion; they’re not motivated by a desire to interfere with it,” he said.In the workplace, private employers would have a lot of flexibility to require vaccinations and fire workers who refuse them for anything but legitimate medical concerns.As long as employers show there are significant costs associated with having unvaccinated workers, they would not need to offer religious exemptions to employees, Fox said.Under the 1964 Civil Rights Act, employers are not required to accommodate religious employees if doing so would pose more than a “de minimis,” or minimal cost. 3561

SAN DIEGO (KGTV) - California's stay at home order may be in effect, but you can still hear the sounds of heavy machinery and hammers banging across San Diego County.Construction was deemed essential, allowing builders to continue working."Not only have we been able to pull permits, but we can call our inspections," said Gregg Cantor with Murray Lampert Design, Build, Remodel.Companies like Cantor's business have changed, but it keeps moving.He said employees who can are working from home, client calls are happening remotely, and inspections are taking place at a distance or in some cases through videos and pictures."We're conscious of social distancing as well as making sure we don't have more than five or six people at any given time on the job site," Cantor said.Local companies aren't the only ones changing how they operate.The City of San Diego's Development Services Department (DSD) laid out a series of changes to protect city staff and customers."The city is taking necessary preventative safety measures while being responsive to the business needs of our customers," said DSD Director Elyse W. Lowe. "DSD employees will continue to work with customers to limit delays to project approvals and keep the city moving forward. We are quickly leveraging available technology to increase our options and continuously implementing new safety measures in response to this unprecedented global pandemic."Changes include revamping the residential inspection process by now allowing for photos to be submitted instead of in-person physical inspections for qualified residential project, granting all qualifying building permit applications and issued building permits an automatic 180-day extension, and establishing an unstaffed document drop-off area for customers to submit project files and documents in the first floor of the Development Services Center."We're still very grateful that we are able to send our crews out every day," said Borre Winckel, president and chief executive officer of the Building Industry Association of San Diego County.Winckel said there were some early hiccups with building inspections across the county, but things have smoothed out."We were promised they would send the inspectors out as long as the conditions were safe," he said. "So it was very important for us since we're an outdoor activity that we created this safe and healthy environment for our workforce and the inspectors."Winckel said right now building is a business and plans are getting reviewed, but he pointed to New York and Washington where some construction is either blocked or building is only approved for projects deemed essential.Winckel said in California some have asked the governor to stop in office reviewing of plans."If we don't go beyond current construction and can't be processing plans anymore, that would just create a disaster for us and housing in the future," he said. "So there's a bit of tension there."For now, the show goes on."Most of the people want to keep moving forward," Cantor said. "There are some people that just want to pause for a second, but they are not canceling out on doing the work." 3152

SAN DIEGO (KGTV) - Boomers! wants to start serving wine and beer at its Kearny Mesa location off I-805.The family entertainment center at 6999 Clairemont Mesa Blvd. asked the city for a zoning change to allow it to serve drinks.Boomers! is known for its child-friendly activities including mini-golf, batting cages, and go-karts.A Boomers! spokeswoman gave 10News a statement about the change: 401

SAN DIEGO (KGTV) -- California roads have some of the worst drivers in the entire country, according to a new ranking.Finance website SmartAsset reports that California ties with Missouri to take third on the list for states with the worst drivers.In order to rank states, the site looked at the percentage of drivers with insurance, the number of DUIs per driver, the average number of deaths per miles driven and how often residents Google terms like traffic ticket or speeding ticket.California ranked 12th for DUIs per thousand drivers and 11th for percentage of uninsured drivers. The Golden State also ranked 32nd for number of people killed per 100 million miles driven.It may give some comfort to know that California wasn’t ranked first. That honor was given to Mississippi followed by Tennessee.More California rankings: 839

来源：资阳报