濮阳东方医院妇科做人流价格公开(濮阳东方医院看妇科病口碑非常好) (今日更新中)

The University of Utah nurse at the center of a highly controversial arrest that was recorded on the officers' body cameras has reached a 0,000 settlement with all parties involved.In addition, Alex Wubbels announced Tuesday afternoon that she will use part of that money to launch a new initiative to make body camera video more accessible to all residents in Utah involved in a police incident."I am not in the business of setting anyone up for failure. I want us to be successful in moving forward. And I think this is a small step we can provide to enable that potential success if we are going to start asking the police departments to have body cameras,” Wubbels said outside the Salt Lake City Police Department while standing next to her attorney, Karra Porter.The nurse added "it's shocking" that today's police forces don’t all have body cameras."We all deserve to know the truth. And the truth comes when you see the actual raw footage. And that’s what happened in my case. No matter how truthful I was in telling my story, it was nothing compared to what people saw and the visceral reaction people experienced when watching the footage," she said.Wubbels' widely publicized arrest happened July 26 when Salt Lake detective Jeff Payne was sent to University Hospital to collect blood from a man injured in a crash that killed the driver who caused it. Wubbels — citing policy agreed upon by the hospital and the police department — declined to tell Payne where the patient was or allow him to draw blood.The detective, with direction from his supervisor that day, Lt. James Tracy, ultimately arrested the screaming nurse after physically pushing her out of the emergency room and holding her against a wall while handcuffing her. Police body camera video of the incident caused outcries of protest from across the country and prompted Salt Lake City Mayor Jackie Biskupski and Salt Lake Police Chief Mike Brown to personally apologize to Wubbels for the way she was treated while doing her job.Payne was fired from the police department. Tracy was demoted to the rank of officer. Both men have since appealed their discipline. Their appeals remained pending as of Tuesday.Wubbels and Porter — who never filed a civil lawsuit — announced she had reached a settlement with all "U.-related and Salt Lake City-related parties" who would have potentially been named if a lawsuit had been filed."There will be no legal lawsuit. This part of this is over. We’re hopping the discussion about body cameras continues,” Porter said.Matthew Rojas, spokesman for Salt Lake Mayor Jackie Biskupski, said both the city and the university agreed to pay 0,000 each."Salt Lake City has been focused first and foremost on ensuring policies and procedures are changed so things like this don’t happen again, and we are glad we could come to a resolution with nurse Wubbles," he said.Since Wubbels went public with the arrest video, Porter said her client has had several goals, including changes to policy on how police interact with nurses; accountability by the officers involved; starting a public discussion on the importance of body camera video; compensation; and helping others.Wubbels is working with the American Nurses Association on a campaign to prevent what happened to her from happening elsewhere. She also would like to speak before the Utah Legislature during the next session about the importance of making body cameras mandatory for all police agencies. And she and Porter want to help all Utahns have access to body camera video for their own cases."Thanks to Alex, there will be more transparency as body cam footage becomes more readily available in Utah,” Porter said.Wubbels said she was grateful for how Salt Lake City has responded to her arrest and the settlement, but also noted she still becomes emotional when thinking about the incident."This landed in my lap. This is not something I sought out. I didn’t seek out the last four months," she said. "I’m incredibly humbled by change that’s happened."This is very emotional," Wubbels continued, "This is an emotional situation. … I’m still processing this. I mean, this is something I never expected to happen. But I’m also honored by the weight of it and honored to be the one to help make progress in our society at large."Porter said body cameras are also important for protecting officers, with both Wubbels and Porter emphasizing there are many good officers. They stressed that fact when talking about the fatal shooting and manhunt at the university that forced the campus to go into lockdown Monday night."I literally park where this incident happened. I walk, in the dark, every night to my work, back and forth to my car where this incident happened,” Wubbels said, adding the police "did a really good thing today. And that’s a highlight for what comes out when good cops do good work."Watch the original body camera video here: 4923

The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court on Monday to take up a case concerning the government's decision to phase out an Obama-era initiative that protects from deportation young undocumented immigrants who came to the United States as children.In doing so, government lawyers sought to bypass federal appeals courts that have yet to rule definitively on the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.In court papers, Solicitor General Noel Francisco asked the justices to take up the case this term and argued that district judges who had issued opinions against the administration were "wrong" to do so. Francisco pointed out that back in 2012 the Obama administration allowed some "700,000 aliens to remain in the United States even though existing laws provided them no ability to do so."Francisco said that "after a change in administrations" the Department of Homeland Security ended the policy "based on serious doubts about its legality and the practical implications of maintaining it."The filing came the night before the midterm elections as President Donald Trump has repeatedly brought up immigration to rally his base in the final hours before the vote.In September 2017, the government announced plans to phase out the program, but lower court judges blocked the administration from doing so and ordered that renewals of protections for recipients continue until the appeals are resolved.The legality of the program is not at issue in the case. Instead, lower courts are examining how the government chose to wind it down.Supporters of the roughly 700,000 young immigrants who could be affected by the end of DACA say the administration's actions were arbitrary and in violation of federal law. 1736

The U.S. regulators who will decide the fate of COVID-19 vaccines are taking an unusual step: Asking outside scientists if their standards are high enough.The Food and Drug Administration may have to decide by year’s end whether to allow use of the first vaccines against the virus. Thursday, a federal advisory committee pulls back the curtain on that decision process, debating whether the guidelines FDA has set for vaccine developers are rigorous enough.“We will not cut corners, and we will only use science and data to make that determination,” FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn pledged at a meeting of the Milken Institute Wednesday.Exactly how much data his agency needs to be sure a vaccine is safe and effective is a key question for the advisers. An even bigger one: If the FDA allows emergency use of a vaccine before final testing is finished, will that destroy chances of ever learning just how well that shot -- and maybe competitors still being studied -- really work?“We can’t lose sight of the fact that it is in our societal interest to see these trials to completion,” said Dr. Luciana Borio, a former FDA acting chief scientist who will be watching the advisers’ debate.Plus, multiple vaccines are being studied -- shots made with different technologies that each have pros and cons.“The first vaccine is not necessarily the best vaccine,” cautioned Dr. M. Miles Braun, a former FDA scientist now with Georgetown University School of Medicine. If the trials aren’t allowed to finish, it may be difficult or impossible to ever know for sure.It’s a critical moment in FDA’s 114-year history. The government has spent billions to race a vaccine through a research process that usually takes years, and FDA faces unprecedented pressure from the Trump administration, fueling public skepticism that politics could overrule science.Interest is so high, FDA is airing the meeting on YouTube. Here are some key issues the committee will discuss:HOW MUCH EVIDENCE IS NEEDED?FDA is requiring manufacturers to do studies of at least 30,000 people to prove if a vaccine protects and how safe it is. Those studies must include adequate numbers of people at highest risk from COVID-19 -- older adults, minorities and anyone with underlying health problems.FDA has made clear that any vaccine must be at least 50% effective. And while the studies are designed to run for two years, companies may get enough evidence the shots are protective -- in at least some people -- to stop the trials early and seek what’s called an “emergency use authorization” for wider vaccinations.Despite White House objections, the FDA told vaccine makers earlier this month not to seek that speedier review until they’ve tracked at least half their trial participants for two months. With other vaccines, that’s about the amount of time when major side effects crop up.That’s not long enough, said the head of the non-profit ECRI Institute, which reviews medical technology for hospitals and insurers. In comments submitted to the advisory committee, ECRI’s Dr. Marcus Schabacker said FDA should require six months of follow-up.“Doing any less would simply risk too much, and the consequences may be severe,” he wrote. “A weak vaccine that loses public trust could poison the well for epidemic control for many years.”WOULD EMERGENCY USE DERAIL FULL ANSWERS ABOUT VACCINES?Normally when a study ends because of evidence that a vaccine is working, the participants who got dummy shots are offered the real thing.But if FDA allows emergency use of a COVID-19 vaccine, that’s not the same as having full proof the shot works, Borio cautioned.And if the participants in the placebo group are immediately offered the real shot, researchers may not be able to get answers about all the high-risk groups in the study — or tell how long the vaccine’s protection lasts, a process expected to take many more months.But Pfizer Inc., which with Germany’s BioNTech is developing one of the leading candidates, told FDA that if it’s granted emergency use authorization, it “would have an ethical obligation” to alert study participants who got a placebo and allow them vaccine access. The company wants FDA to look into “other scientifically and statistically sound methods” to determine long-term safety and effectiveness.Pfizer’s stance is likely to face pushback. The Infectious Diseases Society of America states that FDA’s panelists “should insist” that vaccine developers “present a compelling case” for how they will complete their trials if FDA grants early authorization of their vaccine.Clearing a vaccine based on premature or faulty data “could cause more harm” by “further eroding public confidence in all vaccines,” the group said.It’s an unprecedented dilemma. The FDA has previously allowed emergency use of only one vaccine, a decades-old shot that in 2005 was authorized to prevent anthrax poisoning.This time around, multiple COVID-19 vaccines are in the pipeline. Pfizer competitor Johnson & Johnson cautioned that early FDA clearance of one vaccine could “jeopardize integrity” of other ongoing trials if patients decide to drop out to seek the first cleared shot instead.The company asked regulators to explain what options are available to ensure completion of all ongoing COVID-19 vaccine trials.WHAT ABOUT LONG-TERM SAFETY MONITORING?Even a study of 30,000 people cannot spot a side effect that only strikes 1 in 100,000. So the government is planning extra scrutiny of every COVID-19 vaccine to hit the market.At first there will be limited doses given to just certain high-risk people -- and those early recipients are to get text messages daily for the first week after vaccination, and then weekly out to six weeks, asking how they’re feeling.FDA also will be checking databases of electronic health records and insurance claims, looking for any red flags.“There’s a kind of tracking that has to take place here on a massive basis that hasn’t taken place before,” said Dr. Jesse Goodman of Georgetown University, a former director of the FDA’s vaccine and biologics center.___The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content. 6274

The US House of Representatives passed a bill Wednesday to fund more security at schools, exactly one month after a gunman killed 17 people at a high school in Parkland, Florida, and as thousands of students take part in a national walkout in protest of gun violence.While the bill had bipartisan support, many Democrats were frustrated that it doesn't include any gun control measures."This is a pretense that we are doing something while assuring the NRA that we aren't doing anything," Rep. Steny Hoyer of Maryland, the second ranking Democrat in the House, told reporters Tuesday.The vote was 407-10. The bill attempts to curb school violence by providing more training for school officials and local law enforcement to respond to mental health crises, as well as, among other things, money to develop anonymous reporting systems for threats and deterrent measures like metal detectors and locks.Many Democratic lawmakers pressed Republican leaders to bring up gun control measures to expand background checks and ban assault weapons, but House GOP leaders continue to say they will wait to see what, if anything, the Senate can pass.In the Senate, the Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the Florida shooting and failures by the FBI and law enforcement to act on warning signs displayed by the gunman before the attack."In the wake of the Parkland attack, this committee has an obligation to find out what happened," said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, an Iowa Republican, in his opening remarks. "We must hold government to account for its failures, and make sure plans are in place to avoid future tragedies. And we must rally around consensus, evidenced-based solutions that will protect our nation's most valuable resource — its youth — from violent attacks."Both the hearing and the vote happened the same day students across the country are holding walkouts to commemorate the Parkland shooting anniversary and call for more action gun control measures. In Washington, global advocacy group Avaaz placed 7,000 pairs of shoes on the Capitol lawn to represent gun violence victims since the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre. Protesters are demonstrating at the Capitol and in front of the White House on Wednesday.Both of Florida's senators -- Republican Marco Rubio and Democrat Bill Nelson -- testified at the hearing. The two men have also teamed up on legislation that would encourage states to adopt so-called red flag laws, which would give law enforcement the authority to seize guns from people who pose a threat to themselves or others.It's one of many gun control bills proposed by members on both sides of the aisle, but most efforts have largely stalled.President Donald Trump reiterated his support last weekend for a bill by Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, and Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut that would encourage states and federal agencies to enter more data into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, known as "Fix NICS."It was first introduced last fall after the Sutherland Springs, Texas, church shooting but it has seen renewed attention since last month's Florida shooting. While the bill currently has more than 60 cosponsors -- a normal indicator that it could avoid a filibuster -- many Democrats want to open up the legislation to amendments, and it's unclear how Republican leaders will proceed."I'm extremely interested in seeing Senator Cornyn's Fix NICS bill passed and a significant school safety bill passed," Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told reporters on Tuesday. "The best way to get that done is still under discussion. But I'm anxious to pass both of them, and pass both of them soon."The witness list at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing also included David L. Bowdich, the acting deputy director of the FBI, as well as Ryan Petty, whose daughter was killed in the Florida shooting, and Katherine Posada, a teacher at the school, Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School.And while there were no gun industry witnesses at the first hearing since the shooting, they loom large in the debate and play a critical role in lobbying members of Congress and rallying their supporters across the country during elections.The House bill, the STOP School Violence Act, aims to provide more training for school officials and local law enforcement to respond to mental health crises, as well as, among other things, money to develop anonymous reporting systems for threats and deterrents like metal detectors and locks.It does not include many of the components of a proposal unveiled by the White House -- most notably it does not include any provisions to arm teachers. House Republicans have largely ignored the President's plan, especially since he publicly declared that the major legislation the GOP-controlled chamber passed in December to loosen concealed carry rules was not something that could pass as part of broader gun legislation."This is about schools but it's not just about schools," Rubio told reporters Tuesday at a news conference about the Senate version of the bill. "When someone is determined that they're going to commit an act of violence, it could be in a school, it could be in a mall, it could be in a movie theater, it could be in an airport, it could be at a stadium. So what we're really focused on here more than anything else is identifying the people that are going to commit a violent act irrespective of where they're going to commit it and stopping them before they do it." 5558

The Trump administration will no longer seek to automatically release pregnant immigrants from detention -- a move in line with the overall efforts by the administration to hold far more immigrants in custody than its predecessors.The change in policy was sent by Immigrations and Customs Enforcement to Congress on Thursday morning and obtained by CNN.According to the new directive, immigration officers will no longer default to trying to release pregnant women who fall into immigration custody, either because they are undocumented or otherwise subject to deportation. The Obama administration policy urged officers to presume a pregnant woman could be released except for extreme circumstances.But a FAQ sent with the directive makes clear that ICE is not going to detain all pregnant immigrants. The policy will require a case-by-case evaluation, the FAQ explains, and will keep in custody "only those whose detention is necessary to effectuate removal, as well as those deemed a flight risk or danger to the community."ICE will also lean towards releasing pregnant women if they are in their third trimester, and will also make an effort for detention facilities to provide services to pregnant women and parents.The move follows controversial efforts by the Department of Health and Human Services to keep unaccompanied minor immigrants in custody rather than releasing them to obtain abortions, a policy that has been the subject of intense litigation.The-CNN-Wire 1482

来源：资阳报