濮阳东方医院看男科非常专业濮阳东方医院男科口碑高吗,濮阳东方坐公交路线,濮阳东方医院看早泄技术很不错,濮阳东方医院男科治疗阳痿口碑很好价格低,濮阳东方医院男科割包皮很靠谱,濮阳东方医院看男科价格偏低,濮阳东方看妇科病非常靠谱

LAS VEGAS - From the counting room to the courtroom. That's where things are headed as Nevada has become center stage for a legal showdown.The Trump campaign and the Nevada Republican Party are likely to keep knocking on Nevada courthouse doors as our state is poised to become a pawn in a legal chess game surrounding election results and how votes are counted."The Trump campaign hasn't been shy about sort of foreshadowing this stream of lawsuits," said UNLV associate professor of Political Science Rebecca Gill. "And indeed, they started well before Election Day as well."But in one Nevada case, it appears both sides may have come to an agreement to avoid a court battle.Thursday, a proposed settlement in a pending case before the Nevada Supreme Court.On election night, in a unanimous vote, the state's high court rejected an emergency appeal by the Trump campaign and state Republican party that sought to stop counting mail ballots in Clark County. The appeal was from an earlier loss in a lower court where the GOP raised concerns about observing ballot processing and electronic signature verification, with the implication of potential for fraud."But unfortunately for the Trump campaign, there's really no evidence of widespread voter fraud at all, regardless of what type of voting mechanism is used," said Professor Gill. "Mainly because, among other things, voter fraud is a felony. And the return on investment is very low because you would have to risk a felony in order to have an absolutely small chance of changing any outcome, particularly in a presidential election."The state Supreme Court wouldn't stop the count, but agreed to hear an expedited appeal. Then, Thursday afternoon, the appellants asked for an extra week, citing a pending settlement of the case. That after the Clark County Registrar agreed to make all tables where the ballot duplication process occurs visible to public observers.Once everyone signs off, the appeal will be dismissed.If any issues arise, a decision on how to proceed will come no later than Nov. 11 at 4 p.m.In the meantime, Clark County can continue counting mail ballots. Those postmarked by election day that arrives by Nov. 10 must be counted by Nov. 12.In another lawsuit, the Trump campaign and Nevada GOP sued Clark County to force officials to release records including copies of every registered voter's signature. That likely indicates a potential challenge over signature matches of what's on file versus on the actual ballot.A District Court judge denied that request and said most of the other requested records didn’t have to be produced until Nov. 20, after county officials finish counting votes.Of course, the specter of a recount demand looms large depending on how narrow the margin of votes ultimately is. Recounts are done to confirm accuracy, check for mistakes and settle fraud claims.The most infamous recount in U.S. history was Bush vs. Gore in 2000 in Florida."But I think it's important to remember that what happened in Florida in 2000," explains Professor Gill. " It was a very unusual confluence of events that led to a situation where there was a real technical difficulty with the actual mechanics of voting in Florida. And that was coupled with this extremely small difference in the vote counts."In Nevada, we have no rules that would trigger an automatic recount. The candidate defeated in an initial vote count can ask for a recount if they deposit estimated costs of the effort. And the candidate gets reimbursed if the recount changes the race’s outcome.President Trump has threatened to take his election concerns to the United States Supreme Court."But I think if you couple these wider vote margins with the fact that there isn't this one really solid reason to be concerned with the operation of the electoral system," said Professor Gill. "Then I think that it's probably unlikely that anything that would happen in the courts would have that outcome that the Trump campaign is probably looking for."Legal experts say the way the nation's high court would most likely be brought in, would be to review a specific challenge to ballots in a tight race in a state that could tip the balance in the election.Nevada, with its six electoral votes, could be that state. And the review could stem from last-minute lawsuits challenging the counting process.This story originally reported by Darcy Spears on ktnv.com. 4420

Laws that seek to limit abortions around the world may not lower the rate of abortions but could make them less safe, according to a new report that illustrates the trend.In countries with the fewest restrictions, only 1% of abortions were the "least safe" kind from 2010 to 2014. That number jumps to 31% in the most restrictive countries, according to the report, released Tuesday by the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive rights think tank.During the same period, abortions happened roughly as frequently in the most restrictive countries as they did in the least restrictive: 37 versus 34 abortions each year for every 1,000 women aged 15 to 44."Restricting abortion laws does not eliminate the practice of abortion," said Gilda Sedgh, principal research scientist at the Guttmacher Institute and one of the report's authors.Abortion rates have dropped globally over the past 25 years, driven by increased and more effective contraceptive use, Sedgh said. Procedures have also become safer overall, in large part due to the increasing use of medications that are effective in terminating pregnancy, the report said.A study last year by researchers at the Guttmacher Institute and the World Health Organization found that 45% of abortions performed between 2010 and 2014 were considered unsafe, meaning they didn't use both a recommended abortion method and a trained provider.Unsafe abortions can lead to complications, such as heavy bleeding, infection, damage to internal organs or an incomplete abortion, according to the WHO. Complications can sometimes be fatal.Countries that have seen falling abortion rates since the '90s are more likely to be developed countries, which tend to have fewer abortion restrictions and wider access to contraceptives. Abortion rates in developing regions haven't changed much overall.About 42% of women of reproductive age live in countries "where abortion is highly restricted," according to the report, versus 37% who live "where abortion is available without restriction as to reason -- with maximum gestational limits specified in almost all cases."US abortion rates have hit a historic low in recent years, according to another report last year by the institute.However, advocates have warned that increasing restrictions by individual states could delay care and put some women's health at risk."The United States has been adding restrictions on a state-by-state basis at an alarming rate over the last few years," said Dr. Jody Steinauer, director of the Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health at the University of California, San Francisco. Steinauer, a practicing ob-gyn, was not involved in the new report."The bottom line is that these restrictions ... cause unnecessary harm and delay women in accessing the care they need," Steinauer said.On Monday, Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant signed a bill that prevents women from getting abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. This would have given Mississippi the distinction of having the earliest abortion ban in the country, but a federal judge issued an order Tuesday temporarily blocking it.Research has shown that restrictive laws in places like Ohio, Utah, Wisconsin and Texas did not improve outcomes and in some cases led to more hardships such as delayed abortion care, more side effects and higher costs for women.At the same time, between 2000 and 2017, 28 countries around the world modified their abortion laws, and all but one -- Nicaragua -- broadened access to abortion, the report says. Nepal came the furthest of any country, removing its complete ban on abortion in favor of no restrictions on why someone might seek to terminate their pregnancy.Some countries, Sedgh said, "are moving toward liberalizing abortion laws, making it legal under broader ground.""At the same time, in some countries with liberal abortion laws like the US and some former Soviet countries, ideology is making its way into legislation, and more and more restrictions are being imposed."These restrictive policies are "based on this myth that abortion is a complicated procedure or an unsafe procedure," Steinauer said."In fact, it's just the opposite. It is an extremely safe procedure," she said. "It's even safer than a dental extraction." 4358

LA JOLLA, Calif. (KGTV) - Researchers at UC San Diego have found a way to improve radar technology that can make self-driving cars safer."Our vision is to make self-driving cars much more safer than how we humans drive," says Dinesh Bharadia, an Assistant Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering at UC San Diego.Bharadia led a team of researchers working on ways to help autonomous vehicles see in bad weather.Currently, he says, self-driving cars rely on LiDAR, a light-based radar system. But it's performance is limited because it uses a low frequency that reflects in bad weather.Bharadia says his team tested wireless radar, which has a higher frequency wavelength and found it can rain and fog.However, the wireless radar's sight range is limited. So Bharadia's team built a system where five wireless radars work together to create a more full "view" of the road."From each radar's vantage point, you see something different," says Bharadia. "Those different things, observed from five different radars, gives you much more detailed aspect ratio of another car (on the road)."Bharadia says the combination of all five radars helps create a 3-D image of other objects on the road. That helps the car's self-driving system figure out how to avoid them."You need to know the exact aspect ratio of the other cars on the road," he says. "Only then can you drive around them if you need to."Bharadia says carmakers like Toyota and Honda have been helping with the research and development. He thinks this new technology could be on the road within 2-3 years."Radars are already out there," he says. "We just need to plug in our software to make the cars more autonomous..."It's a simple technology that can be widely deployed and used to make our roads safer for everyone."Bharadia and his team will present their findings at the Sensys Conference this week. For more information about the technology, see the full news release here. 1951

Life coach Tony Robbins apologized Sunday for his comments about the #MeToo movement after suggesting during a March event that some women use it to gain significance by playing the victim.Robbins argued with a woman name Nanine McCool during a March 15 Unleash the Power Within event about how the #MeToo movement is being used. McCool posted the exchange on her personal YouTube account on March 25. Robbins immediately faced backlash for what he said."My comments failed to reflect the respect I have for everything Tarana Burke and the #MeToo movement has achieved," Robbins said in a statement, referencing the woman credited with starting the movement in 2006. "I apologize for suggesting anything other than my profound admiration for the #MeToo movement."The video shows Robbins towering over McCool, and at one point using his fist to push her to metaphorically show how some women are using the movement."If you use the #MeToo movement to try to get significance and certainty by attacking and destroying someone else, you haven't grown an ounce. All you've done is basically use a drug called significance to make yourself feel good," Robbins said during the event.McCool acknowledged during the exchange there are people using the #MeToo Movement for their own personal gain, but also said that there are people who are trying to make it safe for other women."You're a leader and an influential man and you are doing a disservice, in my opinion, to the #MeToo movement," McCool said to Robbins.Robbins said during the event that he can't be doing a disservice because the women in the room will continue to do what they believe."It's not just about what women believe, it's about what people believe," McCool said."I'm not gonna be inauthentic and say I'm sorry about something I'm not sorry about," Robbins said at the end of the exchange.After the exchange was posted, it was picked up by the entertainment news outlet NowThis Entertainment where it went viral when it was posted Friday.Tarana Burke, who started the #MeToo movement, said on Twitter Saturday that Robbins' representatives reached out to her."They wanted to 'give me context' apparently," she said in the tweets. "I don't need any. I have eyes."Burke said she watched the entire exchange and said Robbins' "misogyny runs deep."McCool posted another video on Saturday, after the NowThis video went viral, saying she didn't plan on having that exchange with Robbins, but is "grateful and honored to be the catalyst for this discussion.""If we're all agreeing with each other, if we shut down all the people who don't agree with us then we have no discussion and we get nowhere," she said, adding that she doesn't believe in bashing Robbins."I hope what we can actually do is create a discussion with Tony Robbins instead of at Tony Robbins," she said.Robbins acknowledged in his apology Sunday that he has much to learn."I am committed to being part of the solution," he said.  2968

LA MESA, Calif. (KGTV) - Police officers responding to a domestic dispute in a La Mesa neighborhood Monday morning fired at least one shot during an encounter with "an aggressive dog." 192