濮阳东方医院治早泄评价好很专业濮阳东方医院男科看早泄,濮阳东方医院妇科做人流手术先进,濮阳东方医院男科治疗阳痿价格标准,濮阳东方医院男科割包皮手术值得信赖,濮阳东方妇科医院做人流费用价格,濮阳东方医院治疗早泄评价很不错,濮阳东方男科医院割包皮评价非常好

Aaron Hernandez, the former NFL star who took his life while serving a murder sentence in prison, had chronic traumatic encephalopathy -- commonly known as CTE -- attorney Jose Baez said Thursday.Baez cited study results compiled by the Boston University CTE Center, which examined Hernandez's brain for the neurodegenerative brain disease.Hernandez played for the New England Patriots from 2010 to 2012 after a standout collegiate career at the University of Florida.According to a statement from BU, Hernandez's brain was examined by Dr. Ann McKee, director of the CTE Center. The neurodegenerative brain disease has Alzheimer's-like symptoms, including memory loss, confusion, aggression, rage and, at times, suicidal behavior. It is believed to result from repeated trauma to the head, which results in a buildup of the abnormal protein tau that clumps in the brain.The disease is categorized in four degrees, with Stage 4 being the most severe. According to McKee's analysis, Hernandez was found to have Stage 3 CTE, which is commonly associated with cognitive and memory loss, as well as behavioral changes and impaired judgment. Hernandez was found to have early degeneration of brain cells and large tears in the septum pellucidum, a central membrane of the brain.The CTE Center statement added that he had "severe deposition of tau protein in the frontal lobes of the brain" as well as a "deposition of tau protein in nerve cells around small blood vessels, a unique feature of CTE."The initial examination was confirmed by a second neuropathologist at Boston University.CTE can be diagnosed only after death. Researchers are working on ways to detect it in the living, with the hope of being able to treat it one day.Hernandez hanged himself in prison in April. He was 27."Aaron suffered from a severe case of CTE," Baez said. "Not only were the results positive, but we're told that it was the most severe case they had ever seen for someone of Aaron's age."A representative for Boston University's CTE Center did not confirm to CNN that it was the most severe case it had seen and said, "We have nothing further to add."A federal lawsuit suing the National Football League and the New England Patriots was filed Thursday by Shayanna Jenkins Hernandez, Hernandez's fiancee, on behalf of their daughter, Avielle. The lawsuit seeks million."The NFL had made certain representations to players during this time that Aaron was playing (2010 to 2012) and those representations turned out to be false," Baez said.The NFL said it cannot comment about the lawsuit at this time. The Patriots have not responded to a request for comment.In 2015, a federal judge approved a class-action lawsuit settlement between the NFL and thousands of former players who accused the league of hiding the dangers of concussions and repeated head trauma. The agreement provides up to million per retired player for serious medical conditions associated with repeated head trauma.CTE has been detected in veterans, as well as players of other contact sports; however, it has become most associated with football. It has been diagnosed in San Diego Charger and Hall of Famer Junior Seau, as well as the Philadelphia Eagles' Kevin Turner and the Oakland Raiders' Ken Stabler.A recent analysis by BU found evidence of CTE in 110 of 111 brains of former NFL players. However, there is a potential bias in this review, as relatives of these players may have submitted their brains for diagnosis due to clinical symptoms noticed while the players were living. 3577

After years of struggling, one Kansas mother finally has peace of mind. She can now walk through the park with her daughters free of fear. However, living without fear doesn’t mean living without worry.“It feels unsafe to be who you are sometimes,” said J, a mother of two living in Lawrence, Kansas. The mother wishes to be called J in order to protect her identity, because even in a community where legally she should be safe, J is still concerned.“We know what it's like to be living in fear…to have that uncertainty,” said J, referring to her years growing up undocumented in the United States. Now, even though she is a citizen, she worries the current administration will find ways to strip her of her rights.Growing up undocumented taught J about a different side of the American dream. It meant asking neighbors to use their name for utilities and not accessing community resources.“Calling the police on someone…definitely we stopped ourselves because we don't want those questions,” said J.She saw the same fear in her own daughter’s eyes as her family worked for over four years for her husband to become documented.“Our daughter has asked what would happen to her dad if he was pulled over. Would he be taken away? It’s just a constant fear of are your parents going to come home that day?”Now that her family is documented, J wants to use her voice to help others in her community stop feeling that same worry. It’s a feeling she’s still confronting herself, especially after Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids last year ended in the wrong man getting arrested and federally detained in her own community, a typically quiet college town.“You can't even walk without looking the way that we look and someone saying, ‘I bet that person is undocumented, and they're probably a criminal, so let's get them,’” said J.So, she joined a group called Sanctuary Alliance, a grass-roots movement fighting to designate the city of Lawrence as a sanctuary city.It took a year of meetings and discussions, but just weeks ago, the city commission voted.The sanctuary ordinance was approved.So, what does it mean to be a sanctuary city? The Lawrence, Kansas ordinance says: no city department can ask about immigration status, including the police and the court system; Anytime an ID is required, a resident can present identification valid in their home country; all city services, including transit, parks and utilities are available to all residents, regardless of immigration status; and if anyone asks about their status, there are ways people can safely report violations to the city.“It’s a big step toward creating safety for the community,” said J. “People think that becoming a sanctuary city will bring criminals in because obviously undocumented people are criminals. They're not. Statistically, a sanctuary city will become safer because the citizens who are undocumented will now not be afraid to call the police."Safety in this community is just the start of the conversation. Sanctuary Alliance is now pushing for a county-wide sanctuary to help more families live life outside the shadows.But while that fight continues, J takes comfort in hey city’s ordinance bringing a new era of unity this community has never seen before.“There's still some work that needs to be done, but it will make it better,” said J. 3340

After a record drought that featured no major (Category 3-5) hurricane landfalls in the United States, 2017 roared to life, reminding everyone how powerful and destructive these monster storms can be.The drought lasted more than a decade and ended with not one, but three major hurricanes striking US soil: Harvey, Irma and Maria.Those three storms all rank among the top five costliest in history. With the 2017 season still fresh on the minds of many coastal residents, the question is: What will 2018 bring? 518

Amazon banned police use of its face-recognition technology for a year, making it the latest tech giant to step back from law-enforcement use of systems that have faced criticism for incorrectly identifying people with darker skin.The Seattle-based company did not say why it took action now. Ongoing protests following the death of George Floyd have focused attention on racial injustice in the U.S. and how police use technology to track people. Floyd died May 25 after a white Minneapolis police officer pressed his knee into the handcuffed black man’s neck for several minutes even after Floyd stopped moving and pleading for air.Law enforcement agencies use facial recognition to identify suspects, but critics say it can be misused. A number of U.S. cities have banned its use by police and other government agencies, led by San Francisco last year. On Tuesday, IBM said it would get out of the facial recognition business, noting concerns about how the technology can be used for mass surveillance and racial profiling.It’s not clear if the ban on police use includes federal law enforcement agencies. Amazon didn’t respond to questions about its announcement.Civil rights groups and Amazon’s own employees have pushed the company to stop selling its technology, called Rekognition, to government agencies, saying that it could be used to invade privacy and target people of color.In a blog post Wednesday, Amazon said that it hoped Congress would put in place stronger regulations for facial recognition.“Amazon’s decision is an important symbolic step, but this doesn’t really change the face recognition landscape in the United States since it’s not a major player,” said Clare Garvie, a researcher at Georgetown University’s Center on Privacy and Technology. Her public records research found only two U.S. agencies using or testing Rekognition.The Orlando police department tested it, but chose not to implement it, she said. The Washington County Sheriff’s Office in Oregon has been the most public about using Rekognition, but said after Amazon’s announcement Wednesday that it was suspending its use of facial recognition indefinitely.Studies led by MIT researcher Joy Buolamwini found racial and gender disparities in facial recognition software. Those findings spurred Microsoft and IBM to improve their systems, but irked Amazon, which last year publicly attacked her research methods. A group of artificial intelligence scholars, including a winner of computer science’s top prize, last year launched a spirited defense of her work and called on Amazon to stop selling its facial recognition software to police.A study last year by a U.S. agency affirmed the concerns about the technology’s flaws. The National Institute of Standards and Technology tested leading facial recognition systems -- though not from Amazon, which didn’t submit its algorithms -- and found that they often performed unevenly based on a person’s race, gender or age.Buolamwini on Wednesday called Amazon’s announcement a “welcomed though unexpected announcement.”“Microsoft also needs to take a stand,” she wrote in an emailed statement. “More importantly our lawmakers need to step up” to rein in harmful deployments of the technologies.Microsoft has been vocal about the need to regulate facial recognition to prevent human rights abuses but hasn’t said it wouldn’t sell it to law enforcement. The company didn’t respond to a request for comment Wednesday.Amazon began attracting attention from the American Civil Liberties Union and privacy advocates after it introduced Rekognition in 2016 and began pitching it to law enforcement. But experts like Garvie say many U.S. agencies rely on facial recognition technology built by companies that are not as well known, such as Tokyo-based NEC, Chicago-based Motorola Solutions or the European companies Idemia, Gemalto and Cognitec.Amazon isn’t abandoning facial recognition altogether. The company said organizations, such as those that use Rekognition to help find children who are missing or sexually exploited, will still have access to the technology.This week’s announcements by Amazon and IBM follow a push by Democratic lawmakers to pass a sweeping police reform package in Congress that could include restrictions on the use of facial recognition, especially in police body cameras. Though not commonly used in the U.S., the possibility of cameras that could monitor crowds and identify people in real time have attracted bipartisan concern.The tech industry has fought against outright bans of facial recognition, but some companies have called for federal laws that could set guidelines for responsible use of the technology.“It is becoming clear that the absence of consistent national rules will delay getting this valuable technology into the hands of law enforcement, slowing down investigations and making communities less safe,” said Daniel Castro, vice president of the industry-backed Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, which has advocated for facial recognition providers.ángel Díaz, an attorney at New York University’s Brennan Center for Justice, said he welcomed Amazon’s moratorium but said it “should have come sooner given numerous studies showing that the technology is racially biased.”“We agree that Congress needs to act, but local communities should also be empowered to voice their concerns and decide if and how they want this technology deployed at all,” he said.____O’Brien reported from Providence, Rhode Island. 5514

About seven minutes after Sacramento police fatally shot an unarmed black man in his grandmother's backyard last week, officers were instructed to mute their body cameras.Stephon Clark, 22, was in the backyard March 18 when two police officers shot him 20 times. Police said they thought he was holding a gun. But investigators say they did not find a weapon at the scene, only a cellphone near the man's body.The Sacramento Police Department on Wednesday released two body camera videos, the 911 call, the helicopter footage and radio traffic from the shooting.In both videos, an officer can be heard saying, "Hey, mute." Directly after, the video goes silent and officers talk among themselves.'It builds suspicion'The shooting has sparked nationwide outrage, with the muting of the body cameras raising questions about the officers' actions. CNN has called and emailed the police department, but has not heard back.Sacramento Police Chief Daniel Hahn told CNN affiliate KCRA that the action has added to the tension after the shooting."Muting is one of those things that we have to take a look at," Hahn said. "Any time there is muting on this camera, it builds suspicion -- as it has in this case. And that is not healthy for us in our relationship with our community."Although the Sacramento Police Department's 2016 body camera policy designates when to activate body cameras, it does not specifically mention when to activate or deactivate sound or audio recordings. Sacramento police, Hahn said, implemented body cameras last year.When can officers deactivate body cameras?The department policy includes 16 instances when a body camera is required to be activated, including vehicle stops and sobriety tests as well as foot and vehicle pursuits.It says employees can deactivate their cameras in some instances, but that's based on their discretion. These instances may occur when officers are having tactical or confidential conversations, when officers are trying to conserve battery life or if a witness or victim refuses to give a statement on camera, according to the policy.Some situations are also based on the officer's judgment, like if a recording would interfere with the officer's ability to investigate or if recording would be inappropriate based on the victim or witness' physical condition and emotional state.However, it's unclear whether deactivating a body camera or muting are different things."I think it's a policy we should look at very carefully and perhaps change entirely," Mayor Darrell Steinberg said during a news conference Friday.Expert: Muting can be justified at timesPeter Bibring, director of police practices with ACLU Southern California, said he's never heard of a department where an officer muted video."Just because an officer thinks this shouldn't be released," that's not a discussion officers should be having, he said. "Officers should not be having personal conversations during the course of an investigation. And that's certainly not what was going on here."Seth W. Stoughton, assistant professor of law at the University of South Carolina School of Law, has done research, presentations and led training on body cameras for the past two years. He said he'd be surprised if muting cameras was illegal, but said he understands why officers would mute their video."They were in a situation where they didn't want a word to be scrutinized," he said.The inclination among officers, Stoughton said, is not to record footage of an officer unwinding moments after a shooting because officers may not phrase things in the right way.However, he said, muting hurts public trust and diminishes police accountability."I think that muting the microphone is wrong," Stoughton said. "By not capturing that information, they may be undermining the investigation."A different perspectiveWhen officers mute body cameras, Stoughton said, the public looks at it from a different perspective."From a public trust perspective, it may have been better to not have a body camera at all than to have it and turn it off halfway through," he said.Body cameras provide information that the public wouldn't otherwise have, but "it's not perfect information," Stoughton said.There is no statewide body camera policy in California, so body camera policies differ from agency to agency, said Jeff Noble, a police practice consultant and a former deputy police chief in Irvine, California."The cameras served the goal that we put body cameras out for, they were on and activated during the chase and during the shooting," Noble said. 4598