郑州郑州有什么眼科医院郑州眼睛为什么会散光,郑州眼科哪家好,郑州斜视手术有什么风险,郑州近视矫正手术需要多少钱,郑州准分子激光手术价格多少,郑州郑州有名的眼科医生,郑州郑州最好的眼科医院排名

Stormy Daniels was "truthful about having unprotected vaginal intercourse with Donald Trump in July 2006," according to a polygraph test report from 2011.The report states that the "probability of deception was measured to be less than 1%." It was given to CNN by Michael Avenatti, Daniels' attorney and contains three pertinent questions: "Around July 2006, did you have vaginal intercourse with Donald Trump?," "Around July 2006, did you have unprotected sex with Donald Trump?" and "Did Trump say you would get on 'The Apprentice?'"Daniels replied yes to all three questions. The first two were analyzed to be truthful, the third question was "inconclusive" according to the polygraph examiner Ronald Slay.Polygraphs are generally inadmissible in court.The polygraph was performed at the request of Bauer Publishing, which owns Life&Style and InTouch magazines, according to the reporter who interviewed Daniels in 2011. Reporter Jordi Lippe-McGraw initially interviewed Daniels for Life & Style magazine. The interview was not published at the time, but Bauer Publishing released it in InTouch magazine earlier this year.Lippe-McGraw told CNN on Tuesday that Daniels passed the test in a broader sense. "Based off of the interview, we had her take the polygraph test to confirm the details of what she was telling us. There wasn't much in the way of physical evidence, per se," Lippe-McGraw said, adding that the big-picture question they wanted to confirm was that the affair happened, and that Daniels passed. Lippe-McGraw said that Daniels told her she had unprotected sex with Trump, because Daniels is allergic to latex and didn't have condoms at the time.Earlier Tuesday, Avenatti tweeted out a photograph of Daniels being administered the test.The Wall Street Journal first released the details of the polygraph questions and answers. 1871

The 2016 election was psychologically traumatic for some, according to a new study published in the Journal of American College Health. It found that 1 out of 4 students surveyed experienced clinically significant event-related distress short term.Researchers from San Francisco State University, University of California, San Francisco and Arizona State University assessed a diverse group of nearly 800 undergraduates at Arizona State two to three months after the election.A key battleground, Arizona got a lot of political attention. Ultimately, Trump won Arizona by a narrow margin, earning 48.7% of the vote.The survey students filled out asked questions to determine the emotional effect of the event the election. It asked about the impact the election had on close relationships and assessed clinical symptoms of distress and subclinical impacts, meaning emotions that don't present definitive, more readily observable symptoms.Symptoms included "avoidance," a clinical term used to describe how someone deliberately stays away from whatever is causing them trauma, and "intrusion," a clinical term meaning the inability to keep memories of the source of their trauma from returning. The researchers also looked to see if demographics made a difference.Most of those surveyed, 65%, said the election had no impact on their close relationships. About 24% reported a slight or very negative impact and a little more than 10% reported a positive impact.If the election did have a negative emotional impact, avoidance was more common than intrusion among these students. One-fourth of participants showed clinically significant avoidance and intrusion symptoms in response to the election. Women, Democrats, people who did not identify as Christian and sexual minorities reported significantly more event-related distress, the study found.The students surveyed came from diverse backgrounds and held a mix of political opinions. Of the group, 18.5% reported that they were satisfied with the result of the election, 25% said they were somewhat satisfied, 19.2% said they were somewhat dissatisfied, and 37.2% said they were completely dissatisfied. Thirty-nine percent also reported that they were "considerably or extremely" upset by the election, 28.5% were not at all upset, the rest fell somewhere between.The study had limitations. The survey did not look at conditions long term. It couldn't rule out other stressors. It only looked at this one election and did not evaluate how students reacted in other years.Other studies looking at the 2016 election have found similar results. A study released in June that surveyed nearly 300 students two days before the 2016 election, on election night, and two days after, found that students who were concerned about Trump's ability to govern and those who were a part of the "non-dominant social group," including women and people of color, showed increased signs of stress before and during election night. Biological tests showed some signs of increased stress after the election, although there was a general recovery in mood, according to self-reported results.Lindsay Till Hoyt, who co-authored that study and is not connected with the current work, found this latest research interesting. She was not surprised that students felt increased stress."I think so much of the social media and news about the election really felt personal and aimed at specific groups like Mexican Americans and women," Hoyt, an?assistant professor of psychology at Fordham University,?said.For example, she cites Trump's justification for building a wall between Mexico and the US, saying in a debate "we have some bad hombres here and we're going to get them out." Or when a 2005 "Access Hollywood" tape was released in which Trump talked about how his celebrity status allowed him to behave aggressively with women, saying he could "grab them by the (expletive)" and that he would sometimes "just start kissing them.""Comments like those could hit very close to home, as opposed to arguments about abstract concepts like foreign policy and economic policy, students might not be as well versed in those topics," Hoyt said. "Because there was literal name-calling going on in the election cycle, even with students less politically engaged, that strong language and the harsher crassness of the rhetoric may have had a more broad effect on these students."In another study she and a graduate student are working on, they've noticed that both sides, conservatives and liberals, say they have felt discriminated against during the election, and preliminary results show it has caused them stress that interrupted their sleep."It's not just along ethnic and racial discrimination lines," Hoyt said "Conservatives also feel discrimination is affecting their sleep, it crosses both sides of the political aisle."Another 2018 study looking at how 700 teachers navigated the days after the election with K-12 students, and researchers found stories of such distress. One surveyed teacher remarked "for millions of people, this is real trauma."Beth Sondel,?who co-authored that study of teachers, finds this latest research on college students useful."Many of these young kids that the teachers were talking about in our study weren't privy to the policy being presented in the election, but the rhetoric was so strong it was impacting them," said Sondel, a research assistant professor in the department of instruction and learning at the University of Pittsburgh School of Education.Teachers reported they saw an immediate heightened fear of deportation among students. One teacher reported one of her seventh graders asked her if "Trump can come with a bus and get me?" Another teacher in Nebraska said a high school student who was expecting a baby asked if the teacher would take care of the baby if he was deported. Another teacher reported consoling a second-grade student who told her through tears that she was worried that when she'd get home from school her parents wouldn't be there."In general, I think our results are similar, in that we are finding that even these younger students are internalizing this rhetoric and it is causing stress and trauma," Sondel said. "I think the personal has become really political in this election."The authors hope this latest study will help mental health professionals better counsel college students have. Knowing that an election can cause distress, professionals should ask about it to better target treatment, they said. 6606

Tesla on Thursday recalled about 123,000 Model S sedans, asking customers with cars built before April of 2016 to have their power steering bolts replaced.A Tesla spokesperson said the company has observed "excessive corrosion" of the part in some cold climates where a certain type of road salt is used.No injuries or accidents have been reported in connection with the issue, the spokesperson said.A Tesla spokesperson said that if the bolts fail, the driver should still be able to control the vehicle. The issue can make the car more difficult to steer at low speeds and to parallel park, and it should "not materially affect control at high speed."The company sent out emails to Model S owners who have cars included in the recall.The Model S has been lauded for its safety ratings, but news of this recall comes at a rough time for Tesla.Its stock price has plunged more than 25% over the past month. Investors are worried about the startup's ability to deliver on its first mass-market car, the Model 3, which has been plagued by manufacturing woes.Tesla's stock sank nearly 4% during after-hours trading Thursday after news broke about the Model S recall. 1171

The biggest test of special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election begins Tuesday with the trial of Donald Trump's former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort.The trial on Manafort's financial dealings will hang over the White House and show just how deeply federal authorities have looked into the private business of Trump associates.It comes as the President continues to rail against Mueller's investigation, calling it a "witch hunt," and some congressional Republicans are looking to impeach the Justice Department official overseeing the Muller probe, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.One year ago to the month, federal agents barged into Manafort's Alexandria, Virginia, apartment under a search warrant. They took dozens of hanging file folders, bank statements, discs, memory cards and computer hard drives, and a watch worth several thousand dollars from the design house Bijan -- much of that evidence will be on display for the jury. 1016

SUFFOLK COUNTY, N.Y. -- Dozens of people tested positive for the coronavirus and hundreds were quarantined after an outbreak in Suffolk County, New York, linked to a sweet 16 party, County Executive Steve Bellone said Tuesday.The party took place at the Miller Place Inn on Sept. 25, with a guest list of 81 people.The Miller Place Inn was fined ,000 for violating state executive orders and health laws, and ,000 for violating county rules.Several positive COVID-19 cases in the Sachem School District were reported to the county on Sept. 30, and during the course of their investigation, the county discovered that the cases were connected to the sweet 16 party.Following a contact tracing investigation, the county identified 37 positive cases connected to the party; 270 people were told to quarantine.It's the first time a businesses was fined by the Suffolk County Health Department over COVID-19-related violations.Bellone said that for the county, this qualifies as a super spreader event.“This was an egregious violation and should serve as a stark reminder of the consequences that exist for flouting COVID-19 protocols,” said Bellone. “These rules and regulations exist for a reason - to keep New Yorkers safe - and we all have an obligation to act responsibly.”This story was originally published by Corey Crockett at WPIX. 1348