普宁24岁女子查出白癜风普宁白癜风治疗最好专家,汕头市白癜风研究所在哪里,梅州看中医白癜风哪家最好,潮州白癜风308激光,白癜风只去汕头中科治好,潮州白癜风要怎样治疗,汕头那个家治疗白癜风好

The US Olympic Committee wants to revoke USA Gymnastics' status as the sport's governing body as the organization struggles to recover from the sex abuse scandal involving?Larry Nassar.USOC CEO Sarah Hirshland has offered USA Gymnastics the option of surrendering its status voluntarily.In an open letter Monday to the United States gymnastics community, Hirshland wrote, "We believe the challenges facing the organization are simply more than it is capable of overcoming in its current form."She told the athletes they "deserve better."CNN has reached out to USA Gymnastics for reaction.The announcement comes amid turmoil for the current governing body. Nassar is the former team doctor for USA Gymnastics.Last month, USA Gymnastics lost its second president in two months when former US Rep. Mary Bono stepped down as interim president.Bono had taken over just a month after embattled president and CEO Kerry Perry quit. Perry, who held the job for nine months, was criticized for what many people characterized as inadequate action during the Nassar abuse fallout.Bono came under fire in her first few days. In one instance, a September tweet surfaced of Bono defacing a Nike logo after Nike featured former NFL quarterback and civil rights activist Colin Kaepernick in its advertising campaign. (Nike is a major sponsor of Olympic champion Simone Biles, a megastar for USA Gymnastics.)Biles was critical of Bono. She tweeted: "don't worry, it's not like we needed a smarter usa gymnastics president or any sponsors or anything," Biles tweeted. Others also criticized Bono's tweet as being tone-deaf, saying the suppression of athletes' voices allowed Nassar's abuse to continue.Days after Bono's resignation, former USA Gymnastics head Steve Penny was arrested in connection with accusations he removed documents linked to the Nassar sexual abuse case from the Karolyi Ranch gymnastics training facility in Texas, authorities said. A judge set Penny's bail at ,000.Nassar was already serving 40 to 175 years in Michigan for sexually abusing women and girls under the guise of performing medical treatment when he was indicted in June on charges linked to allegations at the Karolyi Ranch.He faces six counts of sexual assault of a child. Meanwhile, former?USA Gymnastics trainer Deborah Van Horn is facing one count of sexual assault of a child in Texas, prosecutors said. 2403

The White House on Monday backed down from its threats to revoke Jim Acosta's press pass."Having received a formal reply from your counsel to our letter of November 16, we have made a final determination in this process: your hard pass is restored," the White House said in a new letter to Acosta. "Should you refuse to follow these rules in the future, we will take action in accordance with the rules set forth above. The President is aware of this decision and concurs."The letter detailed several new rules for reporter conduct at presidential press conferences, including "a single question" from each journalist. Follow-ups will only be permitted "at the discretion of the President or other White House officials."The decision reverses a Friday letter by the White House that said Acosta's press pass could be revoked again right after a temporary restraining order granted by a federal judge expires. That letter -- signed by two of the defendants in the suit, press secretary Sarah Sanders and deputy chief of staff for communications Bill Shine -- cited Acosta's conduct at President Trump's November 7 press conference, where he asked multiple follow-up questions and didn't give up the microphone right away."You failed to abide" by "basic, widely understood practices," the letter to Acosta claimed.CNN won the temporary restraining order earlier on Friday, forcing the White House to restore Acosta's press access for 14 days. Judge Timothy J. Kelly ruled on Fifth Amendment grounds, saying Acosta's right to due process had been violated. He did not rule on CNN's argument that the revocation of Acosta's press pass was a violation of his and the network's First Amendment rights.Many journalists have challenged the administration's actions against Acosta, pointing out that aggressive questioning is a tradition that dates back decades.But Trump appeared eager to advance an argument about White House press corps "decorum," no matter how hypocritical.Since the judge criticized the government for not following due process before banning Acosta on November 7, the letter looked like an effort to establish a paper trail that could empower the administration to boot Acosta again at the end of the month.The letter gave Acosta less than 48 hours to contest the "preliminary decision" and said a "final determination" would be made by Monday at 3 p.m.CNN's lawyers had signaled a willingness to settle after prevailing in court on Friday. Ted Boutrous, an attorney representing CNN and Acosta, said they would welcome "a resolution that makes the most sense so everyone can get out of court and get back to their work."But in a new court filing on Monday morning, CNN's lawyers said the defendants "did not respond to this offer to cooperate." Instead, the letter from Shine and Sanders was an "attempt to provide retroactive due process," the filing alleged.So CNN and Acosta asked the judge to set a schedule of deadlines for motions and hearings that would give the network the chance to win a preliminary injunction, a longer form of court-ordered protection to Acosta's press pass.They were seeking a hearing "for the week of November 26, 2018, or as soon thereafter as possible," according to the court filing.A preliminary injunction could be in effect for much longer than the temporary restraining order, thereby protecting Acosta's access to the White House.In a response Monday morning, government lawyers called the CNN motion a "self-styled 'emergency'" and sought to portray the White House's moves as a lawful next step."Far from constituting an 'emergency,' the White House's initiation of a process to consider suspending Mr. Acosta's hard pass is something this Court's Order anticipated," they said.The DOJ lawyers continued to say that the White House had made "no final determination" on Acosta's access, and asked the court to extend its own deadline, set last week, for a status report due at 3 p.m. Monday, in light of the White House's separate self-imposed deadline for the Acosta decision.At lunchtime, Kelly granted the government's request and extended the status report deadline to 6 p.m. Monday.The case was assigned to Judge Kelly when CNN filed suit last Tuesday. Kelly was appointed to the bench by Trump last year, and confirmed with bipartisan support in the Senate. He heard oral arguments on Wednesday and granted CNN's request for a temporary restraining order on Friday."We are disappointed with the district court's decision," the Justice Department said in response at the time. "The President has broad authority to regulate access to the White House, including to ensure fair and orderly White House events and press conferences. We look forward to continuing to defend the White House's lawful actions."Trump seemed to shrug off the loss, telling Fox's Chris Wallace in an interview that "it's not a big deal."He said the White House would "create rules and regulations for conduct" so that the administration can revoke press passes in the future."If he misbehaves," Trump said, apparently referring to Acosta, "we'll throw him out or we'll stop the news conference.""This is a high-risk confrontation for both sides," Mike Allen of Axios wrote in a Monday item about Trump's new targeting of Acosta. "It turns out that press access to the White House is grounded very much in tradition rather than in plain-letter law. So a court fight could result in a precedent that curtails freedom to cover the most powerful official in the world from the literal front row."The-CNN-Wire 5546

The world has spent the last several months wearing masks in public, avoiding gatherings and, in general, spending less time outside the home. But a new report suggests household transmission is one of the most common ways COVID-19 is spreading; an individual is most likely to contract COVID-19 from their spouse or significant other.That conclusion is part of a new report from the University of Florida which was published in the journal JAMA Network Open on Monday. Researchers looked at the results of 54 studies across 20 countries that included nearly 78,000 subjects.They found more than one in three, roughly 38%, of COVID-19 patients passed the virus to their spouses or significant others they live with."Infection risk was highest for spouses, followed by non-spouse family members and other relatives, which were all higher than other [close] contacts," the authors wrote.In the studies, about 17% of COVID-19 patients transmitted the virus to children they live with.Anyone living in the same home as someone who has contracted the coronavirus is at a heightened risk, but researchers say spouses and significant others are more likely to pass along the virus for various reasons, including "intimacy, sleeping in the same room, or longer or more direct exposure to index cases," according to the report's authors.The researchers found no significant difference between male and female transmission rates inside the home.A recent study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that 53% of people who live with someone who has COVID-19 will contract the virus within seven days.Health experts have urged those who have COVID-19 or have symptoms to wear a mask in their home, and isolate within the home as much as possible away from others under the same roof. 1798

The resilience of the students and staff at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School is obvious. They've resumed classes, and their lives, on a campus where 17 of fellow students and teachers were killed in a mass shooting just over a month ago.And now, they'll turn what's normally a private chronicle of high school life -- a yearbook -- into a public testament to pain and perseverance.For the first time, the high school's yearbook is being made available nationally for purchase. In it, the yearbook staff weave a powerful tale of Marjory Stoneman Douglas' strength and resolve, for the whole world to see."We're still here. We still have games going on. We're still making the yearbook. There's still going to be prom," yearbook adviser Sarah Lerner said in a blog post for Walsworth Yearbooks. "We're a very strong community and we're not letting this stop us."Lerner said at first she was hesitant to share the upcoming yearbook, The Aerie, with the public, because there are student pictures and personal stories in it. But she ultimately decided that opening up the yearbook to people outside the school would let them see how much pride the students have in their school."I hope they see how hard the kids have worked and how much love has gone into this book," Lerner said. "I hope that they see all of the wonderful things that we do here, before the (shooting) and since."'It's our story'The Aerie will include coverage of the shooting, pictures from vigils and memorials, a story on students dyeing their hair in honor of the victims, pieces on the surviving students' political activism and highlights from the week they returned to the school.In a special section, each of the mass shooting's 17 victims will be profiled."We have a story to tell and it's our story. No one else will tell it better than we will, because we lived it," Lerner said.People interested in buying a copy of the yearbook can go to yearbookforever.com to place an order. 1966

The US House of Representatives passed a federal "right-to-try" bill Wednesday night, leaving many Americans wondering what the move could mean for their health and that of their loved ones.The bill, backed by President Donald Trump, would give terminally ill patients the right to seek drug treatments that remain in clinical trials and have passed phase one of the Food and Drug Administration's approval process, but they have not been fully approved by the FDA.The bill passed the House 267 to 149, after failing to pass last week. Now the legislation needs approval from the Senate.Right-to-try laws exist in 38 states -- Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, Washington and Wyoming -- but this federal bill would introduce legislation across state lines.The central question, however, remains: Would a federal right-to-try bill help or hurt some of the country's most fragile patients? Here's what you need to know, according to experts on both sides of the legislation. 1320