天津市龙济咨询(武清区龙济泌尿医院好) (今日更新中)

The federal government is running up its credit bill again.The deficit rose to 9 billion in fiscal year 2018, up 17% from last year, according to final figures released Monday by the Treasury Department. That's the largest number since 2012, when the country was still spending massively to stimulate an economy struggling to recover.Government receipts were flat this year from last year. Corporate tax collections fell billion, or 22%, due to the Republican-backed tax cut. But that drop was more than offset by increased revenues from individual and self-employment taxes. The fiscal year ended September 30.Spending rose 3% over the previous year, fueled in part by increases to the defense budget agreed upon in September 2017 as part of a deal between Republicans and Democrats to head off a government shutdown. Social Security and interest on the federal debt also contributed to the increase.The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a think tank that warns of the dangers of rising debt levels, said the deficit could reach trillion as soon as next year. That would still be below a high of .4 trillion reached in 2009, but in a vastly different economy."Those elected to Congress this year will face stark and difficult choices to put the debt on a downward path and protect our nation's social programs from insolvency," said Maya MacGuineas, the group's president. "It's no longer a problem for the future."The White House has steadfastly defended its policies, arguing that the yawning gap is a reason to cut deeper into social programs to balance out increases to the military budget. It's a long way from the Republican stance under President Barack Obama, when the GOP-led House demanded about trillion in budget cuts over 10 years in exchange for a debt ceiling increase, leading to years of painful automatic reductions to federal spending.White House budget director Mick Mulvaney, a notable debt hawk while he was a congressman, said the numbers underscored a need to cut spending."The president is very much aware of the realities presented by our national debt," Mulvaney said in a statement. "America's booming economy will create increased government revenues — an important step toward long-term fiscal sustainability. But this fiscal picture is a blunt warning to Congress of the dire consequences of irresponsible and unnecessary spending."His comments echoed remarks by Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin last week in an interview with CNN suggesting that Democrats' resistance to cutting government spending on education, health care and other social programs was to blame for deficit increases."People are going to want to say the deficit is because of the tax cuts. That's not the real story," Mnuchin told CNN. "The real story is we made a significant investment in the military which is very, very important, and to get that done we had to increase non-military spending."Not many non-military spending categories increased, however. Outlays for the departments of Housing and Urban Development, Transportation, Energy and Education all decreased, while Health and Human Services and Veterans Affairs increased slightly. The Agriculture Department saw a 7% bump from last year.The deficit figure is?in line with what the Congressional Budget Office, the official government scorekeeper of federal fiscal policy, projected earlier this month. In June, the CBO projected that the deficit would rise to 9.5% of GDP in 2018.Also in June, the federal debt — which aggregates annual deficits over time — stood at 78% of gross domestic product, the highest level since right after World War II. Updated figures were not immediately available on Monday.As interest rates rise, servicing that ballooning debt could pose challenging. Treasury spent 2 billion last year paying interest, up 14% from the year before. That's more than the cost of Medicaid, food stamps, and the department of Housing and Urban Development combined. But it is smaller as a percentage of GDP than it has been historically.In late September, the House passed a bill that would extend individual tax cuts that are currently are slated to end in 2025, at a cost of 1 billion over a 10-year window. 4260

The Food and Drug Administration on Wednesday authorized the first rapid coronavirus test that doesn’t need any special computer equipment to get results.The 15-minute test from Abbott Laboratories will sell for , giving it a competitive edge over similar tests that need to be popped into a small machine. The size of a credit card, the self-contained test is based on the same technology used to test for the flu, strep throat and other infections.It’s the latest cheaper, simpler test to hit the U.S. market, providing new options to expand testing as schools and businesses struggle to reopen and flu season approaches. The FDA also recently greenlighted a saliva test from Yale University that bypasses some of the supplies that have led to testing bottlenecks.Both tests have limitations and neither can be done at home. Several companies are developing rapid, at-home tests, but none have yet won approval. Abbott’s new test still requires a nasal swab by a health worker, like most older coronavirus tests. The Yale saliva test eliminates the need for a swab, but can only be run at high-grade laboratories.And in general, rapid tests like Abbott’s are less accurate than lab-developed tests. The FDA said in a statement announcing the decision that negative results with Abbott’s test may need to be confirmed with a lab test in some cases. The agency granted Abbott’s test an emergency use authorization late Wednesday for patients with suspected COVID-19.The two additions should help expand the number of available tests. The U.S. is now testing about 690,000 people per day, down from a peak of 850,000 daily tests late last month. Many public health experts believe the country will soon need to test vastly more people to find those who are infected, isolate them and contain the virus.The FDA noted that Abbott’s test could be used in a doctor’s office, emergency room or some schools. “Given the simple nature of this test, it is likely that these tests could be made broadly available,” the FDA said.Since the start of the pandemic, nasal swab tests that are sent to a lab have been the standard for COVID-19 screening. While considered highly accurate, the tests rely on expensive, specialized machines and chemicals. Shortages of those supplies have led to repeated delays in reporting results, especially during a spike in cases last month.Government and health experts view rapid tests that can be run outside the laboratory system as key to boosting capacity.“Those screening tests are what we need in schools, workplaces and nursing homes in order to catch asymptomatic spreaders,” said Dr. Jonathan Quick of the Rockefeller Foundation, in an interview earlier this month. The nonprofit group has called for the U.S. to conduct about 4 millions per day by October, mostly rapid, point-of-care tests.Abbott’s BinaxNOW is the fourth rapid test that detects COVID-19 antigens, proteins found on the surface of the coronavirus, rather than the virus itself. It’s considered a faster, though sometimes less precise, screening method. The other tests need to be inserted into a small machine.Inside the Abbott test is a specially coated strip that interacts with COVID-19 antigens. The patient’s nasal swab is inserted into the card and a few drops of a chemical solution are added. Markings appear on the card to indicate whether the sample is positive or negative — much like a pregnancy test.Two other makers of antigen tests — Quidel and Becton Dickinson have said they haven’t been able to meet demand for the tests. A third, LumiraDx, plans to begin shipping its recently approved antigen tests by the end of this month. Abbott expects to begin shipping tests in September, reaching 50 million tests a month in October.The influx of antigen tests will go a long way toward meeting the Trump administration’s projection that 90 million COVID-19 tests a month will be available by September if needed. But U.S. “testing czar” Adm. Brett Giroir has stressed that the U.S. can contain the outbreak with far fewer tests.“That’s the capacity ... we do not need that many tests to safely and sensibly reopen,” Giroir told reporters on a recent call. He pointed to several key indicators that have been falling, including new infections and hospitalizations, even as testing has slowed.Earlier this month, the FDA authorized Yale’s saliva-based test, which is expected to cut the time and cost compared with similar tests. It’s the fifth COVID-19 saliva tests OK’d by regulators. All require lab processing.Developed by Yale’s School of Public Health, SalivaDirect can use any sterile container to collect a sample, not the special tube needed with earlier tests, and requires less chemicals. Outside experts welcomed the new approach but noted its limitations.“It’s not a rapid test, it’s a laboratory-based test that will still be prone to the same massive delays as any other test,” said Dr. Michael Mina of Harvard University.___Follow Matthew Perrone on Twitter: @ AP_FDAwriter.___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. 5201

The Environmental Protection Agency blocked reporters from several news outlets from a national summit on Tuesday where Scott Pruitt, the agency's chief, was speaking.Journalists from CNN, the Associated Press and E&E News, a publication that covers energy and environment issues, were barred by the EPA from entering the event, which was focused on harmful chemicals in water. A handful of other reporters from other news organizations, however, were allowed inside the event for Pruitt's opening remarks after having been previously invited by the agency the day before.In a statement, Jahan Wilcox, an EPA spokesman, said the agency barred reporters from attending due to space limitations inside the venue. He said the EPA was able to accommodate only 10 reporters and that it provided a livestream "for those we could not accommodate.""This was simply an issue of the room reaching capacity, which reporters were aware of prior to the event," Wilcox said.A report published by The Hill, however, said a handful of seats in the press section remained vacant by the time Pruitt began speaking. Another reporter told Politico there were dozens of empty seats in the room, and a photo obtained by CNN also showed space for cameras.Additionally, the Associated Press said in a story that one of its reporters, denied entry, was grabbed by security guards and forcibly shoved out of the building after asking to speak to an EPA public affairs person. A CNN photographer saw the female journalist being shoved out of the building by a uniformed guard, and the Associated Press journalist recounted the incident to CNN immediately after it took place.When reached by phone and asked about the Associated Press report, Wilcox declined to comment to CNN beyond his original statement, which said he was "unaware of the individual situation that has been reported."CNN was also blocked from attending the summit. A CNN photographer was screened by security guards before the event and was waiting for an escort or further information. Wilcox arrived soon after and provided security with a list of news outlets and reporters, instructing them not to let anyone not on the list into the event. The CNN photographer then asked if he could enter the event and was told by security he couldn't.Separately, a CNN reporter and producer lined up with members of the public and presented their IDs and credentials, identifying themselves as reporters. The individual manning the door said he needed to ask the press office if they could be permitted to enter. A few minutes later, he returned and said the CNN journalists were not allowed in.In a statement, a CNN spokesperson said, "Today, CNN was turned away from covering the PFAS National Leadership Summit at the EPA after multiple attempts to attend. While several news organizations were permitted, the EPA selectively excluded CNN and other media outlets. We understand the importance of an open and free press and we hope the EPA does, too."Sally Buzbee, executive editor of The Associated Press, said in a separate statement, "The Environmental Protection Agency's selective barring of news organizations, including the AP, from covering today's meeting is alarming and a direct threat to the public's right to know about what is happening inside their government."Buzbee added, "It is particularly distressing that any journalist trying to cover an event in the public interest would be forcibly removed."Following the media firestorm, the EPA reversed course and opened the second portion of the summit, which Pruitt was not scheduled to speak at, to the press. 3621

The Democratic National Convention gets underway this week. Republicans will hold their convention next week. While this year's convention is virtual for both parties, have you asked yourself what's the point of these anyway?CONVENTIONS YEARS AGO WERE DIFFERENT Americans have known for months that Joe Biden is going to be the Democratic nominee and that Donald Trump would be the Republican nominee. However, before political parties started relying on primaries, conventions were the place the nominee was decided.In 1856, it took Abraham Lincoln three rounds of voting to become the Republican nominee. In 1924, Democrats needed 103 ballots over 16 days to pick John Davis as their party nominee.CONVENTIONS PURPOSE In 1948, networks began televising conventions and since then, many argue conventions have become taxpayer-funded spectacles for insiders. While taxpayers are no longer directly funding conventions, they are paying for security. In 2016, it was estimated that around 0 million of taxpayer funds were spent on convention security. 1952 was the last year both political parties had a contested convention; however, party insiders believe conventions still play a pivotal role. Conventions are where networking can take place and where delegates can debate the party platform. It's also a place where training sessions can occur and speeches can take place. Could Barack Obama have become president in 2008 without his speech at the 2004 convention? Sure, it's possible, but that speech was credited with making the Illinois state senator a household name. WILL 2020 CHANGE CONVENTIONS? With the events now online, after these next two weeks, both parties will likely sit down and see if in-person conventions need to be changed at all. Do parties need a full week of expensive arena space? Or would that money be better spent on staffing in swing states? Will Americans tune in like they did in 2016 this year? These are just some of the questions that will be asked following the conventions. 2023

The Food and Drug Administration warned pregnant women on Thursday of using some pain and fever medications during the second half of pregnancies.According to the FDA, these nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs can cause rare but serious kidney problems in the unborn baby, which can cause pregnancy-related complications. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs include ibuprofen, naproxen, diclofenac, and celecoxib. The FDA added that its warning does not apply to low-dose aspirin.“It is important that women understand the benefits and risks of the medications they may take over the course of their pregnancy,” said Patrizia Cavazzoni, M.D., acting director of FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. “To this end, the agency is using its regulatory authority to inform women and their health care providers about the risks if NSAIDs are used after around 20 weeks of pregnancy and beyond.”The FDA says that warnings on prescription nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs already advise of complications past 30 weeks. The newest guidance calls on health care providers to only prescribe the lowest effective dose for the shortest period possible for women 20 to 30 weeks into their pregnancy.More information on the warning can be found here. 1259

来源：资阳报