男天津龙济医院男科医院(天津市武清区龙济医院在什么路上) (今日更新中)

The woman had used oxycodone for almost a decade but told her doctors she had been sober for two years. She never touched narcotics during her pregnancy, she said, and had completed rehab.But her newborn son was in withdrawal: jittery, screaming and requiring an infusion of morphine to stay alive. The infant craved drugs, but why?Amid an opioid epidemic, the boy's doctors didn't blame heroin, fentanyl or other illicit substances. Instead, they said, the infant had grown dependent on a controversial herbal supplement: kratom. 538

The same day that the First Baptist Church of Sutherland Springs held its first service since a gunman opened fire on parishioners last week, killing 25 people and an unborn child, residents and visitors got to see how the church had been turned into a memorial.On Sunday evening, the church opened its doors and invited the public inside the sanctuary, which had been emptied and transformed into a memorial, completely covered from floor to ceiling in white.Those who visited found 26 roses on 26 white chairs, representing each of the victims who lost their lives. 575

The US Consumer Product Safety Commission (USPSC) announced Wednesday that it is issuing a recall of Xtava Allure hair dryers due to concerns that they could catch fire or deliver electrical shocks.According to the USPSC, the recall affects more than 200,000 hair dryers.Nearly 200 people have reported the dryers and power cords have either "overheated, melted, exploded or caught fire" while in use. Eighteen people sustained burns while using the product, with one of those being classified as a "severe" burn.The dryers were sold online at Amazon, eBay, Walmart and Groupon, in addition to Xtava's own website. They were sold individually or in a hair care pack that included "treatment products, a flat iron or a diffuser."The affected products include the following SKU numbers on a label on the back:  XTV010001, XTV010001N, XTV010002, or XTV010002N.Those with the dryers should contact Xtava directly. Visit their recall website here.Alex Hider is a writer for the E.W. Scripps National Desk. Follow him on Twitter @alexhider. 1082

The US Coast Guard was searching Friday for a passenger who reportedly went overboard from a cruise ship about 35 miles south of the Florida Keys.The 26-year-old man was on the Carnival Victory cruise ship below Islamorada when the incident occurred, officials said.Vance Gulliksen, a spokesman for Carnival Cruise Line, said the vessel was headed back to Miami, its home port, when the man disappeared."All appropriate authorities, including the United States Coast Guard, were notified, and the ship has joined in the search and rescue efforts," Gulliksen said in a statement.Carnival Victory was completing a four-day cruise.A Coast Guard plane, helicopter and cutter were involved in the search. 707

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

来源：资阳报