天津市龙济泌尿外科早泄(天津市龙济医院可以看男性生殖病) (今日更新中)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration says people would drive more and be exposed to increased risk if their cars get better gas mileage, an argument intended to justify freezing Obama-era toughening of fuel standards.Transportation experts dispute the arguments, contained in a draft of the administration's proposals prepared this summer, excerpts of which were obtained by The Associated Press.The excerpts also show the administration plans to challenge California's long-standing authority to enact its own, tougher pollution and fuel standards.Revisions to the mileage requirements for 2021 through 2026 are still being worked on, the administration says, and changes could be made before the proposal is released as soon as this week.RELATED: California sues over plan to scrap car emission standardsThe Trump administration gave notice earlier this year that it would roll back tough new fuel standards put into place in the waning days of the Obama administration. Anticipating the new regulation, California and 16 other states sued the Trump administration in May.Overall, "improvements over time have better longer-term effects simply by not alienating consumers, as compared to great leaps forward" in fuel efficiency and other technology, the administration argues. It contends that freezing the mileage requirements at 2020 levels would save up to 1,000 lives per year.New vehicles would be cheaper — and heavier — if they don't have to meet more stringent fuel requirements and more people would buy them, the draft says, and that would put more drivers in safer, newer vehicles that pollute less.RELATED: EPA moves to weaken Obama-era fuel efficiency standardsAt the same time, the draft says that people will drive less if their vehicles get fewer miles per gallon, lowering the risk of crashes.David Zuby, chief research officer at the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, said he's doubtful about the administration's estimate of lives saved because other factors could affect traffic deaths, such as automakers agreeing to make automatic emergency braking standard on all models before 2022. "They're making assumptions about stuff that may or may not be the same," he said.Experts say the logic that heavier vehicles are safer doesn't hold up because lighter, newer vehicles perform as well or better than older, heavier versions in crash tests, and because the weight difference between the Obama and Trump requirements would be minimal.RELATED: President Trump, California clash over key issues"Allow me to be skeptical," said Giorgio Rizzoni, an engineering professor and director of the Center for Automotive Research at Ohio State University. "To say that safety is a direct result of somehow freezing the fuel economy mandate for a few years, I think that's a stretch."Experts say that a heavier, bigger vehicle would incur less damage in a crash with a smaller, lighter one and that fatality rates also are higher for smaller vehicles. But they also say that lighter vehicles with metals such as aluminum, magnesium, titanium and lighter, high-strength steel alloys perform as well or better than their predecessors in crash tests.Alan Taub, professor of materials science and engineering at the University of Michigan, said he would choose a 2017 Malibu over a heavier one from 20 years earlier. It's engineered better, has more features to avoid crashes and additional air bags, among other things. "You want to be in the newer vehicle," he said.RELATED: Nearly every governor with ocean coastline opposes Trump's drilling proposalAn April draft from the Trump administration said freezing the requirements at 2020 levels would save people ,900 per new vehicle. But the later draft raises that to ,100 and even as high as ,700 by 2025.Environmental groups questioned the justification for freezing the standards. Luke Tonachel, director of the clean-vehicle program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said the risk from people driving more due to higher mileage is "tiny and maybe even negligible."Under the Trump administration proposal, the fleet of new vehicles would have to average roughly 30 mpg in real-world driving, and that wouldn't change through 2026.California has had the authority under the half-century-old Clean Air Act to set its own mileage under a special rule allowing the state to curb its chronic smog problem. More than a dozen states follow California's standards, amounting to about 40 percent of the country's new-vehicle market.Asked if he thinks a freeze in U.S. mileage standards is warranted, EPA acting administrator Andrew Wheeler told a small group of reporters at EPA headquarters last week, "I think we need to go where the technology takes us" on fuel standards.Wheeler did not elaborate. Agency spokespeople did not respond when asked specifically if the EPA acting chief was making the case that modern cars could be both fuel efficient and safe.Wheeler also spoke out for what he called "a 50-state solution" that would keep the U.S car and truck market from splitting between two different mileage standards.The Department of Transportation said in a statement that the final fuel economy standards would be based on sound science. The department cautioned that a draft doesn't capture the whole picture of the proposed regulation.The draft said a 2012 analysis of fuel economy standards under the Obama administration deliberately limited the amount of mass reduction necessary under the standards. This was done "in order to avoid the appearance of adverse safety effects," the draft stated.___Krisher reported from Detroit. 5642

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- It seems like a visit to the doctor’s office, but this high-tech checkup doesn’t involve a medical professional, but, rather, an app.“It is a completely objective measure,” said David Liu, CEO of Sonde Health.The company is the developer of an app called “Sonde One.” It’s designed to screen employees at home for potential respiratory ailments – like COVID-19 – in part, through the sound of their voice.“Speaking is one of the most complex physical things that a person can do,” Liu said. “Many parts of the body have to come together including your brain, your lips, your mouth, your lungs, your heart.”That is where the app comes in.After answering a few symptom-related questions, it prompts a person to say “ahhh,” for a set amount of time. The app then either clears the person to go into the office or notifies them and their employer that something may be amiss.“It's a biomarker, like any other, that the body produces,” Liu said. “There's data and signal in your voice that can be read and understood.”The voice analysis technology has been used before in helping screen people for depression and several studies done in the U.S., Australia and Germany show it may have merit.However, the app can’t specifically detect the coronavirus. It can pick-up if someone might have a cold, the flu or even asthma. Still, some companies are signing on.“There's a group of managers who are testing this you know on a on a daily basis right now, just so that we can learn the ins and outs of it,” said Ed McNamara, who is with the New Jersey-based software company SHI.SHI has 5,000 employees, all of whom used to go into the office. COVID-19 put a stop to that because, like millions of others, employees at SHI are working from home.“Our culture, as a company, is one that is really based on us being together and collaborating in person,” McNamara said.The company hopes that might change some time in the fall and that the app could be part of their strategy to come back.“It's one compliment of all of the other activities that we're undertaking, just to make sure that when we do come back to the office, it's in the safest possible way,” McNamara said.It is a safety that could hinge on the sound of your voice. 2245

WASHINGTON (AP) — Under fire for the worst privacy debacle in his company's history, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg batted away often-aggressive questioning Tuesday from lawmakers who accused him of failing to protect the personal information of millions of Americans from Russians intent on upsetting the U.S. election.During some five hours of Senate questioning, Zuckerberg apologized several times for Facebook failures, disclosed that his company was "working with" special counsel Robert Mueller in the federal probe of Russian election interference and said it was working hard to change its own operations after the harvesting of users' private data by a data-mining company affiliated with Donald Trump's campaign.Seemingly unimpressed, Republican Sen. John Thune of South Dakota said Zuckerberg's company had a 14-year history of apologizing for "ill-advised decisions" related to user privacy. "How is today's apology different?" Thune asked."We have made a lot of mistakes in running the company," Zuckerberg conceded, and Facebook must work harder at ensuring the tools it creates are used in "good and healthy" ways.The controversy has brought a flood of bad publicity and sent the company's stock value plunging, but Zuckerberg seemed to achieve a measure of success in countering that: Facebook shares surged 4.5 percent for the day, the biggest gain in two years.In all, he skated largely unharmed through his first day of congressional testimony. He'll face House questioners on Wednesday.The 33-year-old founder of the world's best-known social media giant appeared in a suit and tie, a departure from the T-shirt he's famous for wearing in public as well as in private.Even so, his youth cast a sharp contrast with his often-elderly, gray-haired Senate inquisitors. And the enormous complexity of the social network he created at times defeated the attempts of legislators to hammer him on Facebook's specific failures and how to fix them.The stakes are high for both Zuckerberg and his company. Facebook has been reeling from its worst-ever privacy failure following revelations last month that the political data-mining firm Cambridge Analytica, which was affiliated with Trump's 2016 campaign, improperly scooped up data on some 87 million users.Zuckerberg has been on an apology tour for most of the past two weeks, culminating in his congressional appearance Tuesday.Although shaky at times, Zuckerberg seemed to gain confidence as the day progressed. An iconic figure as a billionaire entrepreneur who changed the way people around the world relate to each other, he made a point of repeatedly referring back to the Harvard dorm room where he said Facebook was brought to life.At times, he showed plenty of steel. After aggressive questioning about Facebook's alleged political bias from Sen. Ted Cruz, for instance, Zuckerberg was asked if he was ready to take a break.No need. "That was pretty good," he said of the exchange with Cruz.For the most part, his careful but generally straightforward answers, steeped in the sometimes arcane details of Facebook's underlying functions, often deflected aggressive questioning. When the going got tough, Zuckerberg was able to fall back on: "Our team should follow up with you on that, Senator."As a result, he found it relatively easy to return to familiar talking points: Facebook made mistakes, he and his executives are very sorry, and they're working very hard to correct the problems and safeguard the users' data.As for the federal Russia probe that has occupied much of Washington's attention for months, he said he had not been interviewed by special counsel Mueller's team, but "I know we're working with them."He offered no details, citing a concern about confidentiality rules of the investigation.Earlier this year Mueller charged 13 Russian individuals and three Russian companies in a plot to interfere in the 2016 presidential election through a social media propaganda effort that included online ad purchases using U.S. aliases and politicking on U.S. soil.A number of the Russian ads were on Facebook.Much of the effort was aimed at denigrating Democrat Hillary Clinton and thereby helping Republican Trump, or simply encouraging divisiveness and undercutting faith in the U.S. system.Zuckerberg said Facebook had been led to believe Cambridge Analytica had deleted the user data it had harvested and that had been "clearly a mistake." He said Facebook had considered the data collection "a closed case" and had not alerted the Federal Trade Commission.He assured senators the company would handle the situation differently today.Separately, the company began alerting some of its users that their data was gathered by Cambridge Analytica. A notification that appeared on Facebook for some users Tuesday told them that "one of your friends" used Facebook to log into a now-banned personality quiz app called "This Is Your Digital Life."The notice says the app misused the information, including public profiles, page likes, birthdays and current cities, by sharing it with Cambridge Analytica.In the hearings, Zuckerberg is trying to both restore public trust in his company and stave off federal regulations that some lawmakers have floated.Democrat Bill Nelson of Florida said he believes Zuckerberg was taking the congressional hearings seriously "because he knows there is going to be a hard look at regulation."Republicans have yet to get behind any legislation, but that could change.Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., asked Zuckerberg if he would be willing to work with lawmakers to examine what "regulations you think are necessary in your industry."Absolutely, Zuckerberg responded, saying later in an exchange with Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, that "I'm not the type of person who thinks that all regulation is bad."Ahead of the hearing, John Cornyn of Texas, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, said, "This is a serious matter, and I think people expect us to take action."At the hearing, Zuckerberg said, "We didn't take a broad enough view of our responsibility, and that was a big mistake. It was my mistake, and I'm sorry. I started Facebook, I run it, and I'm responsible for what happens here."He outlined steps the company has taken to restrict outsiders' access to people's personal information. He also said the company is investigating every app that had access to a large amount of information before the company moved to prevent such access in 2014 — actions that came too late in the Cambridge Analytica case.Watch the testimony in the player below:  6570

WASHINGTON, D.C. – NASA announced this week that astronaut Jeanette Epps has been assigned to its Boeing Starline-1 mission.The mission is the first operational crewed flight of Boeing’s CST-100 Starling spacecraft on a mission to the International Space Station.Epps will join astronauts Sunita Williams and Josh Cassada for a six-month expedition planned for a launch in 2021 to the orbiting space lab.This assignment will also make Epps the first Black woman to live and work in space for an extended period of time, CNBC and USA Today report.Epps reacted to the announcement in a video on Twitter, saying she’s looking forward to the mission. While this will be her first time in space, Epps said she’s “flown in helicopters with Sunni flying” and been “in the backseat of a T38 with Josh flying.”Thank you @JimBridenstine! I’m looking forward to the mission.???? https://t.co/h2xIJMK1Ef pic.twitter.com/cSRf1SE4cr— Jeanette J. Epps (@Astro_Jeanette) August 25, 2020 Before joining NASA in 2009, Epps spent seven years as a CIA technical intelligence officer. She has a bachelor’s degree in physics from LeMoyne College, as well as a master’s degree in science and doctorate in aerospace engineering from the University of Maryland, College Park. 1258

WELD COUNTY, Colo. – The tornado that touched down in a field outside of Keota, Colorado Wednesday morning was an “extremely rare” event, according to a National Weather Service meteorologist.The tornado dropped to the ground at 6:37 a.m. about 5 miles northwest of Keota, in northeast Weld County, as an early-morning round of severe thunderstorms moved across eastern Colorado. 387

来源：资阳报