武清龙济治疗阳痿怎么样武清龙济医院秘尿科怎么样,天津市龙济医院男科医院贵吗,武清区男性自龙济,天津龙济医院泌尿科医院治病怎么样,天津龙济医院割包皮医院,天津市龙济医院和平医院怎么样,武清区龙济医院做包皮包茎多少钱

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 Week 12 game between the Baltimore Ravens and the Pittsburgh Steelers has now been moved to Wednesday, the National Football League announced on Monday.The league said the game will be played at 3:40 p.m. ET Wednesday on NBC.This is the third time this game has been moved.It was originally scheduled to be played on Thanksgiving night but was moved to Sunday due to a COVID-19 outbreak within the Ravens.It was then moved from Sunday to Tuesday, and now will be played Wednesday. Last week, reports from the NFL Network said Baltimore Ravens Quarterback Lamar Jackson tested positive for COVID-19.With the rescheduling, the league said other games will be moved around: Steelers will host the Washington Football Team on Monday at 5 p.m. ET which was originally slated for Sunday, while the Ravens will host the Dallas Cowboys on Tuesday, Dec. 8 at 8:05 p.m. ET on FOX/NFL."These decisions were made out of an abundance of caution to ensure the health and safety of players, coaches and game day personnel and in consultation with medical experts," says the NFL.Ravens Coach John Harbaugh released a statement regarding the postponement.We appreciate the efforts of the NFL and Pittsburgh Steelers throughout this process, while we all work to create an environment that keeps the health and safety of everyone involved at the forefront of each decision.Our organization has a plan in place, and we will be prepared to play the Steelers. We thank everyone for their adaptability and look forward to the challenge of facing a very good football team at Heinz Field on Tuesday night.Ravens player Pat Ricard spoke out about the COVID outbreak: The word is out, I tested positive yesterday for COVID. I’ll be using this time to rest/recover along w my teammates/staff who has been affected by this virus. I appreciate all the love and support. We will come back stronger than ever! ?????????— Pat Ricard (@PRic508) November 27, 2020 This story was first reported by Kelly Broderick at WMAR in Baltimore, Maryland. 2030

The U.S. dollar is cooling off after a red-hot surge.Though it rose in the weeks following President Trump's election victory last November, the greenback has steadily fallen this year. It's now down to its lowest level since January 2015. Since January 3, the first trading day, the dollar is down 11 percent.It's down nearly 17 percent against the Mexican peso this year, a reversal of fortunes after Trump's campaign threats caused the peso to plunge. It's also down 12 percent against the euro and 7% against the pound. 541

The United States Supreme Court is expected to rule on several major cases next week impacting everything from abortion rights to the presidential election. Traditionally, the court issues all of it's rulings by the end of June to go on recess by early July. It's unclear this year however if the Supreme Court will extend its rulings if they are behind because of the pandemic. The Supreme Court said in advance what days justices will issue opinions, but would not announce which specific opinions will be announced on those days. Rulings typically come down around 10 a.m. ET.EXPECTED CASE #1 SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE CHANGES?In Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, the ruling could allow students in religious schools the ability to seek private scholarships funded through state income-tax credits. For years such programs were thought to be incompatible with Montana's constitutional ban on public aid to religious schools, however the Supreme Court could allow the program to exist. Because similar bans exist in 38 states, the ruling could change the definition of the separation of church and state. EXPECTED CASE #2CHANGE TO ABORTION RIGHTS?In June Medical Services LLC v. Russo, the ruling could impact the future of abortion rights across the country. The ruling examines whether a Louisiana law, which requires abortion providers to have admitting privileges in nearby hospitals, is constitutional. Abortion-rights activists say it will lead to clinics being shut down because most providers don't work with hospitals. More importantly, the ruling could tell anti-abortion leaders across the country that the High Court may be open to changes to Roe v Wade in the future. EXPECTED CASE #3ELECTORAL COLLEGE CONFUSION?In Colorado Department of State v. Baca, the ruling could result in major confusion in the 2020 election. The case is out of Colorado where in 2016, state electors to the electoral college attempted to vote for someone other than the winner of Colorado, Hillary Clinton. The electors were removed and replaced with someone to deliver the actual result, however it raised questions over how much power do these electors really have. EXPECTED CASE #4PRESIDENT TRUMP TAX RETURNS?In Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP and Trump v. Deutsche Bank, the question is whether the president has to comply with subpoenas for personal records. Does the power of the presidency allow President Donald Trump to say "no" when it comes to revealing his tax returns? If the Supreme Court rules against President Trump, it could create a new controversy for the President ahead of the election. 2615

The Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that the Trump administration can end census field operations early, in a blow to efforts to make sure minorities and hard-to-enumerate communities are properly counted in the crucial once-a-decade tally.The decision was not a total loss for plaintiffs in a lawsuit challenging the administration’s decision to end the count early. They managed to get nearly two extra weeks of counting people as the case made its way through the courts.However, the ruling increased the chances of the Trump administration retaining control of the process that decides how many congressional seats each state gets — and by extension how much voting power each state has.The Supreme Court justices’ ruling came as the nation’s largest association of statisticians, and even the U.S. Census Bureau’s own census takers and partners, have been raising questions about the quality of the data being gathered — numbers that are used to determine how much federal funding and how many congressional seats are allotted to states.After the Supreme Court’s decision, the Census Bureau said field operations would end on Thursday.At issue was a request by the Trump administration that the Supreme Court suspend a lower court’s order extending the 2020 census through the end of October following delays caused by the pandemic. The Trump administration argued that the head count needed to end immediately to give the bureau time to meet a year-end deadline. Congress requires the bureau to turn in by Dec. 31 the figures used to decide the states’ congressional seats — a process known as apportionment.By sticking to the deadline, the Trump administration would end up controlling the numbers used for the apportionment, no matter who wins next month’s presidential election.In a statement, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the Supreme Court’s decision “regrettable and disappointing,” and said the administration’s actions “threaten to politically and financially exclude many in America’s most vulnerable communities from our democracy.”Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented from the high court’s decision, saying “respondents will suffer substantial injury if the Bureau is permitted to sacrifice accuracy for expediency.”The Supreme Court ruling came in response to a lawsuit by a coalition of local governments and civil rights groups, arguing that minorities and others in hard-to-count communities would be missed if the census ended early. They said the schedule was cut short to accommodate a July order from President Donald Trump that would exclude people in the country illegally from being counted in the numbers used for apportionment.Opponents of the order said it followed the strategy of the late Republican redistricting guru, Thomas Hofeller, who had advocated using voting-age citizens instead of the total population when it came to drawing legislative seats since that would favor Republicans and non-Hispanic whites.Last month, U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, California sided with the plaintiffs and issued an injunction suspending a Sept. 30 deadline for finishing the 2020 census and a Dec. 31 deadline for submitting the apportionment numbers. That caused the deadlines to revert back to a previous Census Bureau plan that had field operations ending Oct. 31 and the reporting of apportionment figures at the end of April 2021.When the Census Bureau, and the Commerce Department, which oversees the statistical agency, picked an Oct. 5 end date, Koh struck that down too, accusing officials of “lurching from one hasty, unexplained plan to the next ... and undermining the credibility of the Census Bureau and the 2020 Census.”An appellate court panel upheld Koh’s order allowing the census to continue through October but struck down the part that suspended the Dec. 31 deadline for turning in apportionment numbers. The panel of three appellate judges said that just because the year-end deadline is impossible to meet doesn’t mean the court should require the Census Bureau to miss it.The plaintiffs said the ruling against them was not a total loss, as millions more people were counted during the extra two weeks.“Every day has mattered, and the Supreme Court’s order staying the preliminary injunction does not erase the tremendous progress that has been made as a result of the district court’s rulings,” said Melissa Sherry, one of the attorneys for the coalition.Besides deciding how many congressional seats each state gets, the census helps determine how .5 trillion in federal funding is distributed each year.San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo said that his city lost 0 million in federal funding over the decade following the 2010 census, and he feared it would lose more this time around. The California city was one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit.“A census count delayed is justice denied,” Liccardo said.With plans for the count hampered by the pandemic, the Census Bureau in April had proposed extending the deadline for finishing the count from the end of July to the end of October, and pushing the apportionment deadline from Dec. 31 to next April. The proposal to extend the apportionment deadline passed the Democratic-controlled House, but the Republican-controlled Senate didn’t take up the request. Then, in late July and early August, bureau officials shortened the count schedule by a month so that it would finish at the end of September.The Senate Republicans’ inaction coincided with Trump’s order directing the Census Bureau to have the apportionment count exclude people who are in the country illegally. The order was later ruled unlawful by a panel of three district judges in New York, but the Trump administration appealed that case to the Supreme Court.The Supreme Court decision comes as a report by the the American Statistical Association has found that a shortened schedule, dropped quality control procedures, pending lawsuits and the outside politicization of some parts of the 2020 census have raised questions about the quality of the nation’s head count that need to be answered if the final numbers are going to be trusted.The Census Bureau says it has counted 99.9% of households nationwide, though some regions of the country such as parts of Mississippi and hurricane-battered Louisiana fall well below that.As the Census Bureau winds down field operations over the next several days, there will be a push to get communities in those two states counted, said Kristen Clarke, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, one of the litigants in the lawsuit.“That said, the Supreme Court’s order will result in irreversible damage to the 2020 Census,” Clarke said.___Follow Mike Schneider on Twitter at https://twitter.com/MikeSchneiderAP 6792