徐州四维跟三维彩超区别(徐州市哪个医院做肠镜做的好) (今日更新中)

SAN DIEGO (KGTV) -- Low inventory and historically low interest rates are driving California's red-hot real estate market.According to the California Association of Realtors, home sales climbed to their highest level in more than a decade, and the median home price set another high for the fourth straight month.It's making it harder for buyers to buy low but easier for sellers looking to sell high."With everything shutting down, I just figured now was the time to do it," said Kristi Gonzalez.After a career in the San Diego area, Gonzalez is retiring, moving out of state, and about to cash out."I think now is a great time to sell," she said. "There's very low inventory. It will make it easier for me."If you've paid attention to California's real estate landscape, the market is hot in many cities."We're seeing about a 10 percent increase in the last four to five months, and that's insane considering where we were," said Jordan Beal, president of the Beal Group.Beal said the San Diego area sees an influx of buyers from New York, the Bay Area, and Los Angeles."When you look at the fact that money is as cheap as it is, people who have been able to keep their jobs combined with a lot of tech people who can now work remotely and see San Diego as really cheap market compared to the Bay Area, Los Angeles, and New York, I don't see our market slowing down anytime soon," Beal said.The same thing is happening as you head north into the Central Valley."Inventory is historically low, interest rates are historically low, and it's just kind of the perfect storm with that whole supply and demand," said Ronda Newport, president of the Bakersfield Association of Realtors.Newport said the Bakersfield market is on fire.It's a combination of locals looking to take advantage of interest rates and those from wealthier ZIP codes trying to get out of a big city."If you have an LA buyer or a Bay Area buyer, and if they sell their home, you know a small little home for what they sell for in that area, and they move to Bakersfield, and they see what they can get for the money here, it's an easy decision," she said."We are just breaking all sorts of records," said Bruce Blair of Blair Properties.Blair's been selling homes along the Central Coast since the 70s.He said some people are buying houses they've never seen. Some buyers are paying in cash, and those who aren't have large down payments."It's tough to make any type of prediction right now, but right now, the housing market is not affordable for a lot of people in San Luis Obispo County, and that's a problem."According to the California Association of Realtors, September's statewide median home price was 2,430. That's up more than 17 percent from September of last year.According to a survey from Zillow, life uncertainty, likely caused by COVID-19, keeps more than a third of would-be sellers out of the market.The Zillow survey found many sellers say they anticipate a higher sale price if they wait.So, what to do? Unfortunately, there's no crystal ball."I don't anticipate it slowing down too much," said Carla Farley, President of the Greater San Diego Association of Realtors. "Unless we get some interest rates that go crazy after the election cycle, maybe that might slow some things, but I don't anticipate that happening either."According to the California Association of Realtors, the median number of days it took to sell a California single-family home was 11 days in September, down from 24 in September 2019. The September 2020 figure was the lowest ever recorded. 3564

SAN DIEGO (KGTV) -- Mayor Kevin Faulconer has directed city staff to reinstate San Diego Fire-Rescue Department’s Girls Empowerment Camp that was abruptly canceled last week.The event was canceled one day after attorney Al Reva sent a letter to the city’s attorney and organizers of the event.The letter claims that Reva’s client Rich Allison was “deterred and prevented from timely enrolling his son in this camp because boys were not invited to attend, based solely on their sex.”RELATED: Girls empowerment camp rescheduled after abrupt cancellation?Families who previously registered for the canceled camp will have first choice of which of the two weekends the camp is being offered they would like to participate in.“Our firefighters, staff and volunteers put their hearts and souls into this event,” said Fire Chief Brian Fennessy. “We are committed to moving forward with this excellent opportunity for young people. Last year, we heard that the Girls Empowerment Camp was a priceless experience for the campers. We want the same for our 2018 participants.”The Girls Empowerment Camp is a free two-day camp for youth ages 14-18 “regardless of age or gender.”The camp introduces participants to career opportunities in firefighting and encourages them to consider public safety as a career option.“We made a commitment to hundreds of kids and their families and we are going to stand by that,” Mayor Faulconer said. “This is an important camp that teaches kids what it’s like to be a firefighter and exposes many of them to a career opportunity they may not have considered previously. The camp is open to everyone and encourages girls to consider a profession that needs more female representation.”Only seven percent of firefighters nationally are women, according to a 2016 National Fire Protection Association study.The event will take place on both the weekend of April 14-15 and the weekend of May 19-20.For more information on the camp or to register click here.  1989

SAN DIEGO (KGTV) — It’s a term we’ve heard a lot during the pandemic: emergency use authorization.From ventilators to diagnostic tests to experimental drugs like remdesivir, the Food and Drug Administration has issued at least 616 emergency use authorizations, or EUAs, since the pandemic began.“That’s such a powerful term: emergency use authorization,” said President Donald Trump on Aug. 23 when announcing an EUA for convalescent plasma.Top officials at the FDA are now floating the idea of using an EUA to speed up distribution of a vaccine against COVID-19, writing that it “may be appropriate” under certain circumstances. Critics contend it would be a dangerous move.The mechanism was put into law back in 2004, and EUAs have been used in several health emergencies since, including the 2009 H1N1 pandemic.An EUA allows the FDA to temporarily authorize a drug or device for use during an emergency under certain conditions. There must be no formally approved alternatives to the product, and the available evidence must suggest the potential benefits outweigh the potential risks.“Because in some emergencies, we just cannot wait for all the evidence needed for full FDA approval,” the agency says in a video explaining the rationale for an EUA.While EUAs are relatively common for diagnostic tests and experimental drugs, there has only been one EUA issued for a vaccine. In 2005, the FDA authorized a vaccine intended to protect U.S. soldiers from an anthrax chemical attack. It was the first time the FDA ever used the EUA process. In that case, the product, Anthrax Vaccine Absorbed, had been formally licensed in 1970 as safe and effective against anthrax on the skin, but was not formally approved to counteract inhaled anthrax.In a letter to pharmaceutical companies, the FDA said it “may be appropriate” to issue an EUA for a COVID-19 vaccine “once studies have demonstrated the safety and effectiveness” of the product, but before other steps in the traditional submission process, like detailed information on how the vaccine was made and tested.“It is extremely rigorous,” Dr. Christian Ramers of Family Health Centers of San Diego said of the typical FDA approval process. “People have to submit thousands of pages of documents. They have to open their books, essentially, and show all of the detail on how these things have been tested.”An EUA could allow for the release of a vaccine before the election, something President Trump has suggested but other members of his administration have said is unlikely.The prospect of an EUA for a vaccine alarms consumer advocates like Dr. Sidney Wolfe of Public Citizen, who sent a letter to the agency urging it to avoid the expedited process.“The amount of information on how effective it is, the amount of information on how safe it is is less than would be required for full approval,” Wolfe said. “And full approval could arguably come in three or four months.”Wolfe thinks an EUA could backfire.“The loss of confidence by people will contribute to a much decreased willingness to be vaccinated,” he said, citing a survey during the 2009 H1N1 pandemic that showed people were reluctant to volunteer for inoculation if the vaccine only had emergency authorization.Critics say there’s already shaky public confidence after reports of political pressure from the president in the EUAs for convalescent plasma and for hydroxychloroquine.In the latter case, the FDA revoked the EUA for the anti-malaria drug June 15 after more studies showed it wasn’t effective and could have serious side effects.Dr. Ramers at Family Health Centers of San Diego says there is a big ethical difference between authorizing an experimental drug with limited data and authorizing a vaccine.Fundamentally, doctors give drugs to patients who are already sick, and they're more willing to try something untested in a last-ditch effort. “In somebody who has been through two or three or four rounds of [chemotherapy] and nothing has worked, the risks and benefits are tilted in a different way,” he said.“But a vaccine is a really special situation because we’re giving it to healthy people. We’re giving it to the general population before they become ill. So historically, the safety threshold for a vaccine has been way, way, way higher,” Ramers added. 4302

SAN DIEGO (KGTV) -- It's a question some are grappling with as COVID-19 cases surge across the country.In June, a woman posted a picture of a San Diego barista on Facebook with the caption "Meet Lenen from Starbucks who refused to serve me cause I'm not wearing a mask. Next time I will wait for cops and bring a medical exemption."Someone started a GoFundMe for the Starbucks barista who went viral and has raised 0,000 in donations.Also last month, a woman went on a tirade after being asked to wear a face covering in a Trader Joe's store in North Hollywood.There's no shortage of stories about public debates over face masks.RELATED: New UCSD finding: Wearing masks significantly curbs spread of COVID-19In California, people are required to wear face coverings in most indoor settings and outdoors when physical distancing isn't possible.According to a Pew Research Center study conducted in early June, "Overall, 65% of U.S. adults say that they have personally worn a mask in stores or other businesses all or most of the time in the past month, while 15% say they did this some of the time. Relatively small shares of adults say they hardly ever (9%) or never (7%) wore a mask in the past month, and 4% say they have not gone to these types of places."Reporter Adam Racusin spoke with two doctors in different parts of California to get their take on masks."The primary purpose of wearing a face covering is to protect other people in case you're one of the probably significant number of people who are shedding the virus and not have symptoms," said Dr. Dean Winslow, a professor of medicine at the Stanford University Medical Center.Winslow said the risk of coming into contact with the virus is higher when in indoor settings.RELATED: Some San Diegans push for end of San Diego County face mask requirement"Historically, the major outbreaks we've seen we know where the point source is, and have almost always been indoors," he said."Eventually, the people around us, how healthy they are, is going to come back to haunt us," said Dr. Jyotu Sandhu, Family Medicine, Sharp Rees-Stealy Medical Group. "So we need to look at mitigating the risk for everybody, and masks – regardless of the type – can reduce the risk of spread.”Sandhu said the goal is to lessen or reduce the spread of COVID-19."They (people) want to hear a black or white answer, are masks good, or are they not good, are they protecting me? Are they not protecting me? And it's really a gray area," he said. "They are protecting you, but they are not 100 percent preventative."So, what's behind the decision not to wear a mask, and what are people thinking?RELATED: 8 mask hacks to follow rules while staying comfortable"What we're talking about is the curtailing of folks’ freedom," said Dr. Saurabh Gupta with Southern Californian Psychology Centers.Gupta said some of the factors influencing decisions are world experience, how people see their political leaders, and social responsibility."It's worth looking at people on kind of a spectrum," he said. "So there's some people who really appreciate the mask and recognize that their social responsibility dictates, they really care about other people, they want to make sure that if inadvertently they are infected they don't want to pass it on to anyone, gosh they would feel terrible about that. Then you have folks on the other end who just don't want their freedom curtailed in any way. They don't want to be told what to do, and to cover their face feels very personal. And then you have folks everywhere in between in that spectrum. They will say, alright, I'll put up with this if I have to, but as soon as I don't have to or I'm not being told to it's coming off because I don't like it on my face.”In a UCSD campus-released article titled "To wear a mask or not, is not the question; Research indicates it's the answer," Chemistry Nobel Laureate and UCSD Professor Mario Molina shows the data does not lie.A pivotal point of the study was when they looked at the numbers in Italy and New York after their respective mask mandates went into effect on April 6, 2020, and April 17, 2020. It was only then that the spread of viral air particles slowed drastically. 4211

SAN DIEGO (KGTV) — Jurors have reached their verdict in the trial of a man accused of killing a Navy sailor on a Logan Heights freeway ramp in 2018.Edson Acuna, 26, was found guilty of first-degree murder, robbery, and several other charges in connection with the murder of 21-year-old Curtis Adams on Oct. 27, 2018. Adams was driving on I-15 at about 2 a.m., when he came upon what appeared to be a disabled vehicle. As Adams got out of his vehicle to check on the car's occupants when he was shot.Prosecutors say Acuna and three others had burglarized a Mt. Hope home that night, before getting into a shootout with the home's residents. As they fled, one of their vehicle's tires were shot out. RELATED COVERAGE:Closing arguments in trial for man accused of killing Navy sailor on freewayGunman kills good Samaritan in I-15 shooting near Mountain ViewSuspect in shooting of Navy sailor on freeway has criminal historyMurder suspect's brother arrested in Mexico, charged with Good Samaritan's deathAfter they pulled over, prosecutors say Acuna and the others believed the Navy man to be the homeowner and opened fire. Adam's girlfriend was also in the car with him at the time of the shooting.Acuna's 22-year-old brother, Brandon, and two other co-defendants, Harvey Liberato, 25, and Susana Galvan, 39, have pleaded guilty to charges including voluntary manslaughter and being an accessory after the fact.Adams enlisted in the Navy in 2016. At the time of his death, he worked as a steelworker with Amphibious Construction Battalion 1 at Naval Amphibious Base Coronado.Acuna was also found guilty of burglary, possession of firearm by a felon, transporting assault weapon, possession of assault weapon, prohibited person holding or possessing ammunition, and carrying loaded firearm in a vehicle. He was found not guilty of shooting at an inhabited structure, building or aircraft.He's set to be sentenced to life imprisonment without parole on April 10. 1965

来源：资阳报