宜宾膨体隆鼻价格(宜宾哪里医院割双眼皮好) (今日更新中)

SAN DIEGO (KGTV) - Two fires sparked Saturday afternoon in East County, in addition to a thunderstorm in Pine Valley, created dicey conditions for firefighters.Cal Fire Captain Thomas Shoots said the humidity made a huge difference, "the monsoonal moisture the stickiness has been good because it's helped keep our fires small," slowing the spread of flames.The Bratton Fire sparked in Lawson Valley around 1:30 p.m. and scorched 4 acres. Then around 2:10 p.m., the Sloane Fire started burning in Dehesa, blackening 18 acres.Both were knocked down quickly."We hope that people don't get complacent that we've hit these fires very aggressively and it's worked out," Shoots said.He said if we didn't have the humidity we would be in trouble, "there's a lot of fuel that comes with a good winter so that grass crop is all cured out and ready to burn."Shoots said they were keeping their eye on the thunderstorm in Pine Valley.The National Weather Service reported a severe thunderstorm warning with quarter-sized hail and gusts up to 60 miles per hour."We knew it wasn't going to be to the extent that the north saw when the storms rolled through but it was still definitely a potential concern," Shoots said.Looking forward, Shoots says we need to be very careful, "San Diego and a good chunk of California is sitting at a higher potential for wildfire activity in October-November."He advises creating defensible space around your home not only to protect your home but protect your family if you can't escape in time.Shoots said he hopes firefighters are able to get a handle on the fires in Northern California and stay safe.He said 96% of all Cal Fire engines are working, which shows how extreme this fire season is.More than half of Cal Fire San Diego's resources have been sent up north to help, including 32 engines. Shoots says local fire departments are stepping up to help in their absence. 1907

SAN DIEGO (KGTV) — Wednesday a preliminary hearing began for a man accused of aiming a loaded gun at off-duty San Diego Police officers at a Mission Valley bar parking lot last November.A San Diego Superior Court Judge listened to testimony from officers in case involving the defendant Jonathan Felix. The incident happened outside of McGreggor’s Bar and Grill on Nov. 7, 2018.Wednesday, officer Jonathan Rodriquez was the first witness on the stand. Rodriguez said he had a few beers after work with coworkers that night. He said Felix was sitting about 20 feet away from the off-duty officers.Once the bar was closing they all walked out into the parking lot.RELATED: San Diego man says off-duty SDPD officers assaulted himRodriguez claims he saw Felix looking into his car or looking at his car. He said after that he and the other officers watched Felix go to his own car.“The defendant got a bicycle out of his car, I thought it was strange and he left,” said Rodrigues. “After he left he came back a second time.”Felix claims he lives nearby and uses the parking lot at that shopping center because parking is limited at his apartment complex. Rodriguez says an off-duty officer then walked over to Felix and had an “innocent conversation." He said Felix asked the officers if they’d like to smoke, but they all denied him. Rodriguez decided he did not feel comfortable being there, and says he left in his own vehicle.After that, surveillance video shows what transpired.Felix is seen having interactions with the other off-duty officers, and then he’s seen holding a gun.The officers began beating Felix, leaving him with a bloody head, several lacerations and bruises. He was arrested that night. Second on the stand was officer Andrew Duncan. He was one of the officers involved in the fight. He claims they walked out of the bar and saw Felix acting strange. Duncan says Felix left and came back saying the other officers threatened to beat him. Duncan went on to testify that's when Felix showed his gun. Then, Duncan said, all 4 officers pointed their gun at Felix then tackled him. They say they were wrestling with him to get the gun away. Tasha Williamson with Building Justice says Felix shouldn't be facing these charges, but that the officers should face assault charges because Felix wasn't doing anything wrong that night. Williamson says the officers were off-duty and should have left Felix alone.Felix is charged with two felony weapons charges for being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition. He’s also charged with and a misdemeanor drug charge for being in possession of a controlled substance.Before the preliminary hearing started his lawyer, Alicia Freeze, spoke outside of the courtroom.“Uniquely and I think very creatively, my client is not being charged with brandishing a weapon, he’s not being charged with assault with a deadly weapon, he’s not being charged with a lot of the initial charges he was booked under,” she said.On Jan. 4 the San Diego Police Department issued the following statement: “The San Diego Police Department submitted a criminal case to the District Attorney's Office regarding this incident, in which Mr. Felix pulled a gun on four off-duty police officers. He has been charged with unlawful possession of a firearm, unlawful possession of ammunition, and possession of a controlled substance. Mr. Felix is entitled to the presumption of innocence and the full facts of this case will be litigated as the criminal case proceeds. As in any situation where there are allegations of misconduct, the San Diego Police Department has initiated an internal investigation. If found, any misconduct will be handled accordingly.”At the end of this preliminary hearing a judge will decide if there’s enough evidence for the case to move to trial. If the case goes to trial and Felix is found guilty and convicted, his lawyer says he could be looking at one to two years in prison.Several supporters of Felix showed up to court today and plan to have a press conference following the hearing. 4063

San Diego (KGTV) - Thousands of kids across California approved for in-home nursing care are struggling to get the help they desperately need.On Thursday two children filed a class-action lawsuit against the California Department of Health Care Services and its director claiming the state has failed to fulfill its commitment to provide them with sufficient Medi-Cal in-home nursing services.It says, “this class action lawsuit asks the Court to order Defendants to take all steps necessary to arrange for previously-approved, medically necessary in-home shift nursing services for Plaintiffs and Class members.”According to the lawsuit plaintiff, Ivory N. is a seven-year-old and a Medi-Cal beneficiary. It says the child needs 63 hours per week of skilled nursing at home but only receives about 56 hours per week.The non-profit group, Disability Rights California, says more than 4,000 Medi-Cal eligible children have been approved by the state to receive Medi-Cal in-home nursing care, but the state lacks an effective system for arranging for needed nursing."It’s too bad that a lawsuit had to be filed, but they are right to file it because right now that need is not being met,” said California State Assemblyman Brian Maienschein.In 2017 Maienschein tried to get the problem fixed through legislation. He believes the state is not following through on its promises to the kids.“It was a significant victory last year that we were able to get money in the budget, but they are still not following through on the promises they made,” he said.According to a news release from Disability Rights California, “29 percent of authorized Medi-Cal nursing hours go unstaffed.” 1693

SAN DIEGO (KGTV) — Toni Beery and her husband Jonathon have their hands full trying to get Old Town’s Hungry’s Kitchen and Tap back up to speed.“There’s just not a lot of foot traffic, still, during the week especially,” Toni says. “We’re just trying to take it day by dayThey're trying to bring employees back and working to survive amid social distancing requirements. One new task on their plate is employee temperature checks and monitoring.New technology, however, is doing that for them. It’s called the GoSafe, a stand-alone tablet two San Diego companies developed. Using Qualcomm's chips, San Diego-based OneScreen built a device that takes temperatures and uses facial recognition to allow or deny access to different workplaces and schools.Additionally, the GoSafe can assist health investigators in contact tracing. If someone shows an elevated temperature, it will have a record of who else scanned in around the same time.“It is not only a race against the vaccine, it is a race to go back to normalcy,” said Sanjeet Pandit, Qualcomm’s director of smart cities.San Diego’s Fluid Sound is now working to install the devices at businesses around our region.It recently did so as a test at Hungry’s, and demonstrated how it can reject access for people without masks. The device’s MSRP is ,995.“If you think about the labor cost associated with implementing a health screening process for any business, big or small, it's a significant labor cost,” said Dennis Pappenfus, CEO of Fluid Sound. “This is more of a one-time cost and you've got a pretty good process off to the races."Nationwide, 2,000 of the devices have already sold.In addition to Hungry’s, a spokesman for Fluid Sound says the devices are installed, or could soon be, at places such as Qualcomm headquarters, The Port of San Diego, and the University of San Diego.In a statement from USD, a spokesperson says GoSafe is one device they've considered in their reopening plans."As the University of San Diego prepares for the re-opening of our campus in August, the Return to Work Task Force is looking at a variety of devices and safety procedures to keep our students and employees safe as they return to the office and the classrooms. While GoSafe is one device we have been presented with, it is not the only temperature device we are currently assessing and demoing, no purchases have been made yet. We continue to search for the best technology available to keep our campus community safe and healthy," Lissette Martinez, senior director of media relations, said.A spokeswoman for the Port of San Diego says the agency ordered three of the devices, which will be delivered Tuesday. 2672

SAN DIEGO (KGTV) -- We know the importance of wearing a mask to protect the nose and mouth from the novel coronavirus, but some new research is raising questions about whether the general public should wear goggles, glasses or a shield to protect their eyes.The CDC already urges healthcare workers to wear eye protection. The agency updated its guidance in July, encouraging even healthcare workers in low-transmission environments to wear eye protection when it was previously listed as “optional.”Experts think the nose is still the main entry point for the virus because of the mechanics of breathing, but the surface of the eye is lined with the same mucous membrane to which the virus likes to bind.Animal studies have shown SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, can enter through the eyes and there have been viral particles detected in human tears, but there’s no clear-cut data so far showing the eyes are a major entry point, said ophthalmologist Dr. Annie Nguyen at the USC Roski Eye Institute.However, some observational studies have suggested protecting the eyes may lower the risk of infection.In June, a study in the Journal Lancet suggested face shields, goggles and glasses could lower the risk of infection from 16 percent to 6 percent.Another study published this month suggests that simply wearing eyeglasses could help.Researchers examined 276 hospitalized patients in Suizhou, China. Based on trends in that region, they expected about 31 percent of the patients would wear eyeglasses. Instead, just 5 percent of the hospitalized patients wore glasses.The researchers noted the observational study had limitations, but theorized that eyeglasses may offer a protective barrier against the virus.“I wouldn’t be quick to make the recommendation for everyone to run out and wear glasses,” Dr. Nguyen said.An editorial published alongside the eyeglasses study urged caution. “Although it is tempting to conclude from this study that everyone should wear eyeglasses, goggles, or a face shield in public to protect their eyes and themselves from COVID-19, from an epidemiological perspective, we must be careful to avoid inferring a causal relationship from a single observational study,” wrote Dr. Lisa Maragakis at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.Experts say more evidence is needed because urging people to wear eye protection could have harmful side effects, like causing the wearer to inadvertently touch their face more frequently.“If there is additional evidence that builds up, then that’s the point that we change guidelines,” said Dr. Christian Ramers of Family Health Centers of San Diego.“People have had whiplash from things changing and going back and forth,” he added, citing the change in guidelines on face coverings.Still, some experts say people with underlying conditions should consider adding eye protection, as long as they’re careful not to touch their face.Doctors have suggested that people who wear contact lenses might want to switch to eyeglasses to cut down on the number of times they touch their eyes, but Dr. Nguyen said there’s no hard data yet showing contact lens-wearers are at greater risk from the virus. 3184

来源：资阳报