宜宾韩式埋线双眼皮价格宜宾如何去眼袋,有人在宜宾做双眼皮么,宜宾玻尿酸隆鼻的缺点,宜宾开眼角效果好不好,宜宾开眼角手术要多久,宜宾隆鼻梁骨,宜宾做双眼皮后效果怎样

The roads around your child's or grandchild's school may not be as safe as you think.One in three drivers are doing unsafe things, like being on their cell phone, in school zones.New research from Zendrive says from 4 - 5 p.m. is the most dangerous time to be on or near roads around schools.So that's something to keep in mind, even if you're not picking up kids.It says afternoon pick-up is 40 percent more dangerous than the morning pick-up.The company mapped out the areas around 75,000 schools across the country to see which states are the safest.States in green are the safest overall around schools. And red is the least safe.You can see a breakdown by county and check out your child's specific school here. 754

The school buildings in Evanston, Illinois, are still empty. But the district’s recently hired superintendent caused a stir during a public Zoom meeting announcing how the they will decide which students get priority seating when in-person learning resumes.“We have to make sure that students, who have been oppressed, that we don’t continue to oppress them, and we give them opportunity,” said school superintendent Dr. Devon Horton of the Evanston/Skokie school district in late July.“We will be targeting our dependent learners – those are students who are marginalized first,” he said.Low-income students, special needs and those dealing with homelessness are just some who will be first in line. There have been angry letters, petitions and even death threats to the superintendent and school board.“Understanding that other folks are experiencing more vulnerability and more harm than my family is experiencing,” says Anya Tanyavutti, a parent of two and the Evanston district’s school board president. “I'm happy to see those resources go to people who need it more.”For the last four years, the Evanston school district has been working on implementing anti-racism resolutions and curricula to address inequity.“Taking an anti-racist stance requires some sort of sacrifice,” says Dr. Onnie Rogers a professor at Northwestern University’s school of Education and Social Policy. “I think that's really the part of racial equity that our country is still getting used to on the ground.”Here in Evanston, the achievement gap does fall along racial lines where Black and Latino students are one-third as likely as white students to meet college readiness benchmarks.The district acknowledges that its plan to allow some students to return before others falls mostly along racial lines. But it is need, they say, not race, that will be the determining factor.“If we simply said we're gonna just reopen for whoever wants to come, then the people who are most well-resourced and most well-connected would likely be able to get those seats prior to people who are challenged with homelessness or challenged with getting food on the table,” says Tanyavutti.And there has been opposition. Arlington, Virginia, based ‘Students for Fair Admissions’- a non-profit advocacy group that has mounted legal challenges to affirmative action, has called the district’s plan unconstitutional.“If that student has unique special needs then that's fine to take those into consideration,” says Edward Blum, president of Students for Fair Admissions. “What is not fine to take into consideration is the skin color or ethnic heritage of students.”“It has been legally reviewed, and I am confident that we are operating within the bounds of our Constitution,” says Tanyavutti.In-person learning is tentatively scheduled to resume in mid-November. And while the district says it will accommodate as many students as possible the priority remains their most vulnerable student population. 2974

The U.S. continues to lead the world in deaths linked to COVID-19 with more than 222,000 — and some experts believe that figure is much higher. But according to a new study, at least 130,000 of those deaths could have been avoided.According to a study by the National Center for Disaster Preparedness at Columbia University, the U.S. could have avoided between 130,000 and 210,000 COVID-19 deaths had the country adopted mitigation policies similar to those used by other "high-income nations."It's clear that the U.S. has disproportionately felt the affects of the pandemic — though it has just 4% of the world's population, it accounts for 20% of COVID-19 cases worldwide. The U.S. death toll stands in stark contrast to countries with similar resources, like South Korea, Japan, Australia, Germany, Canada, and France.To calculate the U.S.'s "avoidable deaths," the study applied the death rates of those countries to the U.S.'s population. Researchers then subtracted that figure from the U.S.'s current death count.By that calculation, researchers concluded that 130,000 lives could have been saved had the U.S. adopted policies similar to that of Canada's, and that as many as 215,000 lives could have been saved had the country adopted policies similar to South Korea.In explaining why U.S. deaths are disproportionately high, the Columbia researchers cited four key mistakes:Insufficient testing capacity: Researchers cited issues the U.S. had early on in the pandemic in developing and acquiring tests, while countries like South Korea were prepared almost immediately to test for the virus on a widespread scale.Delayed response: A previous Columbia University study determined that instituting national social distancing measures just one or two weeks earlier would have saved 36,000 of lives.Lack of a national mask mandate: Top health officials recommended against masks early on in the pandemic, fearing that doing so would lead to a shortage. Even today, masks have become politicized in some circles despite evidence showing that wearing one reduces the spread of droplets that can carry the virus.Failure from federal leadership: The Columbia study cited the Trump administration's "hostility to much of the critical guidance and recommendations put forth by its own health agencies," specifically citing the president's attempts to "downplay" the virus.Read more about the Columbia University study here. 2430

The Trump administration is considering a new travel ban to replace its original executive order, which has had its legality questioned and is up for a Supreme Court hearing next month, White House national security adviser H.R. McMaster said Sunday."Well, this is something that we're looking at, is how to protect the American people better, how to ensure that we know who these people are who are moving," McMaster told George Stephanopoulos on ABC's "This Week."This renewed discussion of the travel ban comes after Friday morning's terrorist attack in London, in which 30 passengers on a London Underground train were injured after a bomb went off.In a tweet Friday in response to the attack, President Donald Trump called for a "larger, tougher and more specific" travel ban and also called for shutting down terrorist group's use of the internet for indoctrination and recruitment.McMaster echoed the point Sunday."Because of the strength of these terrorist organizations -- why this is a greater danger than ever -- is, first of all, their ability to communicate, to connect what would otherwise be disconnected cells in other places in the world," he said. "The second part of this is their ability to travel and to move and to move people and money and weapons, oftentimes drugs and other illicit goods, internationally. So part of the strategy must be to interdict these networks, interdict them from how they use information, and communicate, but how they move physically, as well.The Supreme Court is set to hear?oral arguments in the travel ban case early next month.The President's executive order would suspend travel from six Muslim-majority countries (Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen) for 90 days while the secretary of homeland security and others submit a report on the results of a worldwide review to identify what additional information will be needed from each country to make sure an individual seeking entrance is not a public-safety threat.Responding to a lawsuits from states challenging the ban, the Supreme Court let much of the ban take effect in late June, meaning the 90-day clock started and will hit on or around September 24.Administration officials have not divulged the specifics of their future plans.At a recent homeland security conference in Washington DC, acting Customs and Border Protection Deputy Commissioner Ronald Vitiello said, "We are in the process of action planning about each of the opportunities that the US government has to interview and/or vet potential inbound travelers."That could include "looking at things like social media, looking at things like smart phones, those kinds of windows, if you will, into people's backgrounds and their activity," he said.The-CNN-Wire 2771

The White House has cut ties with a senior adviser to first lady Melania Trump after it was revealed the aide's firm was paid close to million to plan events around President Donald Trump's inauguration.The first lady's office said in a statement that it ended its contract with Stephanie Winston Wolkoff, who had been working as a special government employee."The Office of the First Lady severed the gratuitous services contract with Ms. Wolkoff. We thank her for her hard work and wish her all the best," said spokeswoman Stephanie Grisham.The New York Times first reported Wolkoff's departure.Inauguration committee tax documents revealed last week showed WIS Media Partners, a company based in Marina Del Ray, California, and founded by Wolkoff, received ,843,509 for "event production services."The roughly million the company received for its work on the inauguration was likely passed through to other vendors and event coordinators. The New York Times reported that Wolkoff personally received .62 million for her work.She told the Times on Monday that most of the million was paid to subcontractors, and that the .62 million was divided among 15 employees. Messages left by CNN with Wolkoff were not immediately returned.Last week, Grisham said Melania Trump "had no involvement" in planning the inauguration and had "no knowledge of how funds were spent."Trump and Wolkoff are longtime friends.  1438