Tag: 上海夜网NC

first_imgJun 2, 2004 (CIDRAP News) – Chinese health authorities have called off emergency measures for SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome), saying the latest outbreak is under control, according to Xinhua, China’s state news agency.Beijing officials said yesterday they were closing down their SARS prevention headquarters and canceling other emergency control measures, Xinhua reported. Officials took the action after all seven patients in the city were discharged from a hospital and their contacts were released from quarantine, the report said.Also yesterday, the Chinese Ministry of Public Health suspended its daily surveillance reports on SARS, Xinhua said. The surveillance program required local health authorities nationwide to provide a daily SARS report even if no cases were found.Beijing’s SARS prevention headquarters was set up Apr 22, when the city reported its first case this year, according to Xinhua.The recent outbreak included seven SARS cases in Beijing and two in Anhui province in east-central China. Most of the cases were traced to a 26-year-old woman who contracted the virus while working in a laboratory at the National Institute of Virology in Beijing in March. A 31-year-old man who worked in the same lab also became infected. The mother of the 26-year-old woman died of SARS Apr 19; the other eight patients all recovered.Chinese and World Health Organization (WHO) officials inspected the virology lab in May but were unable to determine exactly how the two researchers had acquired the virus there. Neither of them had worked with live SARS virus, officials said.last_img read more

first_imgJoseph YawMichael GouveiaRobert BhagnauthAndy RobertsFour persons convicted of narcotics possession charges were granted an early release from President David Granger in commemoration of today’s Emancipation celebrations.According to a statement from the Public Security Ministry on Wednesday, the presidential pardons, which take effect today, were done by virtue of the powers vested in the Head of State under Article 188 of the Constitution of Guyana.Article 188 (1) (a) of the Constitution of Guyana states that the President has the power to grant any person concerned in, or convicted of, any offence under the laws of Guyana, a pardon, either free or subject to lawful condition.The four pardon beneficiaries are: Robert Bhagnauth, age 39; Michael Gouveia, age 23; Andy Roberts, age 38; and Joseph Yaw, age 54. They have all served a portion of their sentences for possession of cannabis.According to the missive, these men were considered to be “fit and proper” to receive such pardons by the President.The early release of these four men comes at a time when the caretaker coalition Government has taken steps to remove custodial sentences for possession of small amounts of marijuana. About a month ago, Government said in a statement that after extensive discussions and reviews, “Cabinet has approved a proposal to remove custodial sentences for persons found to be in possession of 30 grams or less of marijuana”.The issue of non-custodial sentences for small amounts of marijuana gained momentum back in March 2016 when inmates at the Georgetown Prison started a fire which eventually killed 17 prisoners while several others, along with prison staff, were injured. A subsequent probe had found, among other issues, significant overcrowding at the facility contributed to the events and as such, considerations were reignited to reduce custodial sentences for certain offences such as possession of small amounts of marjiuana.Last year, however, Government had come under fire for failing to act on the matter after a 27-year-old poultry farmer, who was charged for possession of 8.4 grams of marijuana, was sentenced to three years imprisonment in May 2018.According to Guyana’s law, possession of any amount of cannabis over 15 grams is considered trafficking. At the time, former Minister of State Joseph Harmon had explained that the magistrates are operating within the confines of the Narcotic Drug and Psychotropic Substances Act, which does not allow discretion when dealing with narcotics of certain quantities. Harmon had further posited that any Legislative reform on penalties for marijuana use and possession will have to be done with widespread public consultations.last_img read more

first_img We Now Know the DNA of GuacamoleDNA From Tooth Solves Shark Bite Mystery, 25 Years Later By now, you’ve probably heard that the Golden State Killer was apprehended not long ago. That was thanks to using public DNA testing data to find genetic markers among massive pools, then narrow down their suspect based on known criteria — age, relative location, public birth records, etc. That might inspire law enforcement professionals and CSI fans, but it raises huge data privacy questions. “This is really tough,” University of Washington DNA forensics ethicist Malia Fullerton said. “He was a horrible man, and it is good that he was identified, but does the end justify the means.That’s a valid question to ask, particularly given that this murderous asshat didn’t willingly submit any of his own DNA to these databases. In this case, that’s obviously fine, but what if law enforcement took this a step further and began using advanced profiling or screening techniques based on the data that millions have willingly given DNA testing compings?“There is a whole generation that says, ‘I don’t really care about privacy,’” said Peter Neufeld told the New York Times. Neufeld helped found the Innocence Project, a program that uses DNA evidence to exonerate wrongfully convicted people. “And then they do, once there is a Cambridge Analytica. No one has thought about what are the possible consequences.”Because DNA is literally a fundamental part of who we are, and because it carries so much information about us, it’s worth asking — should we be laying out regulations guiding how organizations can use and share this data?The investigators, in this case, uploaded the killer’s DNA to a public genealogy database called GEDmatch. For obvious reasons, you must certify, when using the site, that the data you’re handing over is actually your own. “The purpose was to make these connections and to find these relatives,” said Blaine Bettinger, a lawyer affiliated with GEDmatch told The Times. “It was not intended to be used by law enforcement to identify suspects of crimes.”If you’re concerned about your genetic privacy, then, as things are now, you’re in a tough spot. “If your sibling or parent or child engaged in this activity online, they are compromising your family for generations,” Erin Murphy, a law professor at New York University and expert on DNA evidence lamented. “Using a database of this kind will generate an extraordinary number of leads, and running them all down using both non-genetic and genetic information requires a lot of police power,” Murphy said. “So I doubt it will be run of the mill any time soon.” Even so, it raises important questions that we’ll need answers for, and if we don’t head these off now, it’s hard to even imagine what the DNA equivalent of the Cambridge Analytica breach would be. Seriously though, could this timeline get any shittier? Stay on targetcenter_img Let us know what you like about Geek by taking our survey.last_img read more