题目内容
患者，男，45岁，无高血压病史，与他人争执后突发剧烈头痛，呕吐伴烦躁不安5天，入院查体血压140/90mmHg，心率100次/分，呼吸20次/分，体温 37℃，神志淡漠，烦躁、四肢活动正常，颈抗(+)余神经系统检查(-)。 首选的检查是
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
TV Games ShowsOne of the most fascinating things about television is the size of the audience. A novel can be on the "best sellers" list with a sale of fewer than 100,000 copies, but a popular TV show might have 70 million TV viewers. TV can make anything or anyone well known overnight.This is the principle behind "quiz" or "game" shows, which put ordinary people on TV to play a game for the prize and money. A quiz show can make anyone a star, and it can give away thousands of dollars just for fun. But all of this money can create problems. For instance, in the 1950s, quiz shows were very popular in the US and almost everyone watched them. Charles Van Doren, an English instructor, became rich and famous after winning money on several shows. He even had a career as a television personality. But one of the losers proved that Charles Van Doren was cheating. It turned out that the show’s producers, who were pulling the strings, gave the answers to the most popular contestants beforehand. Why Because if the audience didn’t like the person who won the game, they turned the show off. Based on his story, a movie under the title "Quiz Show" is on 40 years later.Charles Van Doren is no longer involved with TV. But game shows are still here, though they aren’t taken as seriously. In fact, some of them try to be as ridiculous as possible. There are shows that send strangers on vacation trips together, or that try to cause newly-married couples to fight on TV, or that punish losers by humiliating them. The entertainment now is to see what people will do just to be on TV. People still win money, but the real prize is to be in front of an audience of millions. Winners of present-day TV shows no longer get money from the shows.()
通过无人看守的铁路道口时，没有看到火车到来可以加速通过。
某女，21岁，未婚，因白带多、外阴疼痛、尿痛2天就诊，过去健康，月经正常，未生育过，一周来与一商人同居，妇查前庭充血，阴道有大量绿色脓性分泌物，挤压阴道前壁尿道口有脓流出，宫颈充血水肿，有脓性分泌物流出，子宫前位，大小正常，活动好，附件(-)。 此时，首选的检查是
Don’t Count on Dung (粪) Conservationists (自然保护主义者) may be miscalculating the numbers of the threatened animals such as elephants, say African and American researchers. The error occurs because of a flaw in the way they estimate animal numbers from the piles of dung the creatures leave behind. The mistake could lead researchers to think that there are twice as many elephants as there really are in some regions according to Andrew Plumptre of the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) in New York. Biologist Katy Payne of Comell University in Ithaca, New York, agrees, "We really need to know elephant numbers and the evidence that we have is quite indirect, " says Payne, who electronically tracks elephants. Counting elephants from planes is impossible in the vast rainforests of Central Africa. So researchers often estimate elephant numbers by counting dung piles in a given area. They also need to know the rate at which dung decays because it’s extremely difficult to determine these rates. However, researchers counting elephants in one region tend to rely on standard decay rates established elsewhere. But researchers at the WCS have found that this decay rate varies from region to region depending on the climate and environment. Using the wrong values can lead the census astray (离开正道), says Plumptre. He and his colleague Anthony Chifu Nchanji studied decaying elephant dung in the forests of Cameroon. They found that the dung decayed between 55 and 65 per cent more slowly than the dung in the rainforests of neighboring Gabon. If researchers use decay rates from Gabon to count elephants in Cameroon, they would probably find more elephants than are actually around. This could mean estimates in Cameroon are at least twice as high as those derived from decay rates calculated locally, Plumptre says, "However accurate your dung density estimate might be, the decay rate can severely affect the result". Plumptre also says that the dung-pile census should be carried out over a region similar in size to an elephant’s natural range. The usual technique of monitoring only small, protected areas distorts numbers because elephants move in and out of these regions, he says, "If the elephant population increases within the protected area, you can not determine whether. It is a real increase or whether it is due to elephants moving in because they are being poached (入侵偷猎) outside." Plumptre says that similar problems may also affect other animal census studies that rely on indirect evidence such as nests, tracks or burrows (地洞). Piles of dung can’t be relied upon when it comes to estimating elephant numbers because ______.
微信支付 
支付宝支付