question_text: what percentage of the us population have a college degree

text: General attainment of degrees/diplomas[edit]

text:
Educational attainment in the United States (2014)[3]

Education

Age 25 and over

Age 25-29

High school diploma or GED

88.31%

90.83%

Some college

58.57%

64.31%

Associate and/or bachelor's degree

41.89%

44.08%

Bachelor's degree

31.96%

34.04%

Master's and/or doctorate and/or professional degree

11.77%

7.57%

Doctorate and/or professional degree

3.27%

1.70%

Doctorate

1.77%

0.89%

text: In 2003, over four-fifths (85 percent) of all adults 25 years or older reported they had completed at least high school, or obtained a GED/high school equivalency certificate. Over one in four adults (27 percent) had attained at least a bachelor's degree. Both of these measures are all time highs. In 2003, the percentage of the adult population who had completed high school or had not completed high school but obtained a GED increased for the first time since 2000, when it was 84 percent. This increase follows a general trend that the Current Population Survey has shown since educational attainment was first measured in 1947.[2]

text: In 2015, among adults aged 65 and older, 84 percent had either completed high school or more education, or had failed to complete high school but obtained at least a GED certification, compared to 91 percent of adults aged 25 to 34 and 89 percent of adults aged 35 to 44 years or 45 to 64 years. In addition, 27 percent of the population aged 65 and older reported a bachelor's degree or more education compared to 36 percent of adults 25 to 34 years old and 32 percent of adults aged 45 to 64 years.[4]

text: Since 1983 the percentage of people either graduating from high school or failing to complete high school but getting a GED certification has increased from 85% to 88%. The greatest increases in educational attainment were documented in the 1950s, 60s and 70s. In the 1950s and much of the 1960s high school graduates constituted about 50% of those considered adults (25 and above). For young adults aged between 25 and 29, the percentage of either high school graduates or GED obtainers was roughly 50% in 1950 versus 90% today.[2]

text: Gender[edit]

text: For the past fifty years, there has been a gap in the educational achievement of males and females in the United States, but which gender has been disadvantaged has fluctuated over the years. In the 1970s and 1980s, data showed girls trailing behind boys in a variety of academic performance measures, specifically in test scores in math and science.[5]

text: Data in the last twenty years shows the general trend of girls outperforming boys in academic achievement in terms of class grades across all subjects and college graduation rates, but boys scoring higher on standardized tests and being better represented in the higher-paying and more prestigious STEM fields (science, technology, engineering, and math).[5]

text: Gender gap in literacy[edit]

text: Traditionally, girls have outperformed boys in reading and writing. Although this gap may be minimal in kindergarten, it grows as students continue their education. According to the 2004 National Reading Assessment measured by the US Department of Education, the gap between boys and girls, only slightly noticeable in 4th grade, left boys 14 points behind girls during their 12th grade year.[6] On the 2008 test, female students continued to have higher average reading scores than male students at all three ages. The gap between male and female 4th graders was 7 points in 2008. By 12th grade, there was an 11-point gap between males and females.[6]

text: On the 2002 National Writing Assessment, boys scored on average 17 points lower than girls in 4th grade. The average gap increased to 21 points by 8th grade and widened to 24 points by senior year in high school.[7] In the more recent 2007 National Assessment of Writing Skills, female students continued to score higher than male students, though margins closed slightly from previous assessments. The average score for female eighth-graders was 20 points higher than males, down 1 point from the 2002 score. For twelfth-graders, females outscored males by 18 points as opposed to 24 points in 2002.[8]

text: All of these assessments were conducted on a 100-point scale.[6][7][8]

text: Graduation rates[edit]

text: Overall, women have surpassed men in terms of completing secondary and post-secondary education with the gender gap almost completely reversed. In 2006, 10.3% of males and 8.3% of females dropped out of high school.[9] In 2005/2006, women earned 62% of associate degrees, 58% of bachelor's degrees, 60.0% of master's degrees, and 48.9% of Doctorates.[10]

text: According to recent datawhen?, 55 percent of college students are females and 45 percent are males. From 1995 until 2005, the number of males enrolled in college increased by 18 percent, while the number of female students rose by 27 percent.[11] Males are enrolling in college in greater numbers than ever before, yet fewer than two-thirds of them are graduating with a bachelor's degree. The numbers of both men and women receiving a bachelor's degree have increased significantly, but the increasing rate of female college graduates exceeds the increasing rate for males.[12]

text: In 2007, the United States Census Bureau estimated that 18,423,000 males  over the age of 18 held a bachelor's degree, while 20,501,000 females over the age 18 held one. In addition, fewer males held master's degrees: 6,472,000 males compared to 7,283,000 females. However, more men held professional and doctoral degrees than women. 2,033,000 males held professional degrees compared to 1,079,000, and 1,678,000 males had received a doctoral degree compared to 817,000 females.[13]

text: In 2015, the United States Census Bureau estimated that 36.1% of individuals between the ages of 25 to 34 had a bachelor's degree, with 36.3% in individuals aged 35 to 44, 32% in individuals 45 to 64, and 26.7% in individuals 65 and older.

text: In 2016/2017, women are projected to earn 64.2% of associate degrees, 59.9% of bachelor's degrees, 62.9% of master's degrees, and 55.5% of Doctorates.[14]

text: Ethnicity and race[edit]

text: While the educational attainment of all races increased during the 1990s, with the gap between African Americans and non-Hispanic whites decreasing, differences between the races remain, especially among those with a bachelor's degree or higher. Asian Americans had the highest educational attainment of any race, followed by whites who had a higher percentage of high school graduates but a lower percentage of college graduates. Persons identifying as Hispanic or Latino, without regard to race, had the lowest educational attainment. The gap was the largest between foreign-born Asian Americans, over half (50.1%) of whom had a bachelor's degree or higher and foreign-born Hispanics, 9.8% of whom had a four-year college degree.[2]

text: Hispanics and Latinos also trailed far behind in terms of graduating from high school; it was the only major group for which high school graduates constituted less than 80% of the population. This large inequality might partially be explained by the influx of uneducated foreign-born Hispanic Americans who had not been offered the chance to complete secondary education in their home country and who had not completed secondary education in the United States.

text: Overall, nearly half (49.8%) of Asian Americans, nearly a third (30%) of non-Hispanic Whites, 17.3% of non-Hispanic Blacks, and just over a tenth (11.4%) of Hispanics or Latinos had a four-year college degree. The same differences decrease significantly at the high school level with 89.4% of non-Hispanic whites, 87.6% of Asian Americans, 80.0% of African Americans, and 57% of Hispanics or Latinos having graduated from high school.[2]

text: The Racial achievement gap in the United States refers to these educational disparities between minority students and Caucasian students. Evidence of the racial achievement gap remains present today because not all groups of students are advancing at the same rates. The racial achievement gap has many individual and economic implications and there have been many efforts in education reform to narrow this gap.

text: Foreign born and immigrants[edit]

text: A trend becomes visible when comparing the foreign-born to the native-born populace of some races. Foreign-born Asian, European, and African immigrants had a higher educational attainment in terms of having earned a four-year college degree than their native-born counterparts. According to the U.S census about 43.8 percent of African immigrants achieved the most college degrees, compared to 42.5 percent of Asian-Americans, 28.9 percent for immigrants from Europe, Russia and Canada and 23.1 percent of the U.S. population as a whole.[15][16][17]

text: The opposite is true on the high school level and among Hispanics, where the dramatically lower educational attainment of the foreign-born population decreased the educational attainment of the general Hispanophone populace, statistically.[2]

text: The percentage of the foreign born with a high school diploma (67 percent) was dramatically lower than that of the native population (88 percent), but paradoxically, the percentage with a bachelor's degree was the same (27 percent)... At the bachelor's level, foreign born Blacks and non-Hispanic Whites fared better than their native counterparts. Foreign-born Hispanics, in contrast, had a smaller proportion with a bachelor's degree than the native population... The low educational attainment of foreign-born Hispanics, who compose more than 50 percent of the Hispanic population, contributes to the low attainment levels of the entire Hispanic population.— US Census Bureau, 2003

text: Only among Hispanics and Latinos was the proportion of college graduates larger among the native born population. In the general population the proportion of persons with a bachelor's degree or higher was the same among the foreign-born and native-born population (27.2%). As stated above fewer foreign born Americans completed high school than native born Americans. Overall, 87.5% of the native born population had graduated from high school, versus 67.2%. Among whites the difference was three percentage points, the same as for African Americans. Among Asian Americans the difference was five percentage points. It was thirty percentage points among Hispanics or Latinos.[2]

text: African immigrants have been among the more highly educated group in the United States since the 1990s.[18][19] This phenomenon is related to the large "brain drain" in Africa.[20]

text: Income[edit]

text: Educational attainment is strongly correlated with income in the United States. Although the incomes of both men and women are associated with higher educational attainment (higher incomes for higher educational attainment), large income gaps linked to race and gender remained at each educational level. In 2003, average incomes ranged from $13,459 for a male high-school dropout to $90,761 for a male with an advanced degree. The most significant average income difference was between those who had some college education or an Associates degree and those who had a Bachelor's degree. While those with some college averaged $31,046, those with a bachelor's degree averaged $51,194, over $20,000 (64.9%) a year more.[2]

text:
The second most dramatic difference in average income was between those with a Bachelor's degree with $51,940 and those with an advanced degree who made $72,824, roughly $21,000 (42.2%) more. The least significant difference was between those who had graduated from high school and those who had either some college or an Associates degree. Here the difference was a mere $3,766 or 13.8%. The difference between those with a high school diploma ($30,000) and those who did not complete high school ($18,826) was $8,454 or 45%.
Overall, the income in the United States for all sexes, races and levels of educational attainment was $36,308 annually.[2]

text: Even though African immigrants are claimed to have higher educational attainment rates than any other group, they were the hardest hit during the most recent recession beginning in 2007.[21][16][22][23][24] This shows that race and/or ethnicity may play a role in income levels and job selection.[22]

text:
Criteria

Overall

Less than 9th grade

High school drop-out

High school graduate

Some college

Associates degree

Bachelor's degree

Bachelor's degree or more

Master's degree

Professional degree

Doctorate degree

Median individual income
Male, age 25+
$33,517
$15,461
$18,990
$28,763
$35,073
$39,015
$50,916
$55,751
$61,698
$88,530
$73,853

Female, age 25+
$19,679
$9,296
$10,786
$15,962
$21,007
$24,808
$31,309
$35,125
$41,334
$48,536
$53,003

Median household income
$45,016
$18,787
$22,718
$36,835
$45,854
$51,970
$68,728
$73,446
$78,541
$100,000
$96,830

text: SOURCE: US Census Bureau, 2003[25][26]

text: The change in median personal and household income since 1991 also varied greatly with educational attainment. While both the overall median personal and household income increased since 1991, this increase did not take place on all levels of educational attainment. The overall income increased over the course of the 1990s, reaching its high in 1999, but has been decreasing ever since. In 1991 the median household income in the US was $40,873 in 2003 dollars, while the median household income in 2003 was $45,016. In 1999, however, the median household income was $46,236, 2.7% higher than today. While this trend held true for all levels of educational attainment the extent of chorinical fluctuations in income were greatly influenced by educational attainment.[25][26]

text: Overall, the median household and personal income decreased for those with more than a 9th grade education but less than a four-year college degree since 1991. In other words, the median household income decreased for households and individuals at the high school drop-outs and graduate, some-college, and an Associates degree level. Income did, however, increase for those with a Bachelor's degree or more. The following table shows the median household income according to the educational attainment of the householder. All data is in 2003 dollars and only applies to householders whose householder is aged twenty-five or older. The highest and lowest points of the median household income are presented in bold face.[25][26]

text:
Year

Overall Median

Less than 9th grade

High school drop-out

High school graduate

Some college

Associates degree

Bachelor's degree

Bachelor's degree or more

Master's degree

Professional degree

Doctorate degree

1991
$40,873
$17,414
$23,096
$37,520
$46,296
$52,289
$64,150
$68,845
$72,669
$102,667
$92,614

1993
$40,324
$17,450
$22,523
$35,979
$44,153
$49,622
$64,537
$70,349
$75,645
$109,900
$93,712

1995
$42,235
$18,031
$21,933
$37,609
$44,537
$50,485
$63,357
$69,584
$77,865
$98,302
$95,899

1997
$43,648
$17,762
$22,688
$38,607
$45,734
$51,726
$67,487
$72,338
$77,850
$105,409
$99,699

1999
$46,236
$19,008
$23,977
$39,322
$48,588
$54,282
$70,925
$76,958
$82,097
$110,383
$107,217

2001
$45,300
$18,830
$24,162
$37,468
$47,605
$53,166
$69,796
$75,116
$81,993
$103,918
$96,442

2003
$45,016
$18,787
$22,718
$36,835
$45,854
$51,970
$68,728
$73,446
$78,541
$100,000
$96,830

Average
$43,376
$18,183
$23,013
$37,620
$46,109
$51,934
$66,997
$72,376
$78,094
$104,368
$94,487

text: SOURCE: US Census Bureau, 2003 Yellow indicates the year with the lowest median income while green indicates the year with the highest reported median income.[25]

text: Among the races, educational attainment retains its dramatic effect on average income which varies significantly at each educational level. European Americans (White Americans) had the highest average income at every level of educational attainment. However, the proportion of those having college degrees is greater among Asian Americans than among non-Hispanic whites, and the overall highest average income is found among Asians. All races except Whites ranked last on at least one level with African Americans ranking last on the non-high school, high school and advanced degree level.[2]

text: Asians were second highest on the college graduate level and had the highest overall income among the general population. They also had the lowest average annual income for those with some college education or an Associates degree. Racial income difference were also significant at every level of educational attainment with the largest racial inequality being between European and African Americans who did not complete high school and those with advanced college degrees.[2]

text: Overall, European Americans with an advanced degree had the highest average annual income with $74,122. Asian Americans had the second highest with $72,852. Hispanics and African Americans had the lowest annual incomes among those with advanced degrees averaging $67,679 and $59,944 annually. The largest racial inequity was between European Americans with a Bachelor's degree who made $53,185 and Hispanics who made $12,263 or 29.9% less with an average annual income of $40,949.[2] However, Asian Americans as a whole earn more than any other race due to a greater percentage of them being educated overall, an example of Simpson's paradox.

text: Occupation[edit]

text: The educational attainment varied significantly among the different types of occupations. The highest occupational attainment was among those in the Professional and related fields followed by those Business, Management and financial related occupations. The professional/managerial fields were the only two occupational fields where college graduates with a Bachelor's degree or higher represented the majority. Among professional occupations, 99.1% of the population graduated from high school, 90.2% had some college education or an Associates degree and over two thirds, 68.2% had a Bachelor's degree or higher.[2]

text: Business and managerial occupations were second with 97.8% having graduated from high school, 79.5% having some college or an associates degree and just over half, 53.4% having a Bachelor's degree or higher. While nearly all employment fields feature a population where over 80% had graduated from high school with over a third having some college education or an Associates degree, the fields relating to agriculture, construction, manufacturing, and transportation did not. These, often described as blue collar, fields featured a labor force where less than a tenth of the population had a Bachelor's degree or higher, less than half had some college or an Associates, and less than 80% had graduated from high school.[2]

text: Overall, the least educated occupational field was agriculture, ranking last on all educational levels. Here 55.4% had graduated from high school, roughly one fifth (20.8%) had some college education or an Associates degree and 6.8% had a Bachelor's degree or higher. While the largest occupational field, that consisting of professionals and relating occupations was also the largest field, the fields with lower educational attainment combined were larger than the professional and managerial fields combined. Overall, 38.02% were employed in the professional and managerial fields while 61.89% were employed in the other white and blue collar fields were those with a bachelor's degree or higher constituted less than a third of the work force.[2]

text: Geography[edit]

text: Educational attainment among the population aged 25 and above varied rather slightly with geography region. The population of the Northeastern United States, which had the smallest population of any region with thirty-six million residents, had the highest percentage of high-school and college graduates. The western United States had the highest percentage of those with some college or an Associates degree and ranked second for college graduates. The South which had by far the largest population with roughly sixty-six million people had the lowest educational attainment at every level.[2]

text: The proportion of high school graduates was the largest in the Midwest while the proportion of those with some college or an Associates degree was the second and that of those with a Bachelor's degree or higher was the third largest of any region.

text: Social class and education[edit]

text: Educational attainment is one of the primary indicators of social class in the United States.[27] While the American social class system is a vaguely defined concept with many contradicting theories,[28][29] educational attainment emerges as one of the top assessments of social class. Not only is a high educational attainment a status symbol by itself, but it is also very closely related to the other two main indicators of social class: occupation and income. A graduate degree and the roughly seven to eight years of post-secondary education serve as the main requirement for entering the "professions" and becoming part of the professional middle class.[27]

text: Education is a major key in becoming a more privileged member of the American middle class.[27][29] Overall, educational attainment is the main entrance barrier into more privileged parts of the middle class as it is not only of high value but is also the requirement for becoming a professional and earning the corresponding income.[27] This corresponding income is typically significantly higher than that of someone without this higher level of educational attainment in the United States. Exceptions include some entrepreneurs who can rank anywhere in the class system but are usually not referred to as professional middle class unless they are of the professions.

text: In the United States, it is also important to differentiate between the statistical middle class, often defined as consisting of those who are neither rich nor poor, and the professional middle class. Recent research has shown that not only is the statistical middle of society (those with income roughly 80% to 120% of the national median or members of the mid-quintile) no longer able to afford the lifestyle indicative of the middle class,[30] but there also seems to be a widening income gap in between those who may be described as being middle class.

text: Education is not only the main requirement for becoming a member of the professional middle class, it is also key to a comfortable lifestyle and economic security.[27] Those in the statistical middle may have to fear lay-offs and cost-cutting downsizing as well as out-sourcing, while some of those in the professional middle class are less subject to economic fluctuations and are more likely to enjoy upper-middle range incomes even in the face of recessions. Increasingly however even the professional middle class is facing lay-offs and job elimination due to downsizing and replacement of full-time workers with part-time workers—this is particularly evident in colleges and universities where, by 2009, half of the faculty were part-time; another 25% were full-time but with short-term contracts, thus showing that advanced education is not necessarily associated with high salaries and economic stability.[31]

text:
Academic class models

Dennis Gilbert, 2002

William Thompson & Joseph Hickey, 2005

Leonard Beeghley, 2004

Class

Typical characteristics

Class

Typical characteristics

Class

Typical characteristics

Capitalist class (1%)

Top-level executives, high-rung politicians, heirs. Ivy League education common.

Upper class (1%)

Top-level executives, celebrities, heirs; income of $500,000+ common. Ivy league education common.

The super-rich (0.9%)

Multi-millionaires whose incomes commonly exceed $350,000; includes celebrities and powerful executives/politicians. Ivy League education common.

Upper middle class[1] (15%)

Highly-educated (often with graduate degrees), most commonly salaried, professionals and middle management with large work autonomy.

Upper middle class[1] (15%)

Highly-educated (often with graduate degrees) professionals & managers with household incomes varying from the high 5-figure range to commonly above $100,000.

The rich (5%)

Households with net worth of $1 million or more; largely in the form of home equity. Generally have college degrees.

Middle class (plurality/majority?; ca. 46%)

College-educated workers with considerably higher-than-average incomes and compensation; a man making $57,000 and a woman making $40,000 may be typical.

Lower middle class (30%)

Semi-professionals and craftsmen with a roughly average standard of living. Most have some college education and are white-collar.

Lower middle class (32%)

Semi-professionals and craftsmen with some work autonomy; household incomes commonly range from $35,000 to $75,000. Typically, some college education.

Working class (30%)

Clerical and most blue-collar workers whose work is highly routinized. Standard of living varies depending on number of income earners, but is commonly just adequate. High school education.

Working class (32%)

Clerical, pink- and blue-collar workers with often low job security; common household incomes range from $16,000 to $30,000. High school education.

Working class(ca. 40–45%)

Blue-collar workers and those whose jobs are highly routinized with low economic security; a man making $40,000 and a woman making $26,000 may be typical. High school education.

Working poor (13%)

Service, low-rung clerical and some blue-collar workers. High economic insecurity and risk of poverty. Some high school education.

Lower class (ca. 14–20%)

Those who occupy poorly-paid positions or rely on government transfers. Some high school education.

Underclass (12%)

Those with limited or no participation in the labor force. Reliant on government transfers. Some high school education.

The poor (ca. 12%)

Those living below the poverty line with limited to no participation in the labor force; a household income of $18,000 may be typical. Some high school education.

References:  Gilbert, D. (2002) The American Class Structure: In An Age of Growing Inequality. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, ISBN 0534541100. (see also Gilbert Model);
Thompson, W. & Hickey, J. (2005). Society in Focus. Boston, MA: Pearson, Allyn & Bacon; Beeghley, L. (2004). The Structure of Social Stratification in the United States. Boston, MA: Pearson, Allyn & Bacon.
1 The upper middle class may also be referred to as "Professional class" Ehrenreich, B. (1989). The Inner Life of the Middle Class. NY, NY: Harper-Collins.

text: Educational attainment in social theory[edit]

text: Bourdieu and cultural capital[edit]

text: Many scholars have studied educational attainment in the US as a form of social reproduction and stratification. In 1977, Pierre Bourdieu presented the idea that education leads to social reproduction and a stratified society by honoring the cultural capital of elite classes. Students who possess the valued cultural capital, according to Bourdieu, are rewarded with high academic achievement.[32]

text: When elite class members enter the workforce, they are channeled into high paying jobs and powerful positions within society, while those who did not achieve the same level of academic success fall into subordinate occupations and status levels. By rewarding the desired cultural capital with high academic achievement, upper classes are able and prepared to reach higher levels of educational attainment. Members of the working class, on the other hand, are not rewarded for their cultural capital in schools, and are instead socialized for working class jobs.

text: Lareau and concerted cultivation[edit]

text: Annette Lareau also addresses the factors that lead to social stratification in educational attainment. Lareau's idea of concerted cultivation refers to an active involvement of parents in a child's learning and development experiences by creating and controlling organized activities for their children. According to Lareau, middle-class parents engage in concerted cultivation to teach their children, while lower- and working-class parents do not. Laureau further explains that schools firmly encourage and expect parents to use concerted cultivation as a child-rearing strategy.[33]

text: The child-rearing practices of lower- and working-class families thus do not comply with the standards of educational institutions. As a result, lower- and working-class students develop a sense of "distance, distrust, and constraint" in educational institutions, while children of middle-class families gain a sense of entitlement. These differences in child-rearing practices lead to children of lower- and working-class families to lack the necessary life skills that the children of the middle class possess, further isolating them from educational opportunities. In the United States, education attainment typically is viewed as a sign of social status.

text: Collins and credentialism[edit]

text: Randall Collins contributed the idea of credentialism to the study of class-based differences in educational attainment. Collins maintains that public schools are socializing institutions that teach and reward middle-class values of competition and achievement. In this view, elites are selectively separated from other students and placed into prestigious schools and colleges, where they are trained to hold positions of power.[34]

text: By teaching middle-class culture through the public education system, the elite class ensures a monopoly over positions of power, while others acquire the credentials to compete in a subordinate job market and economy. In this way, schools of medicine, law, and elite institutions have remained closed to members of lower classes.


document_title: Rail Budget

question_text: first railway budget of india was presented by

root

text: Rail Budget

text: History[edit]

text: Following the recommendation of the Acworth Committee in 1920-21, headed by British railway economist William Acworth[2] The "Acworth Report" led to reorganisation of railways, the railway finances were separated from the general government finances in 1921. After that in 1924 the budget was announced, a practice that continued till 2016.[3][4][5]

tag: p

text: John Mathai presented the first Railway Budget for independent India in November 1947.

text: The first live telecast took place on 24 March 1994.

text: Lalu Prasad Yadav, who remained Railways Minister from 2004 to May 2009, presented the railway budget 6 times in a row. In 2009, under his tenure a ₹108 billion (US$1.7 billion) budget was passed.[6]

text: In the year 2000, Mamata Banerjee (later Chief Minister of West Bengal) became the first female Railway Minister. In 2002, she became the first female to present the Railway budget and is the only woman to do so for two different governing coalitions (NDA and UPA).

text: In 2014 budget, Railway Minister D. V. Sadananda Gowda announced the first bullet train and 9 High-Speed Rail routes.[7]

text: The last Railway Budget [8] was presented on 25 February 2016 by Mr. Suresh Prabhu.

text: Also, according to Mid-day, a mumbai centric local tabloid newspaper, railway minister Piyush Goyal is planning to introduce 210 air-conditioned suburban local trains and convert the existing fleet into closed-door, cool trains at the cost of R16,3809 crore in the Rail Budget of 2018 which is to be presented on 1st February 2018.[9]


document_title: List of Test cricket triple centuries

question_text: who scored 300 runs in test match for india

text: List of Test cricket triple centuries

text: Key[edit]

text:
* denotes that the batsman remained not out.
Test denotes the number of the Test match played in that series.
Innings denotes which of the team's batting innings the triple century was scored in.
Date denotes the date the match started on.
   denotes that the total was the highest Test match score at the time.

tag: ul

text: Triple centuries and above[edit]

text:
No

Score

Batsman

For

Against

Innings

Test

Ground

Date

1
325
Andy Sandham[1]
 England
 West Indies

1st
4th

Sabina Park, Kingston
3 April 1930

2
334
Donald Bradman[2]
 Australia
 England

1st
3rd

Headingley, Leeds
11 July 1930

3
336*
Wally Hammond[3]
 England
 New Zealand

1st
2nd

Eden Park, Auckland
31 March 1933

4
304
Donald Bradman[4]
 Australia
 England

1st
4th

Headingley, Leeds
20 July 1934

5
364
Len Hutton[5]
 England
 Australia

1st
5th

The Oval, London
20 August 1938

6
337
Hanif Mohammad[6]
 Pakistan
 West Indies

2nd
1st

Kensington Oval, Bridgetown
17 January 1958

7
365*
Garfield Sobers[7]
 West Indies
 Pakistan

1st
3rd

Sabina Park, Kingston
26 February 1958

8
311
Bob Simpson[8]
 Australia
 England

1st
4th

Old Trafford, Manchester
23 July 1964

9
310*
John Edrich[9]
 England
 New Zealand

1st
3rd

Headingley, Leeds
8 July 1965

10
307
Bob Cowper[10]
 Australia
 England

1st
5th

Melbourne Cricket Ground
11 February 1966

11
302
Lawrence Rowe[11]
 West Indies
 England

1st
3rd

Kensington Oval, Bridgetown
6 March 1974

12
333
Graham Gooch[12]
 England
 India

1st
1st

Lord's Cricket Ground, London
26 July 1990

13
375
Brian Lara[13]
 West Indies
 England

1st
5th

Antigua Recreation Ground, St John's
16 April 1994

14
340
Sanath Jayasuriya[14]
 Sri Lanka
 India

1st
1st

R. Premadasa Stadium, Colombo
2 August 1997

15
334*
Mark Taylor[15]
 Australia
 Pakistan

1st
2nd

Arbab Niaz Stadium, Peshawar
15 October 1998

16
329
Inzamam-ul-Haq[16]
 Pakistan
 New Zealand

1st
1st

Gaddafi Stadium, Lahore
1 May 2002

17
380
Matthew Hayden[17]
 Australia
 Zimbabwe

1st
1st

WACA Ground, Perth
9 October 2003

18
309
Virender Sehwag[18]
 India
 Pakistan

1st
1st

Multan Cricket Stadium
28 March 2004

19
400*
Brian Lara[19]
 West Indies
 England

1st
4th
Antigua Recreation Ground, St John's
10 April 2004

20
317
Chris Gayle[20]
 West Indies
 South Africa

1st
4th

Antigua Recreation Ground, St John's
29 April 2005

21
374
Mahela Jayawardene[21]
 Sri Lanka
 South Africa

1st
1st

Sinhalese S.C., Colombo
27 July 2006

22
319
Virender Sehwag[22]
 India
 South Africa

1st
1st

M. A. Chidambaram Stadium, Chennai
26 March 2008

23
313
Younis Khan[23]
 Pakistan
 Sri Lanka

1st
1st

National Stadium, Karachi
21 February 2009

24
333
Chris Gayle[24]
 West Indies
 Sri Lanka

1st
1st

Galle International Stadium
15 November 2010

25
329*
Michael Clarke[25]
 Australia
 India

1st
2nd

Sydney Cricket Ground
3 January 2012

26
311*
Hashim Amla[26]
 South Africa
 England

1st
1st
The Oval, London
19 July 2012

27
319
Kumar Sangakkara[27]
 Sri Lanka
 Bangladesh

1st
2nd
Zohur Ahmed Chowdhury Stadium, Chittagong
5 February 2014

28
302
Brendon McCullum[28]
 New Zealand
 India

2nd
2nd
Basin Reserve, Wellington
18 February 2014

29
302*
Azhar Ali[29]
 Pakistan
 West Indies
1st
1st
Dubai International Cricket Stadium, Dubai
13 October 2016

30
303*
Karun Nair[30]
 India
 England

1st
5th
M. A. Chidambaram Stadium, Chennai
16 December 2016

tag: table


document_title: Open Season 2

question_text: who plays roger the cat in open season 2

text: Open Season 2

text: Plot

text: The film takes place one year after the events of the first film.

text: Elliot (Joel McHale) has grown giant new antlers and is getting married to Giselle (Jane Krakowski). But during a mishap, Elliot's new antlers are cracked off and now look like they did in the first film, which upsets him. Luckily, his best friend, Boog (Mike Epps) and the others manage to cheer Elliot up by having a rabbit fight. But Elliot has new emotions about his marriage and feels reluctant to marry Giselle. Mr. Weenie (Cody Cameron) finds a dog biscuit trail that his previous owners left behind and uncontrollably follows it. At the climax of the wedding, Elliot witnesses Mr. Weenie being taken away by his old owners, Bob and Bobbie (Georgia Engel). Elliot tells an exaggerated story to the other forest animals (in order to get out of marrying Giselle) and decides to make a rescue mission to save him. The other ones that go on Elliot's rescue mission are Boog, Giselle, squirrel McSquizzy (Billy Connolly), Buddy the porcupine, (Matthew W. Taylor), and ducks Serge (Danny Mann) and Deni (Matthew W. Taylor).

text: Meanwhile, the other pets meet. There is Fifi (Crispin Glover), a toy poodle and his basset hound companion Roberto (Steve Schirripa), two cats named Stanley (Fred Stoller) and Roger (Sean Mullen), and Southern dogs named Rufus (Diedrich Bader), and Charlene (Olivia Hack). Fifi discusses his hatred for wild animals as one night he goes into the bushes to retrieve his chew toy and is "traumatized" by the wild animals inside, and accidentally gets his tail zapped by the bug lighter. He then tries to maul a nearby rabbit, until he's stopped by his owner. Meanwhile, the wilds find Weenie, much to Elliot's dismay, who does not want to marry Giselle. They try to free him while his owners are in a gas station. They free him from his chains, but accidentally leave him stuck in the RV along with Buddy. Elliot and Giselle get in a feud, and eventually leaves Elliot to search for Mr. Weenie himself, while Serge and Deni fly to look for him.

text: The owners reach the pet camp with Mr. Weenie and a stowed away Buddy. The other pets meet with Weenie, and Fifi tries to revert Weenie back into his pet state, but Weenie resists. Buddy helps Weenie escape and Buddy tries to free Weenie from his shock collar. During the chase, Fifi gets shocked by the collar and gets the fur on his forehead burned, causing him to lose most of his sanity and vow revenge.

text: Meanwhile, Serge and Deni return and explain they found Weenie and Buddy at a pet camp, which they already escaped from. Boog and the others set camp, and Boog fails to convince Giselle that Elliot is a good person and that they belong together. Elliot, meanwhile, is having a horrible time, following his own tracks that he confuses for Mr. Weenie's and gets his head stuck on a trash can lid all the while missing his friends. The wilds reach the pet camp, but the pets and their owners have already left, but realizes that they have gone to a resort called "Pet Paradiso", a vacation spot for pets. Weenie and Buddy find Elliot in the woods and  convince him to go to Pet Paradiso to save his friends.

text: The wilds reach Pet Paradiso and try to sneak in by disguising themselves as pets, with Giselle as a dalmatian and McSquizzy as a chihuahua. Boog attempts to sneak in as a cat, but gets the idea to be a sheepdog. Elliot also disguises himself as Boog's human owner. Giselle and McSquizzy walk around Pet Paradiso looking for Mr. Weenie, but their cover is blown and are kidnapped by Fifi and the other pets and taken to their secret lair. Elliot, Buddy and Mr. Weenie attempt to go inside to save Giselle and McSquizzy, but Mr. Weenie, missing being a pet again, goes to play on a waterslide, leaving the rest to be captured by Fifi.

text: Fifi tries to kill them all with a pile of shock collars. As Boog tries to stop Mr. Weenie from going down the waterslide, his cover is blown as well and security attempts to tranquilize him. Before Fifi shocks the wilds into submission, Elliot tries to profess his love for Giselle. As Fifi is about to kill them, Boog, via the waterslide, enters the pets' lair, and the water from the waterslide forces everyone out of the lair.

text: A battle between the wilds and pets ensues, with the Pet Paradiso security focused on tranquilizing the wilds. While Boog tricks security into tranquilizing themselves, Elliot saves Giselle, accidentally placing all the shock collars on himself. He wrestles Fifi in the pool for the shock collar remote; Fifi eventually grabs the remote and activates the collars, but then realizes that Elliot put all the collars on him. Fifi survives, but the electricity caused him to lose all his fur, humiliating him. The pets and the wilds settle their differences and decide to become friends. Mr. Weenie, wanting to be a pet again, decides to join the pets and returns to his owners in rejoice. Elliot finally professes his true feelings for Giselle, and they get married. Elliot soon loses his other antler.

text: Cast

text:
Joel McHale as Elliot. He was supposed to marry Giselle, but abandoned her due to new emotions. In the end, he and Giselle end up getting married anyway after he finally manages to profess his love for Giselle.
Mike Epps as Boog. He also leads the rescue mission to save Mr. Weenie.
Cody Cameron as Mr. Weenie. He is a German dachshund. He was captured by Fifi and the pets, leaving Boog, Elliot, and the other wilds to go rescue him.
Jane Krakowski as Giselle. She is Elliot's fiancé who is scared of getting married. However, in the end, she and Elliot end up getting married after Elliot finally professes his love for Gisele.
Billy Connolly as McSquizzy. He joins in the mission to save Weenie.
Crispin Glover as Fifi. He is an ill-tempered toy poodle who is often annoyed by his companion, Roberto. Fifi has a deep hatred over wild animals and slowly begins to lose his sanity after his forehead gets burned during a chase.
Danny Mann as Serge. He joins in the mission to save Weenie with Deni.
Matthew W. Taylor as Deni/Buddy/Ian, one of the main protagonist. Except for Ian, they join in the mission to save Mr. Weenie.
Steve Schirripa as Roberto. He is Fifi's dim-witted companion who usually annoys him. In the end, he is reformed and becomes friends with the wilds.
Fred Stoller as Stanley. He is a pet cat who is constantly annoyed by Roger. In the end, he is reformed and becomes friends with the wilds.
Sean Mullen as Roger. He is an intellectually disabled cat who often annoys his best friend Stanley. In the end, he is reformed and becomes friends with the wilds.
Diedrich Bader as Rufus. He is a Southern dog who is Charlene's boyfriend. In the end, he is reformed and becomes friends with the wilds.
Olivia Hack as Charlene, a Western dog who is Rufus' girlfriend. In the end, she is reformed and becomes friends with the wilds.

text: Production

text: Sony announced a sequel to Open Season in September 2007. Although, the original grossed $85 million and $105 million outside the United States, Sony felt the film performed much better on DVD, thus, making a direct-to-DVD sequel. Sony Pictures Digital president said that "the studio will keep Open Season 2's costs low by utilizing Imageworks' satellite facilities in India and New Mexico".[1]

text: Release

text: Although Open Season 2 was as direct-to-video in the United States and the United Kingdom, it was released theatrically in some countries. In South Africa on its opening day, the film grossed $84,244 from 26 screens with an $2,081 average. In Russia, it opened with $2,835,600 from 360 screens with a $7,877 average. In Poland, it opened with $194,339 from 75 screens with an $2,591 average. In total, the film grossed $8,716,950.[2]

text: Theatrical releases:[2]

text:
South Africa - September 24, 2008
Russia - October 16, 2008
Croatia - November 6, 2008
United Arab Emirates - November 13, 2008
Czech Republic - December 18, 2008
Slovakia - December 18, 2008
Lebanon - December 18, 2008
Turkey - January 16, 2009
Poland - January 23, 2009
Iceland - January 30, 2009
South Korea - March 12, 2009

text: Reception

text: Critic at DVD Verdict claimed, "Open Season 2 is no classic (neither was the original), but it's a competent check-your-brain-at-the-door comedy for children of all ages. The animation and storytelling may not stack up against Pixar's (whose does?), but the flick offers something that Pixar movies generally don't: old cartoon slapstick and sight gags in the mold of Bugs Bunny".[3]

text: Home release

text: Open Season 2 was released on DVD, Blu-ray Disc and PSP UMD on January 27, 2009.[4]

text: Sequel

text: The sequel Open Season 3 premiered in theaters in Russia on October 21, 2010 and was released on DVD and Blu-ray in United States on January 25, 2011.[5]


document_title: Turtle Bay Resort

question_text: where did they stay in forgetting sarah marshall

text: Turtle Bay Resort

text: Description[edit]

text: The resort is about a 50-minute drive from Honolulu, between Kahuku, Hawaii to the east and Kawela Bay, Hawaii to the west. The resort owns 858 acres (3.47 km2) of land with five miles of ocean front at Turtle Bay, and features 410 hotel rooms and suites, including the Premier Rooms on the 6th Floor; 42 Beach Cottages that were refreshed in 2015; and manages numerous Ocean Villas, which are larger 2-BR to 4-BR units. The hotel recently unveiled a $45 million resort-wide, eco-sensitive[1] renovation enhancing food and beverage operations, event staging and guest experiences. The hotel was built with three wings on a small peninsula which provides every room with an ocean view. The resort has a variety of restaurants, including Surfer The Bar, a partnership with Surfer Magazine, and The Point Sunset and Pool Bar. The resort also features The Guide Post, a new concept on the traditional hotel concierge, but more interactive and a key component of the Turtle Bay's positioning as an experiential resort.[2] Turtle Bay Resort sits just north of the Kuilima Estates condominium complexes along both of its golf courses, at 21°42′19″N 157°59′55″W.

text: History[edit]

text: Turtle Bay Resort opened in May 1972 as Del Webb's Kuilima Resort Hotel and Country Club.[3] In the Hawaiian language kui lima means "joining hands".[4] It was built by casino developer Del Webb (1899–1974) to be the first casino on the island; a gaming initiative was on the ballot in the mid-1970s but it did not pass.[citation needed] Hyatt took over the property until August 1983 when Hilton Hotels & Resorts took over.[5] It was renamed "Turtle Bay Golf and Tennis Resort"—early advertisements had to include a guide to pronunciation.[3]

text: A potential development deal with Starwood Hotels fell through in July 2007.[6] Although much expansion had been approved in 1985, local opposition had developed against the plans.[7][8] Governor Linda Lingle suggested the state buy the property in 2008.[9] The Trust for Public Land also tried to raise funds for the preservation effort.[10] Two offers were made by the state in August and November 2008 that would have included surrounding open space, but they were not accepted.[11]

text: After a threat of foreclosure of investor Oaktree Capital Management from Credit Suisse, a new consortium of investors took over the resort in February 2010.[12] As of 2010[update] it was managed and operated by Benchmark Hospitality International.[13] In December 2013, the management of the resort was split between Replay Resorts, based in Vancouver, British Columbia and Benchmark Hospitality International.[14] After four years of court battles, the Hawaii Supreme Court ruled in July 2010 that a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement must be filed for new development.[15] The Resort, represented by Replay Resorts, released its Draft Supplemental Impact Statement on November 23, 2012 with the Public Comment Period extended until January 18, 2013.[16]

text: Activities[edit]

text: The resort is several miles away from surf spots including Waimea Bay, the Banzai Pipeline, and Sunset Beach. The two golf courses are named after designers Arnold Palmer and George Fazio. The Palmer Course was the site of the Turtle Bay Championship, a PGA Champions Tour Event held from 2001 through 2008,[17] and the Fazio Course has hosted the LPGA Tour's Hawaiian Open. The runways of the World War II era Kahuku Army Airfield have been absorbed into the fairways of the golf courses.[18] The James Campbell National Wildlife Refuge preserves a small pond adjacent to a golf course.[19]

text: In 1999, the resort hosted the final Big Mele, a rock festival that had been held for the previous six years at Kualoa Ranch.

text: Films and TV shows have been filmed on or near the Turtle Bay Resort. The hotel has been the setting for episodes of Hawaii 5-0, Magnum P.I., Full House, Cougar Town and the short-lived Fox TV series North Shore. The resort featured as the setting for the reunion-movie Baywatch: Hawaiian Wedding and for the 2008 film Forgetting Sarah Marshall.[20] Preserving the undeveloped setting for film locations was one reason given by opponents to the expansion.[21] The Hills cast have filmed at the Turtle Bay resort in Season 5.[22]


document_title: History of the Food and Drug Administration

question_text: when was the food and drug administration created

text: Early history[edit]

text: Origins of federal food and drug regulation[edit]

text: Up until the 20th century, there were few federal laws regulating the contents and sale of domestically produced food and pharmaceuticals, with one exception being the short-lived Vaccine Act of 1813. A patchwork of state laws provided varying degrees of protection against unethical sales practices, such as misrepresenting the ingredients of food products or therapeutic substances. The history of the FDA can be traced to the latter part of the 19th century and the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Division of Chemistry (later Bureau of Chemistry). Under Harvey Washington Wiley, appointed chief chemist in 1883, the Division began conducting research into the adulteration and misbranding of food and drugs on the American market. Although they had no regulatory powers, the Division published its findings from 1887 to 1902 in a ten-part series entitled Foods and Food Adulterants. Wiley used these findings, and alliances with diverse organizations such as state regulators, the General Federation of Women's Clubs, and national associations of physicians and pharmacists, to lobby for a new federal law to set uniform standards for food and drugs to enter into interstate commerce. Wiley's advocacy came at a time when the public had become aroused to hazards in the marketplace by muckraking journalists like Upton Sinclair, and became part of a general trend for increased federal regulations in matters pertinent to public safety during the Progressive Era.[1] The 1902 Biologics Control Act was put in place after diphtheria antitoxin was collected from a horse named Jim who contracted tetanus, resulting in several deaths. Much credit is given to the deaths of many people in the 1930s, including Eben Byers in 1932 from the ingestion of radithor and many women, some known as The Radium Girls, to making the FDA into the much more powerful organization we know today.[2][3][4][5]

text: The 1906 Food and Drug Act and creation of the FDA[edit]

text: In June 1906, President Theodore Roosevelt signed into law the Food and Drug Act, also known as the "Wiley Act" after its chief advocate.[1] The Act prohibited, under penalty of seizure of goods, the interstate transport of food which had been "adulterated," with that term referring to the addition of fillers of reduced "quality or strength," coloring to conceal "damage or inferiority," formulation with additives "injurious to health," or the use of "filthy, decomposed, or putrid" substances. The act applied similar penalties to the interstate marketing of "adulterated" drugs, in which the "standard of strength, quality, or purity" of the active ingredient was not either stated clearly on the label or listed in the United States Pharmacopoeia or the National Formulary. The act also banned "misbranding" of food and drugs.[6] The responsibility for examining food and drugs for such "adulteration" or "misbranding" was given to Wiley's USDA Bureau of Chemistry.[1]

text: Wiley used these new regulatory powers to pursue an aggressive campaign against the manufacturers of foods with chemical additives, but the Chemistry Bureau's authority was soon checked by judicial decisions, as well as by the creation of the Board of Food and Drug Inspection and the Referee Board of Consulting Scientific Experts as separate organizations within the USDA in 1907 and 1908 respectively. A 1911 Supreme Court decision ruled that the 1906 act did not apply to false claims of therapeutic efficacy,[7] in response to which a 1912 amendment added "false and fraudulent" claims of "curative or therapeutic effect" to the Act's definition of "misbranded." However, these powers continued to be narrowly defined by the courts, which set high standards for proof of fraudulent intent.[1] In 1927, the Bureau of Chemistry's regulatory powers were reorganized under a new USDA body, the Food, Drug, and Insecticide organization. This name was shortened to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) three years later.[8]

text: The 1938 Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act[edit]

text: By the 1930s, muckraking journalists, consumer protection organizations, and federal regulators began mounting a campaign for stronger regulatory authority by publicizing a list of injurious products which had been ruled permissible under the 1906 law, including radioactive beverages, the mascara Lash lure, which caused blindness, and worthless "cures" for diabetes and tuberculosis. The resulting proposed law was unable to get through the Congress of the United States for five years, but was rapidly enacted into law following the public outcry over the 1937 Elixir Sulfanilamide tragedy, in which over 100 people died after using a drug formulated with a toxic, untested solvent. The only way that the FDA could even seize the product was due to a misbranding problem: an "Elixir" was defined as a medication dissolved in ethanol, not the diethylene glycol used in the Elixir Sulfanilamide. Had it been labeled a "solution" instead, it is argued, the agency could have done nothing to track down and confiscate what medication remained in the public's hands.[9]

text: President Franklin Delano Roosevelt signed the new Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) into law on June 24, 1938. The new law significantly increased federal regulatory authority over drugs by mandating a pre-market review of the safety of all new drugs, as well as banning false therapeutic claims in drug labeling without requiring that the FDA prove fraudulent intent. The law also authorized factory inspections and expanded enforcement powers, set new regulatory standards for foods, and brought cosmetics and therapeutic devices under federal regulatory authority. This law, though extensively amended in subsequent years, remains the central foundation of FDA regulatory authority to the present day.[1]

text: Regulation of human drugs and medical devices after 1938[edit]

text: Early FD&C Act amendments: 1938–1958[edit]

text: Soon after passage of the 1938 Act, the FDA began to designate certain drugs as safe for use only under the supervision of a medical professional, and the category of "prescription-only" drugs was securely codified into law by the 1951 Durham-Humphrey Amendment.[1] While pre-market testing of drug efficacy was not authorized under the 1938 FD&C Act, subsequent amendments such as the Insulin Amendment and Penicillin Amendment did mandate potency testing for formulations of specific lifesaving pharmaceuticals.[8] The FDA began enforcing its new powers against drug manufacturers who could not substantiate the efficacy claims made for their drugs, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruling in Alberty Food Products Co. v. United States (1950) found that drug manufacturers could not evade the "false therapeutic claims" provision of the 1938 act by simply omitting the intended use of a drug from the drug's label. These developments confirmed extensive powers for the FDA to enforce post-marketing recalls of ineffective drugs.[1] Much of the FDA's regulatory attentions in this era were directed towards abuse of amphetamines and barbiturates, but the agency also reviewed some 13,000 new drug applications between 1938 and 1962. While the science of toxicology was in its infancy at the start of this era, rapid advances in experimental assays for food additive and drug safety testing were made during this period by FDA regulators and others.[1]

text: Expansion of premarket approval process: 1959–1985[edit]

text: In 1959, Senator Estes Kefauver began holding congressional hearings into concerns about pharmaceutical industry practices, such as the perceived high cost and uncertain efficacy of many drugs promoted by manufacturers. There was significant opposition, however, to calls for a new law expanding the FDA's authority. This climate was rapidly changed by the thalidomide tragedy, in which thousands of European babies were born deformed after their mothers took that drug - marketed for treatment of nausea - during their pregnancies. Thalidomide had not been approved for use in the U.S. due to the concerns of an FDA reviewer, Frances Oldham Kelsey, about thyroid toxicity. However, thousands of "trial samples" had been sent to American doctors during the "clinical investigation" phase of the drug's development, which at the time was entirely unregulated by the FDA. Individual members of Congress cited the thalidomide incident in lending their support to expansion of FDA authority.[10]

text: The 1962 Kefauver-Harris Amendment to the FD&C act represented a "revolution" in FDA regulatory authority.[11] The most important change was the requirement that all new drug applications demonstrate "substantial evidence" of the drug's efficacy for a marketed indication, in addition to the existing requirement for pre-marketing demonstration of safety. This marked the start of the FDA approval process in its modern form. Drugs approved between 1938 and 1962 were also subject to FDA review of their efficacy, and to potential withdrawal from the market. Other important provisions of the 1962 amendments included the requirement that drug companies use the "established" or "generic" name of a drug along with the trade name, the restriction of drug advertising to FDA-approved indications, and expansion of FDA powers to inspect drug manufacturing facilities.

text: These reforms had the effect of increasing the time required to bring a drug to market.[12] In the mid-1970s, 13 of the 14 drugs the FDA saw as most important to approve were on the market in other countries before the United States.[12]

text: One of the most important statutes in establishing the modern American pharmaceutical market was the 1984 Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act, more commonly known as the "Hatch-Waxman Act" after its chief sponsors. This act was intended to correct two unfortunate interactions between the new regulations mandated by the 1962 amendments, and existing patent law (which is not regulated or enforced by the FDA, but rather by the United States Patent and Trademark Office). Because the additional clinical trials mandated by the 1962 amendments significantly delayed the marketing of new drugs, without extending the duration of the manufacturer's patent, "pioneer" drug manufacturers experienced a decreased period of lucrative market exclusivity. On the other hand, the new regulations could be interpreted to require complete safety and efficacy testing for generic copies of approved drugs, and "pioneer" manufacturers obtained court decisions which prevented generic manufacturers from even beginning the clinical trial process while a drug was still under patent. The Hatch-Waxman Act was intended as a compromise between the "pioneer" and generic drug manufacturers which would reduce the overall cost of bringing generics to market and thus, it was hoped, reduce the long-term price of the drug, while preserving the overall profitability of developing new drugs.

text: The act extended the patent exclusivity terms of new drugs, and importantly tied those extensions, in part, to the length of the FDA approval process for each individual drug. For generic manufacturers, the Act created a new approval mechanism, the Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA), in which the generic drug manufacturer need only demonstrate that their generic formulation has the same active ingredient, route of administration, dosage form, strength, and pharmacokinetic properties ("bioequivalence") as the corresponding brand-name drug. This act has been credited with essentially creating the modern generic drug industry.[13]

text: FDA reforms in the AIDS era[edit]

text: Concerns about the length of the drug approval process were brought to the fore early in the AIDS epidemic. In the mid- and late 1980s, ACT-UP and other HIV activist organizations accused the FDA of unnecessarily delaying the approval of medications to fight HIV and opportunistic infections, and staged large protests, such as a confrontational October 11, 1988 action at the FDA campus which resulted in nearly 180 arrests.[14] In August 1990, Dr. Louis Lasagna, then chairman of a presidential advisory panel on drug approval, estimated that thousands of lives were lost each year due to delays in approval and marketing of drugs for cancer and AIDS.[15]

text: Partly in response to these criticisms, the FDA issued new rules to expedite approval of drugs for life-threatening diseases, and expanded pre-approval access to drugs for patients with limited treatment options.[16] The first of these new rules was the "IND exemption" or "treatment IND" rule, which allowed expanded access to a drug undergoing phase II or III trials (or in extraordinary cases even earlier) if it potentially represented a safer or better alternative to treatments currently available for terminal or serious illness. A second new rule, the "parallel track policy", allowed a drug company to set up a mechanism for access to a new potentially lifesaving drug by patients who for various reasons would be unable to participate in ongoing clinical trials. The "parallel track" designation could be made at the time of IND submission. The accelerated approval rules were further expanded and codified in 1992.[17]

text: All of the initial drugs approved for the treatment of HIV/AIDS were approved through accelerated approval mechanisms. For example, a "treatment IND" was issued for the first HIV drug, AZT, in 1985, and approval was granted just two years later in 1987.[18] Three of the first five drugs targeting HIV were approved in the United States before they were approved in any other country.[citation needed]

text: Challenges to FDA authority by states[edit]

text: In two instances, state governments have sought to legalize drugs which have not been approved by the FDA. Because federal law passed pursuant to Constitutional authority overrules conflicting state laws,[citation needed] federal authorities still claim the authority to seize, arrest, and prosecute for possession and sales of these substances, even in states where they are legal under state law.

text: The first wave was the legalization by 27 states of laetrile in the late 1970s. This drug was used as a treatment for cancer, but scientific studies both before and after this legislative trend found it to be ineffective.[19][20] Federal law enforcement prevented interstate shipment, making the drug infeasible to manufacture and sell. Further studies based on a Mexican formulation also showed no effectiveness in treating cancer, but did find that some patients experienced symptoms of cyanide poisoning. Though the political movement died out in the 1980s, FDA enforcement actions against laetrile purveyors continued into the 2000s.[20]

text: The second wave concerned medical marijuana in the 1990s and 2000s. Though Virginia passed a law with limited effect in 1979, a more widespread trend began in California in 1996. In 2009, the Obama Administration de-prioritized enforcement of federal law against patients using the drug in compliance with state law, but reversed this policy in 2011.[21] Recreational marijuana remains illegal (but not necessarily criminal) in all states and at the federal level, as of 2009.

text: Regulation of living organisms[edit]

text: With acceptance of premarket notification 510(k) k033391 in January 2004, the FDA granted Dr. Ronald Sherman permission to produce and market medical maggots for use in humans or other animals as a prescription medical device. Medical maggots represent the first living organism allowed by the Food and Drug Administration for production and marketing as a prescription medical device.

text: In June 2004, the FDA cleared Hirudo medicinalis (medicinal leeches) as the second living organism to be used as a medical devices.

text: Timeline of food and drug legislation[edit]

text: Most federal laws concerning the FDA are part of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act,[22] (first passed in 1938 and extensively amended since) and are codified in Title 21, Chapter 9 of the United States Code. Other significant laws enforced by the FDA include the Public Health Service Act, parts of the Controlled Substances Act, the Federal Anti-Tampering Act, as well as many others. In many cases these responsibilities are shared with other federal agencies.

text: Important enabling legislation for the FDA includes:

text:
1902 – Biologics Control Act
1906 – Pure Food and Drug Act
1938 – Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
1944 – Public Health Service Act
1951 – 1951 Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act Amendments PL 82–215
1962 – 1962 Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act Amendments PL 87–781
1966 – Fair Packaging and Labeling Act PL 89–755
1976 – Medical Device Regulation Act PL 94–295
1987 – Prescription Drug Marketing Act
1988 – Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 PL 100–690
1990 – Nutrition Labeling and Education Act PL 101–535
1992 – Prescription Drug User Fee Act PL 102–571
1994 – Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act
1997 – Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act 105-115
2002 – Bioterrorism Act 107-188
2002 – Medical Device User Fee and Modernization Act (MDUFMA) PL 107-250
2003 – Animal Drug User Fee Act PL 108-130
2007 – Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007
2009 – Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act
2010 – FDA Food Safety Modernization Act
2012 – Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act


document_title: The Staircase

question_text: when did the staircase on netflix come out

text: The Staircase

text: Plot[edit]

text: In December 2001, novelist Michael Peterson called to report that his wife Kathleen had fallen down a set of stairs in their Forest Hills mansion and died.  The authorities disbelieved Peterson's story that Kathleen had fallen while drunk and concluded instead that he had bludgeoned her to death, most likely with a fireplace poker which was discovered missing from the house.  Peterson was soon charged with murder. The film details the ensuing case from the point of view of Peterson and his defense team, led by David Rudolf.  During the trial it is discovered that while Peterson was living in Germany, a family friend died from an intra-cerebral haemorrhage, followed by the body falling down stairs after collapsing, which resulted in similar head injuries to those sustained by Peterson's wife.  An investigation by German police and US military authorities concluded that the death was accidental, and Peterson ended up adopting the woman's two daughters. The prosecution introduce this death into the trial as an incident giving Peterson the idea of how to "fake" Kathleen's accident. During the trial, Peterson's daughters stand steadfastly by their father. The prosecution argues that Kathleen had discovered that Michael was bisexual and had been having affairs with men, which led to an argument in which he bludgeoned her to death.  Peterson claimed that his wife knew about his sexuality and that they had an open marriage. He claims to have been outside by their pool when Kathleen fell down the stairs and injured herself.  A defense team recreation shows that it would have been possible for Peterson to have missed his wife's cries for help had he been by the pool. The jury ultimately convicts Peterson.

text: Reception[edit]

text: Reviews for The Staircase were generally positive. The film received an "exceptional quality" rating (8.5 out of 10) from Documentary-Review.com based on 9 reviews.[11] It won a Peabody Award in 2005.[12]

text: Sequels[edit]

text: In April 2012, it was revealed that Lestrade was working on four follow-up film to The Staircase for French broadcaster Canal+,[13] after Michael Peterson was released from jail, pending a retrial. The sequel, subtitled "Last Chance," premiered at the International Documentary Film Festival Amsterdam (IDFA)[14] in November 2012.[15] It aired on Canal+ on January 30, 2013,[16] and on BBC Four's Storyville on February 4.[17] Sundance Channel aired a shorter alternative cut, presenting "Last Chance" as two new episodes of the original miniseries, airing March 4 and March 11, 2013.[5][18]

text: On November 23, 2015, Lestrade announced a second follow-up film at the IDFA Forum.[19] Originally announced as Staircase III, the film documents the story of Peterson's final trial, set for early 2016. The film was commissioned by Canal+. Last Chance producer Matthieu Belghiti of What's Up Films was also attached.[20] It was later picked up by Netflix to be released as three new episodes of the miniseries, together with the previous ten episodes on June 8, 2018.[21] The first of the new episodes premiered April 28, 2018, at the Tribeca Film Festival.[22]

text: Legacy[edit]

text: The 2017 sitcom Trial & Error parodies this documentary and the details of the case.


document_title: Pine Mountain Jump

question_text: how tall is the pine mountain ski jump

question_tokens: how tall is the pine mountain ski jump

text: Pine Mountain Jump

text: Specifications[edit]

text:
Scaffold height: 176 feet (54 m)
Scaffold length: 117m [2]
Length of underhill (end of take-off to outrun): 632 feet (193 m)
Length of underhill (end of scaffold to end of outrun): 1,032 feet (315 m)
Critical point (K-point) of landing hill: 394 feet (120 m)
Hill Size (HS): 133m [2]
Pitch of landing hill: 39°
Estimated speed of skiers at takeoff (variable depending on wind and other factors): 55–65 mph (89–105 km/h)[4]

text: History[edit]

text: Construction of the jump began in 1937 and was completed in 1938. At the time it was 156 feet (48 m) high.  It hosted its first competition in 1939.  In 1948, the outrun was dug out, and in 1977 the inrun tower was made larger (to the current 176 feet (54 m)) after a fire.  There have been numerous other renovations over the years.  In 1996 and 2000 the hill hosted the FIS Ski Jumping World Cup, bringing in 20,000 spectators.  However, it has not hosted one since, and now hosts annual FIS Ski Jumping Continental Cup competitions.[5]

text: Locally known as "Giant Pine Mountain," it is reputed worldwide to be one of the best ski jumping facilities.  The ski jumping fans are said to be friendly. It is also considered by most jumpers as the most challenging jump on the Continental Cup circuit and in the world. This partly is due to the fact that the top of the jump is nearly 600 feet above all of the surrounding landscape giving the jumpers the same view that they would have if they were standing on top of a 60 story skyscraper. Also, because of the jump and hill's high rise above the surrounding landscape there is a significant wind factor for jumpers making it more challenging.[6]

text: Excluding ski flying hills, the Pine Mountain Ski Jump is the largest ski jump in the United States and it is between the 3rd and 8th tallest man-made ski jump in the world (depending on how height is measured).[7] There are two other ski jumps in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan: Copper Peak is the only Ski flying venue in the western hemisphere, located near Ironwood, Michigan (and has been called "Suicide hill"),[8] as well as the pre-existing Suicide Hill Ski Jump located at Ishpeming, Michigan, which is near the National Ski Hall of Fame.[8]

text: Jump Records[edit]

text: Below is the list of past and current record holders:

text:
Year

Distance (m)

Distance (ft)

Name

Country

1939

78

256

Bob Rocker

 United States

1941

81.5

267

Alf Engen

 NOR

1942

88

289

Torger Tokle

 NOR

1949

89

292

Joe Perrault

 United States

1949

89.5

294

Matti Pietikäinen

 FIN

1949

90.5

297

Joe Perrault

 USA

1955

91.5

300

Rudy Maki

 USA[9]

1961

96

315

Jim Brennan

 USA

1962

96.5

317

Pekka Tirkkinen

 FIN

1965

99

325

John Balfanz

 United States

1968

102

335

Adrian Watt

 United States

1971

105

344

Jerry Martin

 United States

1978

113

371

Gebhart Aberer

 AUT

1980

121.5

399

Armin Kogler

 AUT

1991

122

400

Werner Schuster

 AUT

1996-02-18

131.5

431

Masahiko Harada

 JPN

1996-02-18

131.5

431

Jens Weißflog

 GER

1996-02-18

140

460

Masahiko Harada

 JPN

2002-02-23

142

466

Kalle Keituri

 FIN

2004-02-21

142

466

Olav Magne Dønnem

 NOR

2006-02-18

142.5

468

Stefan Kaiser

 AUT[3]

2009-02-15

142.5

468

Lukas Müller

 AUT

2009-02-15

143.5

471

Stefan Thurnbichler

 AUT[5][10]

text: List of Events Held[edit]

text: The Pine Mountain ski jumping tournament has been part of the FIS Ski Jumping Continental Cup every year since 2004 and with the exception of the occasional Winter Olympic Games or World Cup event, the tournament is unually the most prestigious and highest level ski jumping competition held in the Western Hemisphere. Below is an incomplete list of events held at the hill.[1][2][3]

text:
United States National Ski Jumping Championship held in 1958.
United States National Ski Jumping Championship held in 1960.
United States National Ski Jumping Championship held in 1966.
FIS Ski Jumping World Cup held February 16, 17, 18. and 19, 1996.
FIS Ski Jumping World Cup held February 25, 26, and 27, 2000.
FIS Continental Cup held February 16, 17, and 18, 2001.
FIS Continental Cup held February 22, 23, and 24, 2002.
FIS Continental Cup held January 20, 21, and 22, 2004.
FIS Continental Cup held February 25, 26, and 27, 2005.
FIS Continental Cup held February 17, 18, and 19, 2006.
FIS Continental Cup held February 16, 17, and 18, 2007.
FIS Continental Cup held February 15, 16, and 17, 2008.
FIS Continental Cup held February 13, 14, and 15, 2009.
FIS Continental Cup held January 29, 30, and 31, 2010
FIS Continental Cup held February 11, 12, and 13, 2011.
FIS Continental Cup held February 10, 11, and 12, 2012.
FIS Continental Cup held February 8, 9, and 10, 2013.
FIS Continental Cup held February 7, 8, and 9, 2014.
FIS Continental Cup held February 20, 21, and 22, 2015.

text: Getting there[edit]

text: From US Highway 2 in town (Iron Mountain), turn west onto Kent Street just south of the Chapin Pit, and follow the signs. In about 3⁄4 mile (1.2 km), look for Upper Pine Mountain Road which winds up to the hilltop. There is no charge. The view from the observation deck at the top of the jump is about 30 miles (48 km).[4]


document_title: Brickleberry

question_text: who is the actor that played ethel in brickleberry

text: Brickleberry

text: Synopsis[edit]

text: The series follows a group of park rangers as they work through their daily lives in the fictional Brickleberry National Park near Hazlehurst in the Driftless Region of Illinois.

text: Characters[edit]

text: Main characters[edit]

text:
Steve Williams (voiced by David Herman) – Steve is an overconfident, bumbling park ranger who takes himself and his job way too seriously. Even though he has been "Ranger of the Month" at Brickleberry for several years, he does not appear to display good skills or even common sense. Steve's "Ranger of the Month" title means everything to him and he will do anything to keep it. Despite his extreme lack of intelligence, he knows the Brickleberry park very well because his father was also a Brickleberry ranger, so Steve was raised in the park. He dreamed of working at Brickleberry since he was a child in order to follow in his father's footsteps. He is shown to have a man crush on Viggo Mortensen.
Woodrow "Woody" Johnson (voiced by Tom Kenny) – Woody is a 55-year-old, abrasive ranger with a military background. In the "Crippleberry" episode, he mentions to Steve that he is technically a war criminal. He worked his way up to head ranger over his 30-year career at Brickleberry. He worked alongside Steve's father, but never searched for him when Jonah went missing. He always has the park's best interest in mind and struggles to boost the dwindling tourism numbers by any means. In "2 Weeks Notice", he accidentally confesses to Malloy that when his mother died, his father forced him to dress up in her lingerie, implying that he may have been sexually abused by his father. It is also revealed in season 2 that Woody was a former porn star named Rex Erection.
Ethel Anderson (voiced by Kaitlin Olson in season 1, Natasha Leggero in season 2 and 3) – Ethel is an attractive, 25-year-old female ranger. She was the top ranger at Yellowstone and was transferred to Brickleberry in an effort to get the park back on track (and because she was fired from Yellowstone for being drunk on the job). She is passionate for animals and nature and does her best to treat her co-workers kindly. Steve sees Ethel as a threat to his Ranger of the Month title, while Ethel sees Steve as a bumbling idiot. Ethel possesses extraordinary ranger skills, but is much more humble than Steve.
Denzel Jackson (voiced by Jerry Minor) – Denzel is a black ranger who is horrible at his job, but can't be fired because he works for a government agency. Denzel is a gerontophile, which occasionally gets him into hot water. Denzel finds his job challenging because he's afraid of bugs, snakes, and pretty much anything else that inhabits the woods. It was revealed in the first season that his father and father's father and grandfather's father were undercover cops, but Denzel has no interest in following in their footsteps. For the rest of the series it is not mentioned again.
Connie Cunaman (voiced by Roger Black) – Connie is a lesbian female ranger who has a large body, immense strength, and a deep voice that is often mistaken for a male. In "Gay Bomb", Connie admits she is a lesbian and it is revealed to the viewers that her strength is dubbed by her as "lesbian strength". Connie is capable of lifting massive objects, such as trees, bears, and even a real bomb. She is obsessed with Ethel and was turned away by her Evangelical parents for being a homosexual. On a side note, when Connie gets excited, her vagina makes growling noises similar to that of a stomach, requiring her to talk it down like a wild animal.
Malloy (voiced by Daniel Tosh) – Malloy is the last surviving member of his species Ursus loquacious that Woody has taken in and spoiled after Steve accidentally ran over and shot his parents, telling him a tourist did it. Woody lets him play video games all day and eat junk food. Malloy is very crude, racist, sexist, has a superiority complex, and in some ways is a narcissist. He openly hates the rangers and in addition, he enjoys putting them down and messing with them on a daily basis, especially Steve.

text: Recurring characters[edit]

text:
Bobby Possumcods (voiced by Waco O'Guin) – Bobby is a redneck that lives in the park. He "loves" animals a bit too much and Malloy got a taste of this first hand in the season one premiere. O'Guin has been portraying the live action version of Possumcods for years in O'Guin and Black's underground comedy called "The DAMN! Show".
Bodean (voiced by Roger Black) – Bodean is Bobby's sidekick and best friend. He is known to speak very fast and sometimes for a long time.
Firecracker Jim (voiced by Roger Black) – A local redneck who sells illegal fireworks. He has stumps since he blew off his arms and legs a while ago, and rolls around everywhere as a result.
Dr. Kuzniak (voiced by Tom Kenny) – Brickleberry's personal doctor. He has a strange fetish of medical malpractice. He also has some shady criminal intents such as medical waste dumping and dealings with the "Chinese Black Market".
Jorge (voiced by David Herman) – A foreign man who owns the local strip club. He seems to be very clueless and gullible.

text: Production[edit]

text: The series' creators, Waco O'Guin and Roger Black, met at the University of Georgia in 1999. The series' origin came from O'Guin's father-in-law, a retired park ranger who took his job very seriously. He and Black found his seriousness hilarious, and began first envisioning the show in 2003.[3] The two began pitching Brickleberry as a live-action program after the cancellation of their sketch comedy show Stankervision on MTV2. It was adapted for animation because of budget concerns. Fox Broadcasting Company ordered a pilot episode in 2007, but passed on the series, finding it too offensive.[3] The duo's agent at William Morris Agency connected them with comedian Daniel Tosh, then growing in popularity due to his Comedy Central series Tosh.0. Tosh had been looking for other projects outside of his program and put his support behind the show, which they pitched to Comedy Central. The network wanted them to develop another pilot pitch, which they refused, taking it to Adult Swim, who were prepared to order 10 episodes of the comedy.[3] Comedy Central then relented and purchased the show, ordering a 10-episode first season in 2011.[4]

text: In commenting on the series' humor, O'Guin felt that all targets are "fair game": "If you're clever and don't just try to shock for shock sake, you can make most anything funny."[3] Anticipating concerns that the show would be too similar to Family Guy, the show's writing imposed a rule of fewer pop culture references, in order to differentiate the two.[3]

text: Episodes[edit]

text:
Season
Episodes
Originally aired

First aired
Last aired

1
10
September 25, 2012 (2012-09-25)
December 4, 2012 (2012-12-04)

2
13
September 3, 2013 (2013-09-03)
November 26, 2013 (2013-11-26)

3
13
September 16, 2014 (2014-09-16)
April 14, 2015 (2015-04-14)

text: Comic[edit]

text: In 2016, a 4-issue comic miniseries, published by Dynamite Entertainment, was released, written by co-creators, Waco O'Guin and Roger Black and illustrated by Timothy Hopkins. The comic featured the storyline, "ArMOOgeddon", which takes place in the future, with Steve as the last remaining park ranger after an Alien Cow invasion, but, with the help of Dr. Kuzniak, he travels back in time to 2015 to kill Woody, whose actions led to the invasion and the destruction of all humanity. The Bovine Overlord though sends Bobby back in time to thwart Future Steve's plans, but Malloy teams up with Future Steve to help him kill Woody. When his plan fails, Future Steve returns to the future to rally the remaining park rangers to overthrow the Bovine Overlord.

text: Reception[edit]

text: Ratings[edit]

text: The series followed the Tosh.0 fall seasons on Tuesday nights. In its first season, the series averaged 1.9 total million viewers each week, doing particularly well with male demographics, ages 18–24.[5] In its second season, the show averaged 1.6 million viewers, and was number one in all of television in its time slot with men, ages 18–24.[6] The series' third season saw ratings fall to 1.2 million viewers per episode, while remaining strong with younger demographics.[7]

text: Critical reviews[edit]

text: The show arrived to mixed reviews from critics.

text: Dylan P. Gadino of Laugh Spin called Brickleberry "fast-paced and hilarious."[8]

text: Ray Rahman of Entertainment Weekly said the show "tends to rise above your average adult-animation fare."[9]

text:
Brickleberry raises the offensive comedy stakes so high that it leaves a viewer waiting in expectation for the next tasteless joke. Because the show can't sustain such jokes constantly, there's a lot of down time between the outrageous. During these valleys, Brickleberry grows dull.
“
”

Rob Owen, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette[10]

tag: div

text: However, some found the show more offensive than humorous. Dennis Perkins of The A.V. Club commented that "Brickleberry hails from the 'deliberately provocative' school of comedy, where obviously offensive things are tossed out for shock value and if you don't laugh, you're a tight-ass who doesn't get the other levels to the jokes."[11] Ross Bonaime of Paste gave the show a 0.5 out 10, writing that "Brickleberry is poorly constructed, horribly executed and groan-worthy rather than funny in any way. It's a show that's actually painful to watch, because it keeps finding new depths of tasteless jokes without any punchline that are worse than the ones that preceded them."[12]

text: Many reviewers compared the show unfavorably to Family Guy and South Park. Brian Lowry of Variety lamented the show's eagerness to offend:

text: Yes, South Park has long since established animation is a fine place to skewer sacred cows, but Brickleberry has nothing more on its mind than seeing how far it can push the boundaries of dick and handicapped jokes. As a consequence, the premise (a second-rate national park) is purely incidental.[13]

text: IGN's Jesse Schedeen felt the show did not live up to Comedy Central's past animated efforts, deeming it "a slap to the face of that legacy [... In South Park], there's always an underlying sense of humanity to offset the humor. Brickleberry lacks that."[14] The series creators acknowledged the influence, saying: "Family Guy and South Park paved the way for us."[3]