There are hundreds of different styles of Chinese martial arts, each with their own sets of techniques and ideas. The various movements in kung fu, most of which are imitations of the fighting styles of animals, are initiated from one to five basic foot positions: normal upright posture and the four stances called dragon, frog, horse riding, and snake.
The concept of martial arts styles appeared from around the Ming dynasty (13681644).  Before the Ming period, martial skills were commonly differentiated mainly by their lineage. There are common themes among these styles which allow them to be grouped according to generalized "families" (), "fractions" (), "class" (), or "schools" () of martial art styles. There are styles that mimic movements from animals, or otherwise refer or allude to animals or mythical beings such as dragons, and others that gather inspiration from various Chinese philosophies or mythologies. Some deeply internal styles tend to focus strongly on practice relating to harnessing of qi energy, while some more-conspicuously external styles tend more to display skills and abilities in competition or exhibition.

The rich variety of styles has led to the creation of numerous classification schemes.
Geographical location such as regional affiliation is one well-known example.
A particular Chinese martial arts style can be referred to as either a northern fist () or a southern fist () depending on its point of origin. Additional details such as province or city can further identify the particular style. Other classification schemes include the concept of external () and internal. This criterion concerns the training focus of a particular style. Religious affiliation of the group that found the style can also be used as a classification. The three great religions of Taoism, Buddhism and Confucianism have associated martial arts styles. There are also many other criteria used to group Chinese martial arts; for example, imitative-styles () and legendary styles; historical styles and family styles. Another more recent approach is to describe a style according to their combat focus.

Geographical classifications
The traditional dividing line between the northern and southern Chinese martial arts is the Yangtze River. A well-known adage concerning Chinese martial arts is the term "Southern fists and Northern kicks" (「南拳北腿」). This saying emphasizes the difference between the two groups of Chinese martial arts. However, such differences are not absolute and there are many Northern styles that excel in hand techniques and conversely, there are many different types of kicks in some Southern styles. A style can also be more clearly classified according to regional landmarks, province, city and even to a specific village.

Northern styles

Northern styles () feature deeply extended postures—such as the horse, bow, drop, and dragon stances—connected by quick fluid transitions, able to quickly change the direction in which force is issued.

The group of Northern martial arts includes many illustrious styles such as Northern Shaolin Kung Fu, Baguazhang, Bajiquan, Chaquan, Chuojiao, Eagle Claw, Northern Praying Mantis and tai chi. Changquan is often identified as the representative Northern style and forms a separate division in modern Wushu curriculum.

Northern styles exhibit a distinctively different flavor from the martial arts practiced in the South. In general, the training characteristics of northern styles put more focus on legwork, kicking and acrobatics. The influence of Northern styles can be found in traditional Korean martial arts and their emphasis on high-level kicks.

Southern styles

Southern Chinese martial arts () feature low stable stances and short powerful movements that combine both attack and defense. In practice, Nanquan focus more on the use of the arm and full body techniques than high kicks or acrobatics moves.
The influence of Southern styles can be found in Goju Ryu, Uechi Ryu, and some other styles of karate from Okinawa and also in kempo both American and Japanese styles.

The term Southern styles typically applies to the five family styles of Southern China: Choy Gar, Hung Ga, Lau Gar (), Ng Ying kung fu (), Li (Lee) Family and  Mok Gar. Other styles include: Choy Li Fut, Fujian White Crane, Dog-style kung fu, Five Ancestors, Wing Chun, Southern Praying Mantis, Hak Fu Mun, Bak Mei and Dragon-style. There are sub-divisions to Southern styles due to their similar characteristics and common heritage. For example, the Fujian martial arts can be considered to be one such sub-division. This groups share the following characteristics that "during fights, pugilists of these systems prefer short steps and close fighting, with their arms placed close to the chest, their elbows lowered and kept close to the flanks to offer them protection". Nanquan became a separate and distinct component of the current Wushu training. It was designed to incorporate the key elements of each major Southern style.

Other geographical classifications
Chinese martial arts can also be identified by the regional landmarks, province, city or even village. Generally, this identification indicates the region of origin but could also describe the place where the style has established a reputation. Well-known landmarks used to characterize Chinese martial arts include the famous mountains of China. The Eight Great Schools of Martial Arts, a grouping of martial arts schools used in many wuxia novels, is based on this type of geographical classifications. This group of schools includes: Mount Hua, Mount Emei, Wudang Mountains, Kongtong Mountains, Kunlun Mountains, Cang Mountain, Mount Qingcheng and Mount Song Shaolin. Historically, there were 18 provinces in China. Each province has its own styles of martial arts. For example, in Xingyiquan, there are currently three main branches: Shanxi, Hebei and Henan. Each branch has unique characteristics but they can all be traced to the original art developed by Li Luoneng and the Dai family. A particular style can also be identified by the city where the art was practised. For example, in the North, the cities of Beijing or Tianjin have created different martial arts branches for many styles. Similarly, in the South, the cities of Shanghai, Quandong and Foshan all represented centers of martial arts development. Older martial art styles can be described by their village affiliation. For example, Zhaobao tai chi is a branch of Chen-style tai chi originating from Zhaobao village.

External and internal classifications
The distinction between external and internal (外内) martial arts comes from Huang Zongxi's 1669 Epitaph for Wang Zhengnan.
Stanley Henning proposes that the Epitaph'''s identification of the internal martial arts with the Taoism indigenous to China and its identification of the external martial arts with the foreign Buddhism of Shaolin—and the Manchu Qing Dynasty to which Huang Zongxi was opposed—may have been an act of political defiance rather than one of technical classification.
Kennedy and Guo suggests that external and internal classifications only became popular during the Republican period. It was used to differentiate between two competing groups within The Central Guoshu Academy.
Regardless of the origin of this classification scheme, the distinction becomes less meaningful since all complete Chinese martial art styles have external and internal components. This classification scheme is only a reminder of the initial emphasis of a particular style and should not be considered an absolute division.

External styles
External style () are often associated with Chinese martial arts. They are characterized by fast and explosive movements and a focus on physical strength and agility. External styles includes both the traditional styles focusing on application and fighting, as well as the modern styles adapted for competition and exercise. Examples of external styles are Shaolinquan, with its direct explosive attacks and many Wushu forms that have spectacular aerial techniques.
External styles begin with a training focus on muscular power, speed and application, and generally integrate their qigong aspects in advanced training, after their desired "hard" physical level has been reached. Most Chinese martial art styles are classified as external styles.

Internal styles

Internal styles () focus on the practice of such elements as awareness of the spirit, mind, qi (breath, or energy flow) and the use of relaxed leverage rather than muscular tension, which soft stylists call "brute force".
While the principles that distinguish internal styles from the external were described at least as early as the 18th century by Chang Nai-chou, the modern terms distinguishing external and internal styles were first recorded by Sun Lutang; who wrote that tai chi, Baguazhang, and Xingyiquan were internal arts. Later on, others began to include their style under this definition; for example, Liuhebafa, Ziranmen, and Yiquan.

Components of internal training includes stance training (zhan zhuang''), stretching and strengthening of muscles, as well as on empty hand and weapon forms which can contain quite demanding coordination from posture to posture. Many internal styles have basic two-person training, such as pushing hands. A prominent characteristic of internal styles is that the forms are generally performed at a slow pace. This is thought to improve coordination and balance by increasing the work load, and to require the student to pay minute attention to their whole body and its weight as they perform a technique. In some styles, for example in the Chen style of tai chi, there are forms that include sudden outbursts of explosive movements. At an advanced level, and in actual fighting, internal styles are performed quickly, but the goal is to learn to involve the entire body in every motion, to stay relaxed, with deep, controlled breathing, and to coordinate the motions of the body and the breathing accurately according to the dictates of the forms while maintaining perfect balance. Internal styles have been associated in legend and in much popular fiction with the Taoist monasteries of Wudangshan in central China.

Religious classifications
Chinese martial arts being an important component of Chinese culture are also influence by the various religions in China. Many styles were founded by groups that were influenced by one of the three great philosophical influences of Buddhism, Taoism and Confucianism.

Buddhist styles
Buddhist styles include Chinese martial arts that originated or practised within Chinese Buddhist temples and later spread to laity community. These styles often include Buddhist philosophy, meditation, imagery and principles. The most famous of these are the Shaolin (and related) styles, e.g. Shaolinquan, Choy Li Fut, Fut Gar, Luohanquan, Hung Gar, Wing Chun, Dragon style and White Crane. and recently a contemporary style called wuxingheqidao. One common theme for this group is the association with Chan Buddhism.

Shaolin kung fu

The term "Shaolin" is used to refer to those styles that trace their origins to Shaolin, be it the Shaolin Monastery in Henan Province, another temple associated with Shaolin such as the Southern Shaolin Temple in Fujian Province, or even wandering Shaolin monks. More restrictive definitions include only those styles that were conceived on temple grounds or even just the original Henan temple proper. The broadest definition includes just about all external Chinese martial arts, though this has much to do with the attractiveness of the Shaolin "brand name".

Taoist styles
Taoist styles are popularly associated with Taoism.   They include Chinese martial arts that were created or trained mostly within Taoist Temples or by Taoist ascetics, which often later spread out to laymen. These styles include those trained in the Wudang Mountains, and often include Taoist philosophy, principles and imagery. Some of these arts include Tai chi, Wudangquan, Baguazhang, Bajiquan, Liuhebafa and Bak Mei kung fu.

Islamic styles

Islamic styles are those that were practiced traditionally solely or mainly by the Muslim Hui minority in China. These styles often include Islamic principles or imagery. Example of these styles include: Chaquan, Tan Tui, some branches of Xingyiquan and  ().

Historical classifications

Imitative-styles
Imitative-styles are styles that were developed based on the characteristics of a particular creature such as a bird or an insect. Entire systems of fighting were developed based on the observations of their movement, fighting abilities and spirit. Examples of the most well-known styles are white crane, tiger, monkey (Houquan), dog and mantis. In some systems, a variety of animals are used to represent the style of the system; for instance, there are twelve animals in most Xing yi practice.

Legendary and historical styles
Many Chinese martial arts styles are based or named after legends or historical figures. Examples of such styles based on legends and myths are the Eight Immortals and Dragon styles. Example of styles attributed to historical figures include Xingyiquan and its relationship to Yue Fei and tai chi which trace its origins to a Taoist Zhang Sanfeng.

Family styles
Family affiliations are also an important means of identifying a Chinese martial arts system. Heavily influenced by the Confucian tradition, many styles are named in honor of the founder of the system. The five family (Choi, Hung, Lau, Lei, Mok) of Southern Chinese martial arts are representative of family styles. Family styles can also denote branches of a system. For example, the families of Chen, Yang, Wu and Sun represent different training approaches to the art of Tai Chi Chuan.

By main style of application/attack

Another popular method to describe a particular style of Chinese martial arts is to describe the style's emphasis in terms of the four major applications. The four major applications are: kicking (踢), hitting (打), wrestling (摔) and grabbing (Chin na). A complete system will necessary include all four types of applications but each style will differ in their training focus. For example, most Northern styles are said to emphasize kicking, Southern styles have a reputation for their intricate hand techniques, Shuai jiao practitioners train predominately in full-body close-range techniques, Eagle claw fighters are noted for their grabbing expertise, and Wing Chun focusses on hitting (with the hands/elbows).

Other styles
The variety of classification schemes, like the subject of Chinese martial arts, are endless. Some styles are named after well-known Chinese philosophies. For example, Baguazhang is based on the Taoist philosophy of the eight trigrams (Bagua). Some styles are named after the key insight suggested by the training. For example, liuhebafa is a system based on the ideas of six combinations and eight methods.

See also

Boxing styles and technique
Comparison of karate styles
Comparison of kobudō styles
Hybrid martial arts
Styles of Japanese martial arts
Styles of wrestling

References

Styles of
Style

Styles of Chinese martial arts


A peptic ulcer is an ulcer of the stomach or duodenum. The duodenum is the first part of the small intestines. It is the tube that food goes through when it leaves the stomach. Peptic means talking about the stomach.

Gastric ulcers are peptic ulcers in the stomach.

Duodenal ulcers are peptic ulcers in the duodenum.

Causes of peptic ulcers

Most ulcers are caused by an infection from bacteria. This bacteria is called Helicobacter pylori. 90% of gastric ulcers and 75% of duodenal ulcers are from Helicobacter pylori infection.

Other things can make ulcers worse. But these things are less important than Helicobacter pylori. These other things are:

 Taking some drugs called NSAIDs (acronym means Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug) – These are medicines used for pain and inflammation, such as aspirin, ibuprofen, and naproxen.
 Smoking cigarettes
 Old age
 Stress from diseases or injuries like pneumonia and burns
 If someone in a family has a duodenal ulcer

Symptoms of peptic ulcers
A symptom is a change in the body that tells someone that they have a disease. The biggest symptom is pain in the stomach. Pain is usually in the top of the abdomen below the ribs. Some people also feel pain go up to the chest.

Other symptoms are:
 Vomiting
 Blood in vomit – this can be red. This can also look like coffee grounds (the black substance that is left after making coffee.)
 Black stools
 Waves of Pain or Burning

Diagnosis of peptic ulcers
Diagnosing is how doctors see if someone has a disease. They do this by running tests. Peptic ulcers are diagnosed by three ways:

 Endoscopy – looking inside someones stomach with a camera that goes through their mouth and down to their stomach
 Test on the air someone breathes out to look for Helicobacter pylori infection
 Blood test to look for Helicobacter pylori infection

The best way is endoscopy. But this costs more money. Endoscopy is done by a medical specialist called a gastroenterologist (a doctor who knows much about the digestive system.)

A good thing about endoscopy is finding other diseases if there is no peptic ulcer. The symptoms of peptic ulcer can be from other diseases. Endoscopy can diagnose these other diseases.

Treatment of peptic ulcers
The most important treatment is to stop the Helicobacter pylori infection. This is usually done with antibiotics and can now also be done through the use of natural products.

Antibiotics are medicines that kill germs like bacteria. Usually three different antibiotics are used, and because the Helicobacter pylori bacteria is so resistant, successful treatment is not guaranteed. The number of people turning to natural remedies is increasing. Natural remedies have none of the side effects common to antibiotic treatment.

It is also important to make less acid in the stomach. There are two types of medicines that Doctors normally prescribe to stop the acid. These are called antacids:
 PPI (acronym) proton pump inhibitors
 H2-Blockers – block the Histamine-2 receptor
Both of these medicines make the cells in the stomach stop making acid. There is a problem in unnaturally stopping the production of acid, because acid is vital to ensure proper digestion of foods. When a patient stops taking antacids, the stomach naturally starts producing acid again and usually more than normal because the antacids had unnaturally stopped this process. The result is that there is now too much acid, the whole problem starts again. It is considered better and safer to control acid levels by consuming water and by eliminating foods that may cause excessive acid.

To stop peptic ulcers people must use antacids and antibiotics, or a natural product. The strategy is to kill off the Helicobacter pylori. Controlling the acid levels let the open ulcers in the stomach lining heal quicker.

Once the Helicobacter pylori infection is removed, the ulcer should heal. It can come back if the person is reinfected with Helicobacter pylori again.

Diseases and disorders of the digestive system

Peptic ulcer


Cardboard is a heavy type of paper, notable for its stiffness and durability. It was first invented in China some time in the 15th century, and is used for a wide variety of purposes. One of its more common uses is as a packaging material.

Cardboard boxes were first produced commercially in 1817 in England. Corrugated (also called pleated) paper was patented in England in 1856, used as a liner for tall hats, but corrugated cardboard would not be patented and used as a shipping material until 20 December 1871. The patent was issued to Albert Jones of New York City, New York for single-sided corrugated cardboard. Jones used the corrugated cardboard for wrapping bottles and glass lantern chimneys. The first machine for producing large quantities of corrugated cardboard was built in 1874 by G. Smyth, and in the same year Oliver Long improved upon Jones' design by inventing corrugated cardboard with liner sheets on both sides. This was now cardboard as we know it today.

American Robert Gair was a Brooklyn printer and paper-bag maker during the 1870s, and while he was printing an order of seed bags a metal ruler normally used to crease bags shifted in position and cut the bag. Gair discovered that by cutting and creasing cardboard in one operation he could make prefabricated cartons. Extending this to corrugated cardboard was a straightforward development when the material became available. By the start of the 20th century, corrugated cardboard boxes began replacing the custom-made wooden crates and boxes previously used for trade.

The Kellogg brothers first used cardboard cartons to hold their flaked corn cereal, and later when they began marketing it to the general public a heat-sealed waxed bag of Waxtite was wrapped around the outside of the box and printed with their brand name. This marked the origin of the cereal box, though in modern times the sealed bag is plastic and is kept inside the box rather than outside.

Cardboard packaging has undergone minor changes in recent times due to the trend towards environmentalism. It is now common for cardboard to be manufactured with a large percentage of recycled fibers.

Paper

Cardboard


Hwang Woo-suk (, born January 29, 1953) is a South Korean veterinarian and researcher. He was a professor of theriogenology and biotechnology at Seoul National University until he was dismissed on March 20, 2006. He was considered a pioneering expert in stem cell research and even called the "Pride of Korea". However, he became infamous around November 2005 for fabricating a series of stem cell experiments that were published in high-profile journals, the case known as the Hwang affair.

Hwang was best known for two articles published in the journal Science in 2004 and 2005, where he reported he had succeeded in creating human embryonic stem cells by cloning. However, soon after the first paper was released, an article in the journal Nature charged Hwang with having committed ethical violations by using eggs from his graduate students and from the black market. Although he denied the charges at first, Hwang admitted the allegations were true in November 2005. Shortly after this, data from his human cloning experiments was revealed to have been falsified.

On May 12, 2006, Hwang was charged with embezzlement and bioethics law violations after it emerged much of his stem cell research had been faked. The Korea Times reported on June 10, 2007, that Seoul National University fired him, and the South Korean government canceled his financial support and barred him from engaging in stem cell research. Hwang was sentenced to a two years suspended prison sentence at the Seoul Central District Court on 26 October 2009, after being found guilty of embezzlement and bioethical violations but cleared of fraud. On the same day, CNN reported that the scientist in 2006 had admitted faking his findings, after questions of impropriety had emerged. He had his conviction upheld but his suspended sentence reduced by 6 months on 15 December 2010 by an appeals court in South Korea. In 2014, the South Korean Supreme Court upheld its 2010 ruling.

Since the controversy, Hwang has maintained a relatively low profile, but continues to work in scientific fields. As of September 2020, he worked at the Sooam Bioengineering Research Institute in Yongin, Gyeonggi Province, leading research efforts into creating cloned pig embryos and embryonic stem cell lines. In February 2011, Hwang visited Libya as part of a US$133 million project in the North African country to build a stem cell research center and transfer relevant technology. The project was canceled due to the 2011 Libyan civil war. In November 2015, a Chinese biotech company Boyalife Group announced that it would partner with Hwang's laboratory, Sooam Biotech, to open the world's largest animal cloning factory in Tianjin. The factory would aim to produce up to one million cattle embryos per year to meet the increasing demand for quality beef in China.

Timeline
Hwang first caught media attention in South Korea when he announced he had successfully created a cloned dairy cow, Yeongrong-i in February 1999. His alleged success was touted as the fifth instance in the world in cow cloning, with a notable caveat: Hwang failed to provide scientifically verifiable data for the research, giving only media sessions and photo ops. Hwang's next claim came in April 1999, when he announced the cloning of a Korean cow, Jin-i, also without providing any scientifically verifiable data. Despite the notable absence of any of the scientific data needed to probe the validity of the research, Hwang's several claims were well-received by the South Korean media and public, who were attracted by Hwang's claim of immeasurable economic prospect that his research was said to be promising. The claims of his research results resulted in him being awarded the Scientist of the Year Award by the Korea Science Journalists Association. Until 2004, Hwang's main area of research remained in creating genetically modified livestock that included cows and pigs. During that period, Hwang claimed to have created a BSE-resistant cow (which has not been verified), and also stated his intention to clone a Siberian tiger.

In February 2004, Hwang and his team announced that they had successfully created an embryonic stem cell by the somatic cell nuclear transfer method, and published their paper in the March 12 issue of Science. Although Hwang had already established himself as an expert in animal cloning and secured celebrity status in South Korea in the late 1990s, his alleged sudden success came as a surprise because this was the first reported success in human somatic cell cloning. Until Hwang's claim, it was generally agreed that creating a human stem cell by cloning was next to impossible due to the complexity of primates. Hwang explained that his team used 242 eggs to create a single cell line.

In May, Nature journal published an article stating that Hwang had used eggs taken from two of his graduate students, based on an interview with one of the students. The article raised the question of whether the students might have been pressured to give eggs and thus whether such a donation would have been "voluntary" as Hwang claimed in his scientific paper. At that time, Hwang denied that he had used his students' eggs.

Hwang's team announced an even greater achievement a year later in May 2005, and claimed they had created 11 human embryonic stem cells using 185 eggs. His work, published in the June 17 issue of Science, was instantly hailed as a breakthrough in biotechnology because the cells were allegedly created with somatic cells from patients of different age and gender, while the stem cell of 2004 was created with eggs and somatic cells from a single female donor. This meant every patient could receive custom-made treatment with no immune reactions. In addition, Hwang's claim meant that his team had boosted their success rate by 14 times and that this technology could be medically viable.

Hwang made further headlines in May 2005 when he criticized U.S. President George W. Bush's policy on embryonic stem cell research. Also, Time magazine named Hwang one of its "People Who Mattered 2004", stating that Hwang "has already proved that human cloning is no longer science fiction, but a fact of life."

Following on the earlier success, on August 3, 2005, Hwang announced that his team of researchers had become the first team to successfully clone a dog, which was independently verified through genetic testing. The dog, an Afghan Hound, was named Snuppy.

Shortly after his groundbreaking 2005 work, Hwang was appointed to head the new World Stem Cell Hub, a facility that was to be the world's leading stem cell research center. However, in November 2005, Gerald Schatten, a University of Pittsburgh researcher who had worked with Hwang for two years, made the surprise announcement that he had ceased his collaboration with Hwang. In an interview, Schatten commented that "my decision is grounded solely on concerns regarding oocyte (egg) donations in Hwang's research reported in 2004." Following an intense media probe, Roh Sung-il, one of Hwang's close collaborators and head of MizMedi Women's Hospital, held a news conference on November 21. During the conference, Roh admitted that he had paid women US$1,400 each for donating their eggs which were later used in Hwang's research. Roh claimed Hwang was unaware of this, while the South Korean Ministry of Health asserted that no laws or ethical guidelines had been breached as there were no commercial interests involved. Hwang maintained that he was unaware that this had happened, and resigned from his post.

On November 22, PD Su-cheop (Producer's Note), a popular MBC investigative reporting show, raised the possibility of unethical conduct  in the egg cell-acquiring process. Despite the factual accuracy of the report, news media as well as people caught up in nationalistic fervor in their unwavering support for Hwang asserted that criticism of Hwang's work was "unpatriotic", so much so that the major companies who were sponsoring the show immediately withdrew their support.

On November 24, Hwang held a press conference in Seoul, in which he declared his intention of resigning from most of his official posts. He also apologized for his actions and said, "I was blinded by work and my drive for achievement." He denied coercing his researchers into donating eggs and claimed that he found out about the situation only after it had occurred. He added that he had lied about the source of the eggs donated to protect the privacy of his female researchers, and that he was not aware of the Declaration of Helsinki, which clearly enumerates his actions as a breach of ethical conduct. After the press conference, which was aired on all major South Korean television networks, many of the nation's media outlets, government ministries, and members of the public expressed sympathy for Hwang.

On December 29, 2005, the university determined that all 11 of Hwang's stem cell lines were fabricated. The university announced on January 10, 2006, that Hwang's 2004 and 2005 papers in Science were both fabricated. Following on the confirmation of scientific misconduct, on January 11, Science unconditionally retracted both of Hwang's papers.

On January 12, 2006, Hwang held a press conference to apologize for the fiasco, but did not admit to cheating. Instead, he blamed other members of his research project for having deceived him with false data and alleged a conspiracy, saying that his projects had been sabotaged and that there was theft of materials involved. He said that cloning human stem cells was possible and that he had the technology to do it, and if he were given six more months he could prove it. This is an extension of the ten days he said he needed to re-create the stem cells that he asked for back on December 16, 2005. Seoul prosecutors started a criminal investigation and raided Hwang's home that day.

On January 20, 2006, Hwang maintained that two of his 11 forged stem cell lines had been maliciously switched for cells from regular, not cloned, embryos. The allegation involves the lines Hwang claims to have created at Seoul-based MizMedi Hospital.

On November 22, 2016, Hwang received a certificate of patent on NT-1 technology from the Korean Intellectual Property Office.

Hwang's laboratory technique

In the late 1990s, the method that scientists used in cloning was somatic cell nuclear transfer, which is the same procedure that was used to create Dolly the sheep. This laboratory technique begins when an egg is taken from a donor and the nucleus is removed from the egg, creating an enucleated egg. A cell, which contains DNA, is then taken from the animal being cloned. The enucleated egg is then fused together with the nucleus of the cloning subject's cell using electricity. This creates an embryo, which is implanted into a surrogate mother through in vitro fertilization. If the procedure is successful, then the surrogate mother will give birth to a baby that is a clone of the cloning subject at the end of a normal gestation period. In 2014 researchers were reporting cloning success rates of seven to eight out of ten but in 1996 it took 277 attempts to create Dolly.

Hwang allegedly used this technique at his laboratory in SNU to clone dogs during his experiments throughout the early 2000s. He claimed that it was possible to clone mammals and that probability for success can be better than 1 in 277 attempts (as in similar cases such as Dolly). Hwang was the first in the world to clone a dog, an Afghan hound called Snuppy in 2005.  He described his procedure for cloning in the journal  Nature. Researchers from the Seoul National University and the US National Institutes of Health confirmed that Snuppy was a clone.  Since then Hwang and his associates have cloned many more dogs. In 2015, it was reported that Huang Woo-suk's company Sooam Biotech had produced 700 cloned puppies since 2005, with their owners paying about $100,000 each to have their dogs cloned.

Hwang's intention to develop better technique for cloning was focused on stem cells because they are still at an early stage of development and retain the potential to turn into many different types of cell and when they divide, each new cell has the potential to either remain a stem cell or become another type of cell with a more specialized function.

According to stem cell biologists, it might be possible to harness this ability to turn stem cells into a super "repair kit" for the body, theoretically to use stem cells to generate healthy tissue to replace that either damaged by trauma or compromised by disease.
The many conditions and illnesses that may eventually be treated by stem cell therapy include Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, heart disease, stroke, arthritis, diabetes, burns, and spinal cord damage.

In March 2012, it was announced that Hwang would collaborate with Russian scientists in an attempt to clone a woolly mammoth from remains found in Siberia. He had previously successful cloned eight coyotes in March 2011 using domestic dogs and grey wolves as surrogate mothers. However no mammoth sample fit for cloning had been found as of 2015.

In 2015, the Chinese company BoyaLife announced that in partnership with the Hwang Woo-suk's company Sooam Biotech, they were planning to build a 200 million RMB (about US$32 million) factory in Tianjin, China to produce 100,000 cloned cattle per year to supply China's growing market for quality beef, starting in 2016.

In 2015, Sooam Biotech cloned a male boxer puppy from a pet dog that had been dead for 12 days. This was the first time they had cloned a dog that had been dead for such a long time.

In 2016, Hwang's company was regularly cloning pigs which were genetically predisposed to certain diseases so that they could be used for testing pharmaceuticals, and cloning cattle which were highly valued for their meat. In total Sooam Biotech was reported to be producing roughly 500 cloned embryos a day from various species. They were also reported to be attempting to clone the Ethiopian wolf, one of the world's rarest canids, of which there are only 500 in the wild, another endangered canid, the dhole, of which there only about 2,500 adults, and the Siberian musk deer, which is classified as vulnerable by the IUCN.

Controversies

Until late November 2005, Hwang was criticized only for unpublicized ethical violations. Colleagues and media outlets asserted that he had paid female donors for egg donations and that he had received donations from two junior researchers, both of which were violations. Later controversies centered around scientific misconduct.

His team, which cloned the first human embryo to use for research, said they had used the same technology to create batches of embryonic stem cells from nine patients. According to Hwang, the result was much more efficient than they had hoped.
Hwang's integrity as a researcher was again put in doubt when it was revealed that PD Su-cheop had scheduled a follow-up report questioning his achievement published in Science in June 2005, which stated he had cloned 11 lines of embryonic stem cells. This caused furious backlash among many South Koreans, and the reaction only intensified when it was discovered that Kim Sun-Jong, one of Hwang's researchers from MizMedi, had been coerced by illegal means to testify against Hwang. As a result, the scheduled broadcast was canceled and the network made a public apology to the nation, everyone more or less operating under the assumption that the show was at fault and not Hwang. Yet, other news outlets began to question Hwang's claims.

Close scrutiny revealed that several of the photos of purportedly different cells were in fact photos of the same cell. Hwang responded that these additional photos were accidentally included and that there was no such duplication in the original submission to Science. This was later confirmed by the journal.

Researchers raised questions about striking similarities between the DNA profiles of the cloned cells. Then collaborator Gerald Schatten asked Science to remove his name from the paper, stating as a reason that there were "allegations from someone involved with the experiments that certain elements of the report may be fabricated."

In the midst of national confusion, Hwang disappeared from public sight, to be hospitalized days later for alleged stress-related fatigue, while public opinion gradually began to turn against Hwang with even the major Korean companies who had withdrawn their support from PD Su-cheop reportedly now less than pleased with Hwang. Days later, Hwang started going to his laboratory while requesting Seoul National University to officially conduct a probe to the allegations surrounding him.

The scandal took a dramatic turn on December 15, when Roh Sung-il, who had collaborated on the disputed paper, stated to media outlets that nine of those eleven lines had been faked; specifically, DNA tests illustrated that those nine lines shared identical DNA, implying that they had come from the same source. Roh stated that "Professor Hwang admitted to fabrication", and that he, Hwang, and another co-author had asked Science to withdraw the paper. Adding fuel to the fire, MBC broadcast the content of the canceled PD Su-cheop show, which substantiated Roh's claim.

On the same day, The Seattle Times reported that Science had not yet received an official request from Hwang to withdraw the paper, and it had refused to remove Schatten's name from the paper, stating, "No single author, having declared at the time of submission his full and complete confidence in the contents of the paper, can retract his name unilaterally, after publication."

Several prominent scientists, including Ian Wilmut, who cloned Dolly the sheep in 1996, and Bob Lanza, a cloning expert based in Worcester, Massachusetts, did call on Hwang to submit his paper to an outside group for independent analysis. Lanza noted, "You can't fake the results if they're carried out by an independent group. I think this simple test could put the charges to rest."

Two major press conferences were held on Korean television networks on December 16, one with Hwang, followed by one with his former colleague, Roh Sung-il. Hwang started his press conference by claiming that the technology to make stem cells existed—not an explicit denial that the stem cell lines he used in his paper to Science were fakes. He, however, acknowledged the falsifications of research data in the paper, attributing them to unrecoverable "artificial mistakes". He said that there was a problem with the original lines caused by contamination, and if he were given ten more days he could re-create the stem cell lines. He accused Kim Sun-Jong, a former collaborator, of "switching" some of the stem cell lines.

Despite Hwang's claim, in another press conference held only minutes later, Roh Sung-il rebutted Hwang's accusation, saying Hwang was blackmailing MizMedi and Kim Sun-jong. He maintained that at least nine of the eleven stem cell lines were fakes and that Hwang was simply untrustworthy.

"Roh Sung-il, chairman of the board at Mizmedi Hospital, told KBS television that Hwang had agreed to ask the journal Science to withdraw the paper, published in June to international acclaim. Roh was one of the co-authors of the article that detailed how individual stem cell colonies were created for 11 patients through cloning. Roh also told MBC television that Hwang had pressured a former scientist at his lab to fake data to make it look like there were 11 stem cell colonies. In a separate report, a former researcher told MBC that Hwang ordered him to fabricate photos to make it appear there were 11 separate colonies from only three. [...] University of Pittsburgh researcher Gerald Schatten has already asked that Science remove him as the senior author of the report, citing questions about the paper's accuracy. Seoul National University announced this week it would conduct an internal probe into Hwang's research."

Some scientists have started questioning Hwang's earlier work published in Science in February 2004, in which he claimed to have cloned embryonic stem cells. Maria Biotech head Park Se-pill said, "Up until now, I have believed Hwang did derive cloned embryonic stem cells although he admitted to misconduct in his follow-up paper on patient-specific stem cells...Now, I am not sure whether the cloned stem cell really existed."

On July 26, 2006, Hwang said in testimony that he spent part of 500 million won in private donations in attempts to clone extinct Russian mammoths and Korean tigers.

Official probe and confirmation of fraud
An internal panel was set up in Seoul National University to investigate the allegation, and the probe was started on December 17, 2005. The panel sealed off Hwang's laboratory and conducted a thorough investigation, collecting testimonies from Hwang, Roh and other people who were involved with the scandal. On December 23, the panel announced its initial finding that Hwang had intentionally fabricated stem cell research results creating nine fake cell lines out of eleven, and added that the validity of two remaining cell lines is yet to be confirmed. The panel stated that Hwang's misconduct is "a grave act damaging the foundation of science." Hwang's claim of having used only 185 eggs to create stem cell lines was also denied by the panel, which indicated that more eggs may have been used in the research process.

The panel announced additional findings on December 29, and confirmed that no patient-matched embryonic stem cells existed, and that Hwang's team did not have the scientific data to prove any of the stem cells had ever been made.

In its final report published on January 10, 2006, the panel reaffirmed its previous findings while announcing additional discoveries. The panel found out that, contrary to Hwang's claim of having used 185 eggs for his team's 2005 paper, at least 273 eggs were shown to have been used according to research records kept in Hwang's lab. In addition, the panel discovered that Hwang's team was supplied with 2,061 eggs in the period of November 28, 2002, to December 8, 2005. Hwang's claim of not having known about the donation of eggs by his own female researchers was also denied by the panel; in fact, it was discovered that Hwang himself had distributed egg donation consent forms to his researchers and personally escorted one to the MizMedi Hospital to perform the egg extraction procedure.

The panel stated that Hwang's 2004 Science paper was also fabricated and decided the stem cell discussed in the paper may have been generated by a case of parthenogenetic process (which is itself a significant development, as mammals rarely reproduce by parthenogenesis; in addition, this would make Hwang's lab the first ever to successfully generate human stem cells via parthenogenesis, predating other research facilities' successes). Although Hwang's team didn't rule out the possibility of parthenogenetic process in the paper, the panel said, his team didn't make any conscientious effort to probe the possibility through the tests available.

Chung Myunghee, the head of the panel, said at a news conference that the panel was not in a position to investigate Hwang's claim of his stem cells having been switched with MizMedi's, but added that such a claim was incomprehensible when there were no data to prove any of the stem cells were ever made to begin with.

The panel, in conclusion, stated that Hwang's team intentionally fabricated the data in both the 2004 and the 2005 papers, and that it was "an act of deception targeted to both scientific community and general public." However, the panel confirmed that Hwang's team had actually succeeded in cloning a dog they named Snuppy. (See also Nature 439:122-123)

Resignation and the official dismissal
On December 23, 2005, Hwang apologized for "creating a shock and a disappointment" and announced that he was resigning his position as professor at the university. However, Hwang maintained that patient-matched stem cell technology remained in South Korea, and his countrymen would see it.

Seoul National University said Hwang's resignation request would not be accepted, citing a university regulation that dictates that an employee under investigation may not resign from a post, thus avoiding full retribution and possibly dismissal if found at fault, while benefiting from an  honorable voluntary resignation.

On February 9, 2006, the university suspended Hwang's position as a professor, together with six other faculty members who participated in Hwang's team; Hwang was dismissed  on March 20, 2006.

Indictment of Hwang and collaborators
On May 12, 2006, Hwang was indicted on charges of embezzlement and breach of the country's bioethics law, without physical detention. Prosecutors also brought fraud charges against the three stem cell researchers. He embezzled 2.8 billion won (US$3 million) out of some 40 billion won in research funds, for personal purposes and the illegal purchase of ova used in his experiments.

The prosecution also said Hwang's three associates involved in his stem cell research, Yoon Hyun-soo, Lee Byeong-chun and Kang Sung-keun, also misappropriated tens of millions of won in research money. Investigators have been tracking 24.6 billion won to find out how the research money was spent. It was part of Hwang's 36.9 billion won research funds raised through state support and private donations. Investigators said Hwang used bank accounts held by relatives and subordinates in 2002 and 2003 to receive about 475 million won from private organizations. He allegedly laundered the money by withdrawing it all in cash, breaking it up into smaller amounts and putting it back in various bank accounts. Hwang also withdrew 140 million won in August 2001 to buy gifts for his sponsors, including politicians and other prominent social figures, before Chusok holidays, according to prosecutors. He also allegedly misappropriated around 26 million won in research funds in September 2004 to buy a car for his wife. Hwang is suspected of embezzling 600 million won, provided by a private foundation, on multiple occasions from 2001 to 2005 for personal use. Prosecutors are also accusing him of illegally paying some 38 million won to 25 women who provided ova for his research through Hanna Women's Clinic in the first eight months of 2005. They also said Hwang gave several dozen politicians about 55 million won in political funds on numerous occasions from 2001 to 2005. He allegedly provided 14 million won to executives of large companies that provided financial support for his research. The prosecution added Hwang wired about 200 million won to a Korean American, identified only as Kang, in September 2005 and received the equivalent amount in U.S. currency from him when the scientist visited the United States two months later. Also in 2005, Hwang received one billion won each in research funds from SK Group and the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation based on his fabricated stem cell research results. Meanwhile, investigators said Lee Byeong-chun and Kang Sung-keun, both professors of veterinary science at Seoul National University, embezzled about 300 million won and 100 million won each in state funds by inflating research-related expenses. Yoon Hyun-soo, a biology professor at Hanyang University, also embezzled 58 million won from the research fund managed by MizMedi Hospital.

Parthenogenesis

On August 2, 2007, after much independent investigation, it was revealed that Hwang's team succeeded in extracting cells from eggs that had undergone parthenogenesis. Hwang claimed he and his team had extracted stem cells from cloned human embryos. However, further examination of the cells' chromosomes shows the same indicators of parthenogenesis in those extracted stem cells as are found in the mice created by Tokyo scientists in 2004. Although Hwang deceived the world about being the first to create artificially cloned human embryos, he did contribute a major breakthrough to the field of stem cell research. The process may offer a way for creating stem cells that are genetically matched to a particular woman for the treatment of degenerative diseases.

The news of the breakthrough came just a month after an announcement from the International Stem Cell Corporation (ISC), a California-based stem cell research company, that they had successfully created the first human embryos through parthenogenesis. Although the actual results of Hwang's work were just published, those embryos were created by him and his team before February 2004, when the fabricated cloning results were announced, which would make them the first to successfully perform the process. Jeffrey Janus, president and director of research for ISC, agrees that "Dr. Hwang's cells have characteristics found in parthenogenetic cells" but remains cautious, saying "it needs more study."

Responses

Government involvement
After having acquired a celebrity status in South Korea, Hwang actively sought to establish every possible tie to political and economic institutions in the country. Hwang especially tried to win favor from the Roh Moo-hyun government, which in turn was suffering from a lack of popular support and wanted to demonstrate its competency by creating and promoting an exemplary policy success.

Hwang approached Park Ki-young, a former biology professor, then appointed as the Information, Science and Technology Advisor for the President, and put her as one of the co-authors in his 2004 Science paper. Ties with Park yielded a favorable environment for Hwang in the government, as a non-official group consisting of high-ranking government officials was created to support Hwang's research that includes not only Hwang and Park, but also Kim Byung-joon, Chief National Policy Secretary, and Jin Dae-je, Information and Communications Minister. The group was dubbed as "Hwang-kum-pak-chui", a loose acronym made from member's family names, which means "golden bat" in Korean.

After Hwang's paper was published in Science in 2005, support for Hwang came in full swing. In June 2005, the Ministry of Science and Technology selected Hwang as the first recipient of the title Supreme Scientist, an honor worth US$15 million. Hwang, having already claimed the title of POSCO Chair Professor worth US$1.5 million, secured more than US$27 million worth of support in that year.

President Roh had been acquainted with Hwang since 2003, and made a number of comments intended to protect him from potential bioethical issues. On June 18, 2004, Roh awarded Hwang a medal and said, "it is not possible nor desirable to prohibit research, just because there are concerns that it may lead to a direction that is deemed unethical." In another instance at the opening of World Stem Cell Hub on October 19, 2005, Roh remarked, "politicians have a responsibility to manage bioethical controversies, not to get in the way of this outstanding research and progress."

On December 5, 2005, after PD Su-cheop stirred a national controversy, Cheong Wa Dae reaffirmed its unflinching support for Hwang and his research team. Roh said, "We'll continue to support Professor Hwang. We hope he will return to his research lab soon for the sake of people with physical difficulties and the public", according to presidential spokesman Kim Man-soo.

While implying the controversies over MBC-TV's forceful methods used to gather information from Hwang's former junior staff members, Roh said, "The disputes will be resolved gradually and naturally through following scientific research and study. We hope the ongoing disputes over Hwang's achievement will be settled without further trouble."

It was alleged that advisor Park Ki-young deliberately avoided to report Roh about details of Hwang's allegation for misconduct, while emphasizing a breach of journalist ethics by MBC. Park, after weeks of silence for her role in the controversy, announced her intent to resign from the advisor post on January 10, 2006.

On January 11, 2006, the national post office stopped selling post stamps commemorating Hwang's research. The title of Supreme Scientist awarded to Hwang was revoked on March 21, 2006, after Hwang was dismissed from Seoul National University the day before.

Supporting lawmakers group
On December 6, 2005, a group of 43 lawmakers from the ruling and opposition parties  inaugurated a body to support  Hwang Woo-suk. Members of the group, dubbed the "lawmakers' group supporting Professor Hwang Woo-suk", pledged to help Hwang continue his experiments in pursuit of a scientific breakthrough.

"There are many lawmakers who, regardless of party affiliation, want to support Hwang. We will join forces to help Hwang devote himself to his studies", Rep. Kwon Sun-taik of the ruling Uri Party said in a news conference at the National Assembly, who was also the leader of the group.

He said the group would seek to establish bioethics guidelines and come up with supporting measures for biotechnology researchers in the country. Among those who had joined the group were Reps. Kim Hyuk-kyu, Kim Young-choon and Kim Sung-gon of the ruling party, Kim Hyong-o of the main opposition Grand National Party (GNP) and Kim Hak-won, chairman of the United Liberal Democrats.

Some female lawmakers participated in a civic group for voluntary egg donations for therapeutic research, which opened in November 2005 following the egg procurement scandal.

Reps. Song Young-sun and Chin Soo-hee of the GNP said they would provide their eggs to Hwang's research team. Meanwhile, the ruling and opposition parties called on the Korean Broadcasting Commission to thoroughly investigate the staffers of MBC's PD Note, which broadcast a documentary program critical of Hwang with coercive tactics in interviews, and reprimand them.

After most of Hwang's claims were confirmed to be false on January 10, 2006, some lawmakers revealed that Hwang had made several campaign donations to them and other lawmakers.

Resumption of PD Note
The MBC investigative journalism show PD Note (Korean: PD수첩) returned on air on January 3, 2006, and summarized the course of Hwang's scandal to date. The show had been cancelled under pressure after it broadcast its show on November 22 that accused Hwang of oddities in his research. The last show in 2005, aired on November 29, covered other topics. It remained off the air for five weeks. The second show in 2006, on January 10, dealt further with the Hwang affair, focusing on several instances of Hwang's media spinning tactics. It also covered the unwillingness on the part of a significant part of the public in South Korea to believe that someone who had almost achieved a status of a national hero committed such a shame.

Rallies supporting Hwang
The same day many South Korean citizens rallied outside Hwang's laboratory; as more than 1,000 women pledged to donate their eggs for the scientist's research. [ ... ] Hwang has been in seclusion since apologizing in November 2005, for ethical lapses in human egg procurement for his research. The symbolic event was as a gesture from Hwang's supporters that says they intend to donate their eggs with 1,000 of their members after they took egg-donation pledges online via their website. "Dr. Hwang will not be able to return to the lab, at least, until at the end of this week because he is extremely exhausted, mentally and physically", a key team member, Ahn Cu Rie, wrote in an e-mail to Reuters. [ ... ] At Hwang's lab at Seoul National University, women left bouquets of the national flower, a hibiscus called the Rose of Sharon, for the scientist along with notes of encouragement.

The stem cell research center that Hwang led before resigning said it hoped he would return, even though his lapses could hurt its efforts to work with other research institutions.

"So far more than 700 South Korean women have pledged to donate their eggs and the number is steadily rising", said Lee Sun-min, an official at a private foundation launched last week to promote egg donations. [ ... ] Thousands of patients have applied to participate in the research, hoping the technology could help treat damaged spinal cords or diseases such as Parkinson's. On Tuesday, an official at the lab said it was hoped that Hwang would return.

"We're waiting for Hwang to assume the leadership after some rest", Seong Myong-hoon told a news conference. But Seong said the controversy could hurt the lab. That conclusion was reached after one of Hwang's close research partners, Ahn Cu-rie, returned Tuesday after a 10-day trip to meet with scientists in the United States and Japan, Seong said.

"The reaction of foreign scientists was that they understand what Dr. Hwang disclosed, but they cannot accept that without criticism", Seong said. "We can never be optimistic about cooperation with foreign institutions."

Seong added: "Researchers of our country were newly awakened to the fact that we have to take every precaution to ensure we don't fall behind international ethics (guidelines) while researching."

"The only hope for us is Dr. Hwang. Don't trample on our one shred of hope", a woman whose son suffers from a severe kidney ailment told South Korean broadcaster YTN at the university. The woman also pledged to sell her eggs to Hwang.

Online ova donations
A website backed by Hwang's supporters began taking egg-donation pledges online since late November 2005 after Hwang resigned all his official posts at World Stem Cell Hub, relaying them to a clinic linked to Hwang's research team. The number of pledges had reached 725 by early December 2005.

Banners like "Please come back, Doctor Hwang. I'm already dying to see you, Professor Hwang", were put up on the home page.

The site also carried a photo of Hwang and his cloned dog, Snuppy, trimmed with images of the rose of Sharon, South Korea's national flower, in an apparent appeal for patriotism. The national anthem played as background music.

Those who applied to donate ova included people with incurable illnesses and their family members, who hoped that Hwang's research would eventually lead to cures, and young, healthy women.

Documentary
In June 2023, Netflix released a documentary film, King of Clones which covered Hwang Woo-suk and the Hwang affair.

See also
 List of geneticists and biochemists
 Scientific misconduct, including a list of science scandals.
 Schön scandal
 Haruko Obokata
 List of scientific misconduct incidents

References

External links

Pubmed entry for the controversial paper on embryonic stem cells
Final report published by Seoul National University Investigation Committee (in Korean)
English summary of the SNU final report
South Korean policy failure and the Hwang debacle

Living people
1953 births
2005 in biotechnology
Academic scandals
Woo-suk
Hoaxes in science
Korean nationalism
People involved in scientific misconduct incidents
Science and technology in South Korea
Seoul National University alumni
Academic staff of Seoul National University
South Korean biologists
South Korean Buddhists
People convicted of embezzlement
Stem cell researchers
South Korean fraudsters

Hwang Woo-suk


A visa (short for the Latin carta visa, lit. "the document having been seen") is a permit given by a country that allows someone to go to that country. A visa is a document that is stamped on a person's passport by an embassy. It names the kind of visit and says how long the person can stay. Sometimes, people need to go through an interview held at the embassy before they get a visa.

Many countries require foreign visitors to have a valid passport and a visa before they can enter the country, but there are exceptions (see below for examples of such these).

Visas are associated with the request for permission to enter (or exit) a country, and are thus, for some countries, not the same as actual formal permission for an alien to enter and remain in the country.

Some countries, such as some states of the former Soviet Union, require that their citizens, and sometimes foreign travelers, obtain an exit visa in order to be allowed to leave the country. Until 2004, foreign students in Russia were issued only an entry visa on being accepted to University there, and had to obtain an exit visa to return home. This policy has since been changed, and foreign students are now issued multiple entry (and exit) visa.

Conditions of issue
Some visas can be granted on arrival or by prior application at the country's embassy or consulate, or sometimes through a specialized travel agency with permission from the issuing country in the country of departure. If there is no embassy or consulate in one's home country, then one would have to travel to a third country (or apply by post) and try to get a visa issued there. The need for a visa generally depends on the citizenship of the applicant, how long the applicant plans to stay, and the activities that the applicant may wish to do in the country he visits. These may result different formal categories of visas, with different issue conditions.

Some, but not all, countries have reciprocal visa regimes: if Country A requires citizens of Country B to have a visa to travel there, then Country B may apply reciprocity and require a visa from citizens of Country A. Likewise, if A allows B's citizens to enter without a visa, B may allow A's citizens to enter without a visa.

Examples of such reciprocal visa regimes are between:
 Algeria  and Canada
 most CIS member states and African countries
 Brazil and Canada/CIS member states
 Armenia and most non-CIS member states

A fee may be charged for issuing a visa; these are typically also reciprocal, so if country A charges country B's citizens 50 USD for a visa, country B will often also charge the same amount for country A's visitors. The fee charged may also be at the discretion of each embassy. A similar reciprocity often applies to the duration of the visa (the period in which one is permitted to request entry of the country) and the number of entries one can attempt with the visa. Expedited processing of the visa application for some countries will generally incur additional charges.

This reciprocal fee has become more common in recent years with the decision of the United States to charge nationals of various countries a $100 visa processing fee (non-refundable, even if a visa is not issued). A number of countries, including Brazil, Chile, and Turkey have reciprocated. Brazil requires an advance visa before entry into the country, and that a US citizen be fingerprinted and photographed on arrival—matching U.S. requirements for Brazilians and other foreigners.

The issuing authority, usually a branch of the country's foreign ministry or department (e.g. U.S. State Department), and typically consular affairs officers, may request appropriate documentation from the applicant. This may include proof that the applicant is able to support himself in the host country (lodging, food), proof that the person hosting the applicant in his or her home really exists and has sufficient room for hosting the applicant, proof that the applicant has obtained health and evacuation insurance, etc. Some countries ask for proof of health status, especially for long-term visas; some countries deny such visas to persons with certain illnesses, such as AIDS. The exact conditions depend on the country and category of visa. Notable examples of countries requiring HIV tests of long-term residents are Russia  and Uzbekistan.  However, in Uzbekistan, the HIV test requirement is sometimes not strictly enforced.

Developed countries frequently demand strong evidence of intent to return to the home country, if the visa is for a temporary stay, and especially if the applicant is from a developing country, due to immigration concerns.

The issuing authority may also require applicants to attest that they have had no criminal convictions, or that they do not partake in certain activities (like prostitution or drug trafficking). Some countries will deny visas if the travellers' passports show evidence of citizenship or travel to a country which is not recognized by that country. For example, Saudi Arabia will not issue visas to nationals of Israel or those with evidence of visiting Israel.

Types of visa

Common types of visas are:
 A transit visa, usually valid for 3 days or less, for passing through the country to a third destination.
 A tourist visa, for a limited period of leisure travel, no business activities allowed. Some countries do not issue tourist visas. Saudi Arabia introduced tourist visas only in 2004 although it did (and still does) issue pilgrimage visas for Hajj pilgrims.
 A business visa, for engaging in commerce in the country. These visas generally preclude permanent employment, for which a work visa would be required.
 A temporary worker visa, for approved employment in the host country. These are generally more difficult to obtain but valid for longer periods of time than a business visa. Examples of these are the United States' H-1B and L-1 visas.
 A visa on arrival, which is a visa granted immediately prior to entering the country, such as at an airport or border control post. This is distinct from not requiring a visa at all, as the visitor must still obtain the visa before they can even try to pass through immigration. The on-arrival visa usually is nothing more than an arrival tax, though the visitors can still be denied entry even with a visa.
 A spousal visa, granted to the spouse of a resident or citizen of a given country, in order to enable the couple to settle in that country. Examples include the United Kingdom's EEA family permit.

Less common visas include:
 A student visa, which allows its holder to study at an institution of higher learning in the issuing country. Students studying in Algeria, however, are issued tourist visas.
 A working holiday visa, for individuals traveling between nations offering a working holiday programme, allowing young people to undertake temporary work while traveling. At least ten European countries allow work for non-EU students.

 A diplomatic visa (sometimes official visa), which confers diplomatic status on its holder and is normally only available to bearers of diplomatic passports.
 A courtesy visa issued to representatives of foreign governments or international organizations who do not qualify for diplomatic status but do merit expedited, courteous treatment. A courtesy visa does not normally confer privileges or immunities.
 A journalist visa, which some countries require of people in that occupation when travelling for their respective news organizations. Countries which insist on this include Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, the United States (I-visa ) and Zimbabwe.
 Afiancee visa, granted for a limited period prior to intended marriage based on a proven relationship with a citizen of the destination country. For example, a German woman who wishes to marry an American man would obtain a Fiancée Visa (also known as a K-1 visa) to allow her to enter the United States.
 An immigrant visa, granted for those intending to immigrate to the issuing country. They usually are issued for a single journey as the holder will, depending on the country, later be issued a permanent resident identification card which will allow the traveller to enter to the issuing country an unlimited number of times. (for example, the United States Permanent Resident Card)...

Entry and duration period

Visas can also be single-entry, which means the visa is cancelled as soon as the holder leaves the country, double-entry, or multiple-entry, permitting multiple entries into the country with the same visa. Countries may also issue re-entry permits that allow temporarily leaving the country without invalidating the visa. Even a business visa will normally not allow the holder to work in the host country without an additional work permit.

Once issued, a visa will usually have to be used within a certain period of time.

The validity of a visa is not the same as the authorized period of stay in the issuing country. The visa validity usually indicates when the alien can apply for entry to the country. For example, if a visa has been issued January 1st and expires March 30th, and the typical authorized period of stay in a country is 90 days, then the 90-day authorized stay starts on the day the passenger reaches the country, which has to be between January 1st and March 30th. The traveller could therefore stay in the issuing country until June 1st.

Once in the country, the validity period of a visa or authorized stay can often be extended for a fee if the immigration authorities choose to do so. Staying longer than the period of authorized stay given by the immigration officers is considered illegal immigration even if the visa validity period is not over (i.e. for multiple entry visas) and a form of being "out of status" and the offender may be fined, prosecuted, deported, or even blacklisted (banned) from entering the country again.

Entering a country without a valid visa or visa exemption may result in being arrested and removed (deportation or exclusion) from the country. Doing things that are not authorized by the status of entry (for example, working while having a non-worker tourist status) can result in the individual being deemed removable, in common speech an illegal alien. Such violation is not a violation of a visa, despite the common misuse of the phrase, but a violation of status, hence the term "out of status."

Even having a visa does not guarantee that somebody can enter ah ost country. The border crossing authorities make the final determination to allow entry, and may even cancel a visa at the border if the alien cannot demonstrate to their satisfaction that they will abide by the status their visa grants them.

Visa and immigration laws may be very different among countries. As such, aliens are advised to check with immigration lawyers for visa and immigration laws governing the countries they wish to enter and eligibility to receive visas or other immigration benefits.

Visa extensions

Many countries have a mechanism to allow the holder of a visa to apply to stay longer in that country. For example, in Denmark a visa holder can apply to the Danish Immigration Service for a Residence Permit after they have arrived in the Country. In the United Kingdom applications can be made to the Border and Immigration Agency. In certain circumstances, it is not possible for the holder of the visa to do this, either because the country does not have a mechanism to prolong visas or, most likely, because the holder of the visa is using a short stay visa to live in a country. In such cases, the holder often engages in what is known as a visa run; leaving the country for a short period in order to apply for a new visa prior to their return or so that they can be given a fresh permission to stay when they re-enter.

Visa refusal
A visa may be denied for a number of reasons, including (but not limited to) if the applicant:
 has committed fraud or misrepresentation in his or her application;
 cannot prove to have strong ties to their current country of residence;
 intends to permanently live or work in the country she/he will visit;
 does not have a legitimate reason for the journey;
 has no clear way of having enough resources to take care of himself/herself while in the country;
 does not have accommodation in the destination country;
 has not arranged his or her transportation;
 does not have a health/travel insurance valid for the destination and the duration of stay;
 has a criminal record or has criminal charges pending;
 does not have a good moral character;
 wants to get a visa too soon;
 is considered to be a security risk;
 had their previous visa application(s) rejected;
 is a citizen of a country with whom the host country has poor or non-existent relations;
 has a contagious disease, such as tuberculosis;
 has previous immigration violations;
 has never undertaken any foreign travel before;
 has traveled before, but taken visas for other countries which are nowhere near the destination country;
 unable to demonstrate basic local language skills;
 has planned a vacation for no particular purpose other than sightseeing.
 has a passport that expires too soon

Visa exemption schemes
Possession of a valid visa is a condition for entry into many countries, however various exemption schemes do exist. In some cases visa-free entry may be granted to holders of diplomatic passports even as visas are required by normal passport holders (see: Passport).

Some countries have reciprocal agreements such that a visa is not needed under certain conditions, e.g. when the visit is for tourism and for a relatively short period. One example of this is the Visa Waiver Program of the United States. Such reciprocal agreements may stem from common membership in international organizations or a shared heritage:
 All citizens of ECOWAS member states, excluding those defined by law as undesirable aliens, may enter and stay without a visa in any member state for a maximum period of 90 days. The only requirement is a valid travel document and international vaccination certificates.
 Nationals of the East African Community member states do not need visas for entry into any of the member states.
 Some countries in the Commonwealth do not require tourist visas for citizens of other Commonwealth countries.
 Most countries in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) do not require tourist visas for citizens of other ASEAN countries.
 Armenia  and Uzbekistan   allows citizens of CIS member states, except Turkmenistan, to enter visa-free as tourists.
Other countries may also unilaterally grant visa-free entry to nationals of certain countries in order to facilitate tourism.

Visa-free travel between countries also occurs in all cases where passports are not needed for such travel.
(For examples of passport-free travel, see International travel without passports.)

Common visas
Normally, visas are valid for entry only into the country which issued the visa. Countries that are members of regional organizations or party to regional agreements may however issue visas valid for entry into some or all of the member states of the organization or agreement:
 the Schengen Visa may be the best-known example of a common visa. This visa has it origins in the 1985 Schengen Agreement among European states which allows for a common policy on the temporary entry of persons (including visas). The visa allows a tourist or visitor access to the area covered by the agreement (known as the "Schengen area" or "Schengenland"). Citizens of non-EU, non-EEA countries who wish to visit Europe as tourists, and who require a visa to enter the Schengen area, are simply required to get only the common Schengen Visa from the Embassy/Consulate of any of the Schengen countries. After this, they may visit any or all of the Schengen countries as tourists or for business without hindrance. They are not required to get separate visas for all the Schengen countries they wish to visit.
 the CARICOM Visa was introduced in late 2006 and allowed visitors to travel between 10 CARICOM member states (Antigua & Barbuda, Barbados, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Jamaica, St. Kitts & Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent & the Grenadines and Trinidad & Tobago). These 10 member countries had agreed to form a "Single Domestic Space" in which travellers would only have their passport stamped and have to submit completed, standardized entry and departure forms at the first port and country of entry. The CARICOM Visa was applicable to the nationals of all countries except CARICOM member states (other than Haiti) and associate member states, Canada, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, South Africa, the United Kingdom, the United States of America and the overseas countries, territories or departments of these countries. The CARICOM Visa could be obtained from the Embassies/Consulates of Barbados, Jamaica and Trinidad & Tobago and in countries which have no CARICOM representatives, the applications forms could be obtained from the Embassies/Consulates of the United Kingdom. The common visa was only intended for the duration of the Cricket World Cup and was discontinued on May 15, 2007. However, discussions are ongoing into instituting a revised CARICOM visa on a permanent basis in the future.
 the Central American Single Visa (Visa Única Centroamericana) was implemented by the CA-4 agreement between Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, and Nicaragua. It is required for citizens of all other countries, eliminating the need for separate entry visas for each of the countries. Persons entering the region on Type "B" visas can enter the area through any Port of Entry. Persons entering on Type "C" visas (issued through prior consultation with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs) must enter through a Port of Entry in the country that issued the visa. Once a person has been admitted, they may travel onto any of the other countries and are allowed to stay through the date authorized at the original Port of Entry.
 An East African Single Tourist Visa has been up for approval by the relevant sectoral authorities under the East African Community (EAC) integration programme. The visa would be valid for all three partner states in the EAC (Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda). Under the proposal for the visa, any new East African single visa can be issued by any partner state's embassy. The visa proposal followed an appeal by the tourist boards of the partner states for a common visa to accelerate promotion of the region as a single tourist destination and the EAC Secretariat wants it approved before November's World Travel Fair (or World Travel Market) in London. When approved by the East African council of ministers, tourists could apply for one country's entry visa which would then be applicable in all regional member states as a single entry requirement initiative.
 The SADC UNIVISA (or Univisa) has been in development since SADC members signed a Protocol on the Development of Tourism in 1998. The Protocol outlined the Univisa as an objective so as to enable the international and regional entry and travel of visitors to occur as smoothly as possible. It was expected to become operational by the end of 2002. Its introduction was delayed and a new implementation date, the end of 2006, was announced. However, the SADC now aims to have the univisa system in place by 2008, before the 2010 FIFA World Cup in South Africa. The univisa was originally intended to only be available, initially, to visitors from selected "source markets" such as Australia, the Benelux countries, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Portugal, Spain, the United Kingdom and the USA. It is now expected that when the Univisa is implemented, that it will apply to non SADC international (long-haul) tourists travelling to and within the region and that it will encourage multi - destination travel within the region. It is also anticipated that the univisa will unlock the tourism potential of transfrontier parks by lowering the boundaries between neighbouring countries in the parks. The visa is expected to be valid for all the countries with transfrontier parks (Botswana, Lesotho, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe) and some other SADC countries (Angola and Swaziland).

References

Travel
Identification documents

Visa


The Sarcopterygii  is a class of fish. They are lobe-finned fish, like the lungfish and coelacanths. They are a clade of bony fish which first appeared in the Silurian, 418 million years ago (mya). One line in this group gave rise to the tetrapods.

Characteristics
These are bony fishes with paired rounded fins. These fins, being similar to limbs, suggest that these fish may be ancestors of land vertebrates. All sarcopterygians possess teeth covered with true enamel.

As a clade, the group includes all its descendants. This means it includes the Tetrapods, that is, all species of four-limbed vertebrates. The fin-limbs of sarcopterygiians are very similar to what people believe was the ancestral form of tetrapod limbs. The ancestors of tetrapods are to be found amongst the lobe-fins of the Devonian period. The term 'fishapod' is becoming used for this transitional group.

Evolution
Sarcopterygians and their relatives the Actinopterygii ('ray-finned fish') make up the super-class Osteichthyes,  the 'bony fish', which have a bony skeleton rather than cartilage. Otherwise, there are vast differences in fin, respiratory, and circulatory structures between the Sarcopterygii and the Actinopterygii.

The first sarcopterygians, found in the uppermost Silurian (about 418 mya), closely resembled the Acanthodii, the 'spiny fish' which went extinct at the end of the Palaeozoic era. In the early–middle Devonian (416–385 mya), while the predatory placoderms dominated the seas, some sarcopterygians came into freshwater habitats.

In the early Devonian (416–397 mya), the sarcopterygians split into two main lineages — the Coelacanths and the Rhipidistia. The former never left the oceans and their heyday was the late Devonian and Carboniferous, from 385 to 299 mya, as they were more common during those periods than in any other period in the Phanerozoic; coelacanths still live today in the oceans (genus Latimeria).

The Rhipidistians, whose ancestors probably lived in the oceans near the river mouths (estuaries), left the ocean world and migrated into freshwater habitats. They in turn split into two major groups : the lungfish and the tetrapods. The lungfish evolved the first proto-lungs and proto-limbs; they learned in the middle Devonian (397–385 mya) how to live outside a water environment, using their stubby fins (proto-limbs) to walk on land and find new water if their waterhole was depleted, and their lungs to breathe air and get sufficient oxygen. The lungfish's greatest diversity was in the Triassic period; today there are fewer than a dozen genera left.

The first tetrapodomorphs, which included the gigantic rhizodonts, had the same general anatomy as the lungfish, who were their closest kin, but they appear not to have left their water habitat until the later Devonian epoch (385–359 mya), with the appearance of tetrapods (four-legged vertebrates). Tetrapods are the only tetrapodomorphs which survived after the Devonian.

Non-tetrapod sarcopterygians continued until towards the end of Paleozoic era, suffering heavy losses during the Permian-Triassic extinction event (251 mya).

Taxonomy and phylogeny
 Sarcopterygii
 Coelacanthimorpha
 Coelacanthiformes
 Latimeriidae
 Rhipidistia
 Dipnoi
 Tetrapodomorpha
 †Rhizodontiformes
 Osteolepiformes
 Panderichthyida

Related pages
 Actinopterygii – ray-finned fishes

References

Sarcopterygii


For people and places called Saint James, see the disambiguation page.

Saint James, son of Zebedee (death 44 AD) was one of the disciples (learners) of Jesus. He was the son of Zebedee and Salome and brother of John the Evangelist. He is called Saint James the Greater to distinguish (mark as different) him from the other apostle named James
(James, son of Alphaeus). James is described as one of the first disciples who joined Jesus. The Synoptic Gospels tell that James and John were with their father by the seashore when Jesus called them to begin traveling (Mt.4:21–22, Mk.1:19–20). According to Mark, James and John were called Boanerges, or the "Sons of Thunder" (3:17). Acts of the Apostles 12:1–2 records that King Herod had James executed by sword (Ac.12:1–2).  He was likely the first of the apostles martyred for his faith.

Saint James and Hispania
According to ancient local tradition, on 2 January of the year AD 40, the Virgin Mary appeared to James on the bank of the Ebro River at Caesaraugusta, while he was preaching the Gospel in Spain. She supposedly appeared upon a pillar, Nuestra Señora del Pilar, and that pillar is conserved and venerated within the present Basilica of Our Lady of the Pillar, in Zaragoza, Spain. Following that apparition, St James returned to Judea, where he was beheaded by King Herod Agrippa I in the year 44.

The translation of his relics from Judea to Galicia in the northwest of Iberia was effected, in legend, by a series of miraculous happenings: decapitated in Jerusalem with a sword by Herod Agrippa himself, his body was taken up by angels, and sailed in a rudderless, unattended boat to Iria Flavia in Spain, where a massive rock closed around his relics, which were later removed to Compostela. The 12th-century Historia Compostellana gives a summary of the legend of St James as it was believed at Compostela. Two ideas are central to it: first, that St James preached the gospel in Spain as well as in the Holy Land; second, that after his martyrdom at the hands of Herod Agrippa I his disciples carried his body by sea to Spain, where they landed at Padrón on the coast of Galicia, and took it inland for burial at Santiago de Compostela.

The authenticity of the sacred relics of Compostela was asserted in the Bull of Pope Leo XIII, "Omnipotens Deus," of 1 November 1884.

The tradition at Compostela placed the discovery of the relics of the saint in the time of king Alfonso II (791–842) and of bishop Theodemir of Iria. These traditions were the basis for the pilgrimage route that began to be established in the 9th century, and the shrine dedicated to James at Santiago de Compostela, in Galicia in Spain, became the most famous pilgrimage site in the Christian world. St James's Way is a tree of routes that cross Western Europe and arrive at Santiago through Northern Spain. Eventually James became the patron saint of Spain.

The name "James" in English comes from "Iacobus" (Jacob) in Latin. In eastern Spain, Jacobus became "Jacome" or "Jaime"; in Catalunya, it became Jaume, in western Spain it became "Iago", and Portugal and Galicia it was Tiago. "Saint James" ("Sanctus Jacobus") became "Sant' Iago", which was abbreviated to Santiago. James's emblem was the scallop shell (or "cockle shell"), and pilgrims to his shrine often wore that symbol on their hats or clothes.

Other websites
Catholic Encyclopedia: St James the Greater
R. A. Fletcher, Saint James's Catapult: The Life and Times of Diego Gelmírez of Santiago de Compostela Oxford University Press, 1984: chapter 3, "The Early History of the Cult of St. James"

References
Henry Chadwick, Priscillian of Avila. Oxford University Press, 1976.
Richard A. Fletcher, 1984. Saint James's Catapult : The Life and Times of Diego Gelmírez of Santiago de Compostela (Oxford University Press) (On-line text)

Year of birth unknown
44 deaths
Early Christian saints
Twelve Apostles
1st-century births
Pharmacists

James (son of Zebedee)


The kidneys are two organs in the abdomen of vertebrates which are shaped like beans. They regulate the amount of water and salts in the blood. They make urine so it can be removed from the body.

The adjective which is used for kidneys is  renal. For example, renal failure is when the kidneys are sick and do not work.

The prefix nephro- is also used in words to mean "kidneys". For example, a nephrologist is a specialist who studies kidneys.

Hormones
The kidney makes hormones. The two most important ones that it makes are erythropoetin and renin.

Erythropoetin is made by the kidneys if there is less oxygen in the kidney. Erythropoetin signals the bone marrow to make more red blood cells. This means there will be more oxygen carried in the blood.

Renin is made by the kidney if there is low blood pressure, low volume of blood, or too low salts in the blood. Renin makes the blood vessels smaller and tells the adrenal gland to make aldosterone (which tells the kidneys to save salts). It also makes a person feel thirsty. All of this makes the blood pressure go up.

Stable environment
The kidney's most important work is keeping homeostasis. Homeostasis means that the body keeps a stable environment inside itself. The body needs to have the consistent and proper amount of water, salt, and acid in the blood. The kidney keeps these things constant.

If there is too much water, the kidney puts more water in the urine. If there is not enough water, the kidney uses less water in the urine. This is why people make less urine when they are dehydrated.

Kidney diseases
There are many types of kidney diseases. A kidney disease makes the kidneys unable to work perfectly but they do work in part. People can have mild kidney failure and have no symptoms. As long as it does not become worse, people may not even know they have it. Severe kidney failure means very bad failure. The kidneys do not work very much at all. People with severe kidney failure always have symptoms. They need special care from doctors.

The main kinds of kidney diseases are:
 Kidney stones – this is when a solid substance forms in the urine. This stone moves through the urinary system until it cannot go on and gets stuck. This sometimes blocks urine flow, and usually causes severe pain. After a time, the stone usually goes out or passes. If it does not go out, a surgeon may have to remove it.
 Kidney infections – also called pyelonephritis. This is a bacterial infection in the kidneys. Some of the symptoms are back pain, vomiting, fever, and dark or bloody urine. People with pyelonephritis need strong antibiotic medicines.
 Glomerulonephritis – this is a disease of the tissues in the kidneys that make urine. These are called glomeruli. Glomerulonephritis is an autoimmune disease. It can cause mild or severe kidney failure.
 Congenital kidney disease – this is when people are born with kidneys that do not work properly. This includes people that are born with kidneys in the wrong place, or in the wrong shape. About 1% of people are born with only one kidney.
 Polycystic kidney disease – this is an inherited disorder in which cysts grow in the kidneys, and destroy the kidney tissue until the kidneys can no longer perform their functions.
 Diabetic nephropathy – this is the disease diabetics get when their blood sugar is too high for a long time. This is one of the most common causes of kidney failure in the United States
 Hypertensive nephropathy – this is caused by having hypertension (high blood pressure) for a long time. Many people have hypertensive and diabetic nephropathy together.
 Cancer – Renal cell carcinoma is the most common kind of kidney cancer. It is most often found in adults, and is usually deadly. It is hard to stop it with radiation treatments or chemotherapy.

Renal replacement
If a person's kidneys do not work properly, they are very sick. If they have severe kidney failure, they cannot live unless they have a replacement for their kidneys.

There are two ways to replace the kidneys: dialysis and transplantation.

Dialysis
Dialysis is when doctors use a machine and medicines to do the work of the kidneys. There are two kinds of dialysis: hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis.

Peritoneal dialysis is when doctors put a plastic tube into the person's abdomen. Every day the person fills the abdomen with fluid. The extra salts, waste, and water that the body does not need goes into the fluid. Then the fluid comes out and takes the wastes with it. This does part of the job that kidneys do.

Hemodialysis is when doctors take blood from a person, clean the blood with a special kind of filter, called a haemodialyser, and put it back in the person. When the blood is cleaned; water, salts and wastes are taken out of it. This must be done 2–4 times every week (usually 3 times.) It takes 2–4 hours to do this each time.

Hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis are not perfect. They do some of the work of the kidney, but it is not as good as a real kidney. So people who need dialysis are not as healthy. They must take medicines. For example, in kidney failure, the kidneys do not make any erythropoetin. Doctors have to give people erythropoetin so they make enough red blood cells.

Transplant
A better way to do the kidneys' work is to give the person another kidney. This is called a kidney transplant. Kidney transplants are the most common type of organ transplant. It is the most common because we have two kidneys, but only need one kidney to live. People who are alive can donate a kidney to another person.

Even transplanted kidneys are not the same as kidneys people were born with. A person who gets a renal transplant must take strong medicines to stop their body from attacking the new kidney. Sometimes, after years, the transplanted kidney stops working. But sometimes a patient can get a new transplanted kidney after the first one stops working.

History
It was widely believed in Europe that the conscience was actually located in the kidneys. This idea was taken from the Hebrew Bible. In modern times, medical scientists have shown kidneys do not have this kind of psychological role.

Anatomy of the urinary system

Kidney