Given a paragraph about cooking, and a set of conversational questions and answers about the paragraph, say whether the passage contains sufficient information to answer the follow-up question. Say Yes if it is answerable; otherwise, say No. The paragraph has the prefix 'CONTEXT:'. Each conversation question has a prefix `Q:` followed by the answer prefix `A:`, and the follow-up question has a prefix `FOLLOWUP_Q:`.

Example Input: CONTEXT: Use part of the shell you just cracked to scoop it up; it will attract the broken bit.Also, if you frequently end up with bits of shell in your eggs, you should revise your cracking technique. Eggs should be cracked on a flat surface (countertop or plate) not a sharper surface like the edge of a bowl.  <sep>  Q: I was wondering how to remove bits of egg shell from a cracked egg? A: Use part of the shell you just cracked to scoop it up; it will attract the broken bit  Q: Is there anyway I could do to prevent these egg shells from getting in the egg in the first place? A: if you frequently end up with bits of shell in your eggs, you should revise your cracking technique  Q: Well how should I crack them then? A: Eggs should be cracked on a flat surface (countertop or plate) not a sharper surface like the edge of a bowl.  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Is there any other way to remove the egg other than using the shell itself?
Example Output: No

Example Input: CONTEXT: There are arguments of the universal validity of such rules, but there has long been an argument that reheated meat that was pre-cooked should always be brought to full safe temperature.The general idea is that cooked or not there is bacteria present. If heated to only the 100-120F range, you have reached the temperature of highest active growth of many pathogens, without killing them. Some will argue that this is safe, as long as you eat the item immediately, not let it sit and give time for that bacterial growth to bloom. I would even put credence to this for items which I knew the preparation and handling history, but for prefab type foods, like ground meats and especially poultry, I personally would be reluctant to take risks, I would bring it to temp. There also has always been disclaimers that the reheating to temp rule only applies to if you reheat at all, for instance, medium rare roast beef is often eaten cold as leftover, but the rule stated if you reheat, the reheat to what would have originally be considered a safe temperature, not part way. With something like a prepped burger, again, I personally would not eat it cold, and just thawing it might put you into an unknown zone. I would heat it.  <sep>  Q: Is therea minimum internal temperature for chicken? A: If heated to only the 100-120F range, you have reached the temperature of highest active growth of many pathogens, without killing them. Some will argue that this is safe  Q: Is that the safest temperature? A: as long as you eat the item immediately, not let it sit and give time for that bacterial growth to bloom  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Can I cook them and then refrigerate them for later?
Example Output: Yes

Example Input: CONTEXT: Our brains are wired to consider food more palatable if the dedicated taste receptors (one of the six basic tastes) for salt are triggered. And in a non-urban world, salt/sodium is a valuable nutrient; the fact we might have it too readily available in the developed world doesn't change that we would DIE on a zero-sodium diet (mind that animal products like meat aren't zero-sodium, and that herbivores tend to love licking salt where they find it!). So our brains have a good evolutionary reason to like salt.Also, salt actively interferes (negatively) with another basic taste receptor - the receptor for bitterness (which can mean poison both in nature and in the developed world, or at least something we have no use for, eg an alkali). Most aromatic food (think green vegetables or spices) is bitter, and salt both attenuates that perception and balances it making the combined food still desirable for our brain. You end up with an even more palatable food since you can use an aromatic (desirable) and shut out the bitterness (not always desirable) response.Umami is a different basic taste, probably related to the presence of protein (glutamate, inosinate, guanylate... trigger it - these are amino acids or salts thereof, and an indicator of easily-digestible protein presence).  <sep>  Q: Why does salt enhance the flavor of food? A: Our brains are wired to consider food more palatable if the dedicated taste receptors (one of the six basic tastes) for salt are triggered  Q: What else does salt do? A: in a non-urban world, salt/sodium is a valuable nutrient  Q: Does salt affect taste? A: herbivores tend to love licking salt where they find it  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Does salt affect umami?
Example Output:
No