Given a paragraph about movies 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:`.
--------
Question: CONTEXT: Yes, it is very realistic. While ADHD seems to be about kids who have excess energy, what it really is about is the focus and concentration. ADHD is caused because the areas of the brain that control focus and concentration are UNDER-stimulated or under-activated. So, taking a stimulant, for those with ADHD, actually activates/enervates those portions of the brain. It seems to "calm" the afflicted child or adult, but what it's really doing is allowing them to focus their efforts and energy. Now, to someone who does not have under-stimulated brain function in the area of focus and control, it just has the general, overall stimulative effect because it is a stimulant, after all.  <sep>  Q: Realism of the effect of ADHD medicine in Desperate Housewives? A: it is very realistic. While ADHD seems to be about kids who have excess energy, what it really is about is the focus and concentration  Q: Does it have the effect that the show shows on LInette who does not have ADHD? A: to someone who does not have under-stimulated brain function in the area of focus and control, it just has the general, overall stimulative effect because it is a stimulant, after all  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What is the effect on people who do have ADHD?

Answer: Yes


Question: CONTEXT: There was no movie rating system in place back in the 1940's, and movies were greatly censored by the US government. In the 1920's the Supreme Court ruled that free speech did not apply to movies, and a control board was arranged where by all film studios had to submit their scripts for censorship. Movie studios were given guide lines by which they had to follow. So it's not so much that profanity is now widespread, as much as it was strictly forbidden back in the 1940's. This system of governed film making slowly started to collapse over the years and gave birth to the Motion Picture film rating system. Where the film ratings and censorship is controlled by the film industry and not by a single controlling person or government. Now that we have the rating system, films can be classified by their rating. Today's ratings are, at least by idea, implemented by our peers. So as society changes so do those who review and rate films. That is why we see more profanity in PG rated films, as parents who rate the films accept the fact that children in this age group use these profane words or acknowledge that the film works the way the script was written. New ratings were introduced including PG-13. To address the need for films that target a segment of the population that are pre-adult but seek adult style films. Still, I have to wonder who these people are that rate these films.  <sep>  Q: Era of profanity in movie scripts? A: There was no movie rating system in place back in the 1940's, and movies were greatly censored by the US government  Q: How did that start? A: In the 1920's the Supreme Court ruled that free speech did not apply to movies, and a control board was arranged where by all film studios had to submit their scripts for censorship  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: The quote "Frankly , my dear I don't give a damn" from Gone with the Wind was famous largely because of early use of profanity in the script

Answer: Yes


Question: CONTEXT: As we see in Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (during the climactic fight between Darth Maul, Qui-Gon Jinn and Obi-Wan Kenobi) and Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (when dozens of Jedi storm the arena where Obi-Wan Kenobi, Anakin Skywalker and Padmé Amidala have been sentenced to death), Jedi have no qualms about killing those that are trying to kill them. In fact, we see that Obi-Wan Kenobi is referred to as General Kenobi in Star Wars films set after the events of the Clone Wars, so we can be reasonably sure that there is nothing prohibiting Jedi killing people in battle. However, at the point you are asking about in Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith, Count Dooku is an unarmed opponent and poses little to no further threat. The Jedi way would have been to arrest him, not murder him, as Anakin himself correctly says in the quote in the question.  <sep>  Q: In Star Wars, can a Jedi kill?

Answer:
Yes