niryuu/sni-each-converted huggingface dataset:
Background Paragraph: Some of Antarctica has been warming up; particularly strong warming has been noted on the Antarctic Peninsula. A study by Eric Steig published in 2009 noted for the first time that the continent-wide average surface temperature trend of Antarctica is slightly positive at >0.05 °C (0.09 °F) per decade from 1957 to 2006. This study also noted that West Antarctica has warmed by more than 0.1 °C (0.2 °F) per decade in the last 50 years, and this warming is strongest in winter and spring. This is partly offset by autumn cooling in East Antarctica. There is evidence from one study that Antarctica is warming as a result of human carbon dioxide emissions, but this remains ambiguous. The amount of surface warming in West Antarctica, while large, has not led to appreciable melting at the surface, and is not directly affecting the West Antarctic Ice Sheet's contribution to sea level. Instead the recent increases in glacier outflow are believed to be due to an inflow of warm water from the deep ocean, just off the continental shelf. The net contribution to sea level from the Antarctic Peninsula is more likely to be a direct result of the much greater atmospheric warming there.In 2002 the Antarctic Peninsula's Larsen-B ice shelf collapsed. Between 28 February and 8 March 2008, about 570 km2 (220 sq mi) of ice from the Wilkins Ice Shelf on the southwest part of the peninsula collapsed, putting the remaining 15,000 km2 (5,800 sq mi) of the ice shelf at risk. The ice was being held back by a "thread" of ice about 6 km (4 mi) wide, prior to its collapse on 5 April 2009. According to NASA, the most widespread Antarctic surface melting of the past 30 years occurred in 2005, when an area of ice comparable in size to California briefly melted and refroze; this may have resulted from temperatures rising to as high as 5 °C (41 °F).A study published in Nature Geoscience in 2013 (online in December 2012) identified central West Antarctica as one of the fastest-warming regions on Earth. The researchers present a complete temperature record from Antarctica's Byrd Station and assert that it "reveals a linear increase in annual temperature between 1958 and 2010 by 2.4±1.2 °C". 
Story: Two teams of meteorologists studied environmental changes in Antarctica. Team A studied East Antarctica, while team B studied West Antarctica. They published their findings in a peer reviewed publication.
Output: Which team didn't observe a stronger warming in winter?
Background Paragraph: Some of Antarctica has been warming up; particularly strong warming has been noted on the Antarctic Peninsula. A study by Eric Steig published in 2009 noted for the first time that the continent-wide average surface temperature trend of Antarctica is slightly positive at >0.05 °C (0.09 °F) per decade from 1957 to 2006. This study also noted that West Antarctica has warmed by more than 0.1 °C (0.2 °F) per decade in the last 50 years, and this warming is strongest in winter and spring. This is partly offset by autumn cooling in East Antarctica. There is evidence from one study that Antarctica is warming as a result of human carbon dioxide emissions, but this remains ambiguous. The amount of surface warming in West Antarctica, while large, has not led to appreciable melting at the surface, and is not directly affecting the West Antarctic Ice Sheet's contribution to sea level. Instead the recent increases in glacier outflow are believed to be due to an inflow of warm water from the deep ocean, just off the continental shelf. The net contribution to sea level from the Antarctic Peninsula is more likely to be a direct result of the much greater atmospheric warming there.In 2002 the Antarctic Peninsula's Larsen-B ice shelf collapsed. Between 28 February and 8 March 2008, about 570 km2 (220 sq mi) of ice from the Wilkins Ice Shelf on the southwest part of the peninsula collapsed, putting the remaining 15,000 km2 (5,800 sq mi) of the ice shelf at risk. The ice was being held back by a "thread" of ice about 6 km (4 mi) wide, prior to its collapse on 5 April 2009. According to NASA, the most widespread Antarctic surface melting of the past 30 years occurred in 2005, when an area of ice comparable in size to California briefly melted and refroze; this may have resulted from temperatures rising to as high as 5 °C (41 °F).A study published in Nature Geoscience in 2013 (online in December 2012) identified central West Antarctica as one of the fastest-warming regions on Earth. The researchers present a complete temperature record from Antarctica's Byrd Station and assert that it "reveals a linear increase in annual temperature between 1958 and 2010 by 2.4±1.2 °C". 
Story: Two teams of meteorologists studied environmental changes in Antarctica. Team A studied East Antarctica, while team B studied West Antarctica. They published their findings in a peer reviewed publication.
Output: Which team didn't observe appreciable melting at the surface?
Background Paragraph: Some of Antarctica has been warming up; particularly strong warming has been noted on the Antarctic Peninsula. A study by Eric Steig published in 2009 noted for the first time that the continent-wide average surface temperature trend of Antarctica is slightly positive at >0.05 °C (0.09 °F) per decade from 1957 to 2006. This study also noted that West Antarctica has warmed by more than 0.1 °C (0.2 °F) per decade in the last 50 years, and this warming is strongest in winter and spring. This is partly offset by autumn cooling in East Antarctica. There is evidence from one study that Antarctica is warming as a result of human carbon dioxide emissions, but this remains ambiguous. The amount of surface warming in West Antarctica, while large, has not led to appreciable melting at the surface, and is not directly affecting the West Antarctic Ice Sheet's contribution to sea level. Instead the recent increases in glacier outflow are believed to be due to an inflow of warm water from the deep ocean, just off the continental shelf. The net contribution to sea level from the Antarctic Peninsula is more likely to be a direct result of the much greater atmospheric warming there.In 2002 the Antarctic Peninsula's Larsen-B ice shelf collapsed. Between 28 February and 8 March 2008, about 570 km2 (220 sq mi) of ice from the Wilkins Ice Shelf on the southwest part of the peninsula collapsed, putting the remaining 15,000 km2 (5,800 sq mi) of the ice shelf at risk. The ice was being held back by a "thread" of ice about 6 km (4 mi) wide, prior to its collapse on 5 April 2009. According to NASA, the most widespread Antarctic surface melting of the past 30 years occurred in 2005, when an area of ice comparable in size to California briefly melted and refroze; this may have resulted from temperatures rising to as high as 5 °C (41 °F).A study published in Nature Geoscience in 2013 (online in December 2012) identified central West Antarctica as one of the fastest-warming regions on Earth. The researchers present a complete temperature record from Antarctica's Byrd Station and assert that it "reveals a linear increase in annual temperature between 1958 and 2010 by 2.4±1.2 °C". 
Story: Two teams of meteorologists studied environmental changes in Antarctica. Team A studied East Antarctica, while team B studied West Antarctica. They published their findings in a peer reviewed publication.
Output: Which team didn't observe autumn cooling?
Background Paragraph: Some of Antarctica has been warming up; particularly strong warming has been noted on the Antarctic Peninsula. A study by Eric Steig published in 2009 noted for the first time that the continent-wide average surface temperature trend of Antarctica is slightly positive at >0.05 °C (0.09 °F) per decade from 1957 to 2006. This study also noted that West Antarctica has warmed by more than 0.1 °C (0.2 °F) per decade in the last 50 years, and this warming is strongest in winter and spring. This is partly offset by autumn cooling in East Antarctica. There is evidence from one study that Antarctica is warming as a result of human carbon dioxide emissions, but this remains ambiguous. The amount of surface warming in West Antarctica, while large, has not led to appreciable melting at the surface, and is not directly affecting the West Antarctic Ice Sheet's contribution to sea level. Instead the recent increases in glacier outflow are believed to be due to an inflow of warm water from the deep ocean, just off the continental shelf. The net contribution to sea level from the Antarctic Peninsula is more likely to be a direct result of the much greater atmospheric warming there.In 2002 the Antarctic Peninsula's Larsen-B ice shelf collapsed. Between 28 February and 8 March 2008, about 570 km2 (220 sq mi) of ice from the Wilkins Ice Shelf on the southwest part of the peninsula collapsed, putting the remaining 15,000 km2 (5,800 sq mi) of the ice shelf at risk. The ice was being held back by a "thread" of ice about 6 km (4 mi) wide, prior to its collapse on 5 April 2009. According to NASA, the most widespread Antarctic surface melting of the past 30 years occurred in 2005, when an area of ice comparable in size to California briefly melted and refroze; this may have resulted from temperatures rising to as high as 5 °C (41 °F).A study published in Nature Geoscience in 2013 (online in December 2012) identified central West Antarctica as one of the fastest-warming regions on Earth. The researchers present a complete temperature record from Antarctica's Byrd Station and assert that it "reveals a linear increase in annual temperature between 1958 and 2010 by 2.4±1.2 °C". 
Story: Two teams of meteorologists studied environmental changes in Antarctica. Team A studied East Antarctica, while team B studied West Antarctica. They published their findings in a peer reviewed publication.
Output: Which team noted a warming up in the Antarctic Peninsula?
Background Paragraph: Some of Antarctica has been warming up; particularly strong warming has been noted on the Antarctic Peninsula. A study by Eric Steig published in 2009 noted for the first time that the continent-wide average surface temperature trend of Antarctica is slightly positive at >0.05 °C (0.09 °F) per decade from 1957 to 2006. This study also noted that West Antarctica has warmed by more than 0.1 °C (0.2 °F) per decade in the last 50 years, and this warming is strongest in winter and spring. This is partly offset by autumn cooling in East Antarctica. There is evidence from one study that Antarctica is warming as a result of human carbon dioxide emissions, but this remains ambiguous. The amount of surface warming in West Antarctica, while large, has not led to appreciable melting at the surface, and is not directly affecting the West Antarctic Ice Sheet's contribution to sea level. Instead the recent increases in glacier outflow are believed to be due to an inflow of warm water from the deep ocean, just off the continental shelf. The net contribution to sea level from the Antarctic Peninsula is more likely to be a direct result of the much greater atmospheric warming there.In 2002 the Antarctic Peninsula's Larsen-B ice shelf collapsed. Between 28 February and 8 March 2008, about 570 km2 (220 sq mi) of ice from the Wilkins Ice Shelf on the southwest part of the peninsula collapsed, putting the remaining 15,000 km2 (5,800 sq mi) of the ice shelf at risk. The ice was being held back by a "thread" of ice about 6 km (4 mi) wide, prior to its collapse on 5 April 2009. According to NASA, the most widespread Antarctic surface melting of the past 30 years occurred in 2005, when an area of ice comparable in size to California briefly melted and refroze; this may have resulted from temperatures rising to as high as 5 °C (41 °F).A study published in Nature Geoscience in 2013 (online in December 2012) identified central West Antarctica as one of the fastest-warming regions on Earth. The researchers present a complete temperature record from Antarctica's Byrd Station and assert that it "reveals a linear increase in annual temperature between 1958 and 2010 by 2.4±1.2 °C". 
Story: Two teams of meteorologists studied environmental changes in Antarctica. Team A studied East Antarctica, while team B studied West Antarctica. They published their findings in a peer reviewed publication.
Output: Which team observed a stronger warming in spring?
Background Paragraph: Some of Antarctica has been warming up; particularly strong warming has been noted on the Antarctic Peninsula. A study by Eric Steig published in 2009 noted for the first time that the continent-wide average surface temperature trend of Antarctica is slightly positive at >0.05 °C (0.09 °F) per decade from 1957 to 2006. This study also noted that West Antarctica has warmed by more than 0.1 °C (0.2 °F) per decade in the last 50 years, and this warming is strongest in winter and spring. This is partly offset by autumn cooling in East Antarctica. There is evidence from one study that Antarctica is warming as a result of human carbon dioxide emissions, but this remains ambiguous. The amount of surface warming in West Antarctica, while large, has not led to appreciable melting at the surface, and is not directly affecting the West Antarctic Ice Sheet's contribution to sea level. Instead the recent increases in glacier outflow are believed to be due to an inflow of warm water from the deep ocean, just off the continental shelf. The net contribution to sea level from the Antarctic Peninsula is more likely to be a direct result of the much greater atmospheric warming there.In 2002 the Antarctic Peninsula's Larsen-B ice shelf collapsed. Between 28 February and 8 March 2008, about 570 km2 (220 sq mi) of ice from the Wilkins Ice Shelf on the southwest part of the peninsula collapsed, putting the remaining 15,000 km2 (5,800 sq mi) of the ice shelf at risk. The ice was being held back by a "thread" of ice about 6 km (4 mi) wide, prior to its collapse on 5 April 2009. According to NASA, the most widespread Antarctic surface melting of the past 30 years occurred in 2005, when an area of ice comparable in size to California briefly melted and refroze; this may have resulted from temperatures rising to as high as 5 °C (41 °F).A study published in Nature Geoscience in 2013 (online in December 2012) identified central West Antarctica as one of the fastest-warming regions on Earth. The researchers present a complete temperature record from Antarctica's Byrd Station and assert that it "reveals a linear increase in annual temperature between 1958 and 2010 by 2.4±1.2 °C". 
Story: Two teams of meteorologists studied environmental changes in Antarctica. Team A studied East Antarctica, while team B studied West Antarctica. They published their findings in a peer reviewed publication.
Output: Which team observed a stronger warming in winter?
Background Paragraph: Some of Antarctica has been warming up; particularly strong warming has been noted on the Antarctic Peninsula. A study by Eric Steig published in 2009 noted for the first time that the continent-wide average surface temperature trend of Antarctica is slightly positive at >0.05 °C (0.09 °F) per decade from 1957 to 2006. This study also noted that West Antarctica has warmed by more than 0.1 °C (0.2 °F) per decade in the last 50 years, and this warming is strongest in winter and spring. This is partly offset by autumn cooling in East Antarctica. There is evidence from one study that Antarctica is warming as a result of human carbon dioxide emissions, but this remains ambiguous. The amount of surface warming in West Antarctica, while large, has not led to appreciable melting at the surface, and is not directly affecting the West Antarctic Ice Sheet's contribution to sea level. Instead the recent increases in glacier outflow are believed to be due to an inflow of warm water from the deep ocean, just off the continental shelf. The net contribution to sea level from the Antarctic Peninsula is more likely to be a direct result of the much greater atmospheric warming there.In 2002 the Antarctic Peninsula's Larsen-B ice shelf collapsed. Between 28 February and 8 March 2008, about 570 km2 (220 sq mi) of ice from the Wilkins Ice Shelf on the southwest part of the peninsula collapsed, putting the remaining 15,000 km2 (5,800 sq mi) of the ice shelf at risk. The ice was being held back by a "thread" of ice about 6 km (4 mi) wide, prior to its collapse on 5 April 2009. According to NASA, the most widespread Antarctic surface melting of the past 30 years occurred in 2005, when an area of ice comparable in size to California briefly melted and refroze; this may have resulted from temperatures rising to as high as 5 °C (41 °F).A study published in Nature Geoscience in 2013 (online in December 2012) identified central West Antarctica as one of the fastest-warming regions on Earth. The researchers present a complete temperature record from Antarctica's Byrd Station and assert that it "reveals a linear increase in annual temperature between 1958 and 2010 by 2.4±1.2 °C". 
Story: Two teams of meteorologists studied environmental changes in Antarctica. Team A studied East Antarctica, while team B studied West Antarctica. They published their findings in a peer reviewed publication.
Output: Which team observed appreciable melting at the surface?
Background Paragraph: Some of Antarctica has been warming up; particularly strong warming has been noted on the Antarctic Peninsula. A study by Eric Steig published in 2009 noted for the first time that the continent-wide average surface temperature trend of Antarctica is slightly positive at >0.05 °C (0.09 °F) per decade from 1957 to 2006. This study also noted that West Antarctica has warmed by more than 0.1 °C (0.2 °F) per decade in the last 50 years, and this warming is strongest in winter and spring. This is partly offset by autumn cooling in East Antarctica. There is evidence from one study that Antarctica is warming as a result of human carbon dioxide emissions, but this remains ambiguous. The amount of surface warming in West Antarctica, while large, has not led to appreciable melting at the surface, and is not directly affecting the West Antarctic Ice Sheet's contribution to sea level. Instead the recent increases in glacier outflow are believed to be due to an inflow of warm water from the deep ocean, just off the continental shelf. The net contribution to sea level from the Antarctic Peninsula is more likely to be a direct result of the much greater atmospheric warming there.In 2002 the Antarctic Peninsula's Larsen-B ice shelf collapsed. Between 28 February and 8 March 2008, about 570 km2 (220 sq mi) of ice from the Wilkins Ice Shelf on the southwest part of the peninsula collapsed, putting the remaining 15,000 km2 (5,800 sq mi) of the ice shelf at risk. The ice was being held back by a "thread" of ice about 6 km (4 mi) wide, prior to its collapse on 5 April 2009. According to NASA, the most widespread Antarctic surface melting of the past 30 years occurred in 2005, when an area of ice comparable in size to California briefly melted and refroze; this may have resulted from temperatures rising to as high as 5 °C (41 °F).A study published in Nature Geoscience in 2013 (online in December 2012) identified central West Antarctica as one of the fastest-warming regions on Earth. The researchers present a complete temperature record from Antarctica's Byrd Station and assert that it "reveals a linear increase in annual temperature between 1958 and 2010 by 2.4±1.2 °C". 
Story: Two teams of meteorologists studied environmental changes in Antarctica. Team A studied East Antarctica, while team B studied West Antarctica. They published their findings in a peer reviewed publication.
Output: Which team observed autumn cooling?
Background Paragraph: Currently, millions of individuals with high cholesterol take a similar type of drug, known as a statin. The drug, an inhibitor of HMG-CoA reductase (3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl-CoA reductase), the rate limiting enzyme in cholesterol biosynthesis, decreases blood levels of cholesterol by induce the expression of low density lipoprotein (LDL) receptors in the liver. The increased levels of the LDL-receptors stimulate the catabolism of plasma LDL, removing cholesterol from plasma, which is an important determinant of atherosclerosis. You may know of people who take a statin to help with their cholesterol levels. However, these drugs probably work slightly differently in many of those people. In some, it lowers their cholesterol significantly; in others it may lower it only moderately; and in some, it may have no significant effect at all. (Luckily for those individuals, there are multiple versions of the statins, so different drugs can be tested to find the proper combination for that individual.) Why the difference? Because of the genetic background of all people; the different single nucleotide polymorphisms that make us all different. Pharmacogenomics, a combination of pharmacology and genomics (the study of the genome) that refers to the study of the relationship between pharmaceuticals and genetics, may explain and simplify this problem. 
Story: Brad and Henry were two old friends in their 70's. Brad had very high levels of cholesterol, while Henry was healthier and had normal levels of cholesterol.
Output: Which friend does not take a drug that induces the expression of low density lipoprotein (LDL) receptors in the liver?
Background Paragraph: Currently, millions of individuals with high cholesterol take a similar type of drug, known as a statin. The drug, an inhibitor of HMG-CoA reductase (3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl-CoA reductase), the rate limiting enzyme in cholesterol biosynthesis, decreases blood levels of cholesterol by induce the expression of low density lipoprotein (LDL) receptors in the liver. The increased levels of the LDL-receptors stimulate the catabolism of plasma LDL, removing cholesterol from plasma, which is an important determinant of atherosclerosis. You may know of people who take a statin to help with their cholesterol levels. However, these drugs probably work slightly differently in many of those people. In some, it lowers their cholesterol significantly; in others it may lower it only moderately; and in some, it may have no significant effect at all. (Luckily for those individuals, there are multiple versions of the statins, so different drugs can be tested to find the proper combination for that individual.) Why the difference? Because of the genetic background of all people; the different single nucleotide polymorphisms that make us all different. Pharmacogenomics, a combination of pharmacology and genomics (the study of the genome) that refers to the study of the relationship between pharmaceuticals and genetics, may explain and simplify this problem. 
Story: Brad and Henry were two old friends in their 70's. Brad had very high levels of cholesterol, while Henry was healthier and had normal levels of cholesterol.
Output: Which friend does not take a drug that removes cholesterol from plasma?
Background Paragraph: Currently, millions of individuals with high cholesterol take a similar type of drug, known as a statin. The drug, an inhibitor of HMG-CoA reductase (3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl-CoA reductase), the rate limiting enzyme in cholesterol biosynthesis, decreases blood levels of cholesterol by induce the expression of low density lipoprotein (LDL) receptors in the liver. The increased levels of the LDL-receptors stimulate the catabolism of plasma LDL, removing cholesterol from plasma, which is an important determinant of atherosclerosis. You may know of people who take a statin to help with their cholesterol levels. However, these drugs probably work slightly differently in many of those people. In some, it lowers their cholesterol significantly; in others it may lower it only moderately; and in some, it may have no significant effect at all. (Luckily for those individuals, there are multiple versions of the statins, so different drugs can be tested to find the proper combination for that individual.) Why the difference? Because of the genetic background of all people; the different single nucleotide polymorphisms that make us all different. Pharmacogenomics, a combination of pharmacology and genomics (the study of the genome) that refers to the study of the relationship between pharmaceuticals and genetics, may explain and simplify this problem. 
Story: Brad and Henry were two old friends in their 70's. Brad had very high levels of cholesterol, while Henry was healthier and had normal levels of cholesterol.
Output: Which friend doesn't take a drug that decreases blood levels of cholesterol?
Background Paragraph: Currently, millions of individuals with high cholesterol take a similar type of drug, known as a statin. The drug, an inhibitor of HMG-CoA reductase (3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl-CoA reductase), the rate limiting enzyme in cholesterol biosynthesis, decreases blood levels of cholesterol by induce the expression of low density lipoprotein (LDL) receptors in the liver. The increased levels of the LDL-receptors stimulate the catabolism of plasma LDL, removing cholesterol from plasma, which is an important determinant of atherosclerosis. You may know of people who take a statin to help with their cholesterol levels. However, these drugs probably work slightly differently in many of those people. In some, it lowers their cholesterol significantly; in others it may lower it only moderately; and in some, it may have no significant effect at all. (Luckily for those individuals, there are multiple versions of the statins, so different drugs can be tested to find the proper combination for that individual.) Why the difference? Because of the genetic background of all people; the different single nucleotide polymorphisms that make us all different. Pharmacogenomics, a combination of pharmacology and genomics (the study of the genome) that refers to the study of the relationship between pharmaceuticals and genetics, may explain and simplify this problem. 
Story: Brad and Henry were two old friends in their 70's. Brad had very high levels of cholesterol, while Henry was healthier and had normal levels of cholesterol.
Output: Which friend doesn't take an inhibitor of HMG-CoA reductase?
Background Paragraph: Currently, millions of individuals with high cholesterol take a similar type of drug, known as a statin. The drug, an inhibitor of HMG-CoA reductase (3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl-CoA reductase), the rate limiting enzyme in cholesterol biosynthesis, decreases blood levels of cholesterol by induce the expression of low density lipoprotein (LDL) receptors in the liver. The increased levels of the LDL-receptors stimulate the catabolism of plasma LDL, removing cholesterol from plasma, which is an important determinant of atherosclerosis. You may know of people who take a statin to help with their cholesterol levels. However, these drugs probably work slightly differently in many of those people. In some, it lowers their cholesterol significantly; in others it may lower it only moderately; and in some, it may have no significant effect at all. (Luckily for those individuals, there are multiple versions of the statins, so different drugs can be tested to find the proper combination for that individual.) Why the difference? Because of the genetic background of all people; the different single nucleotide polymorphisms that make us all different. Pharmacogenomics, a combination of pharmacology and genomics (the study of the genome) that refers to the study of the relationship between pharmaceuticals and genetics, may explain and simplify this problem. 
Story: Brad and Henry were two old friends in their 70's. Brad had very high levels of cholesterol, while Henry was healthier and had normal levels of cholesterol.
Output: Which friend takes a drug that decreases blood levels of cholesterol?
Background Paragraph: Currently, millions of individuals with high cholesterol take a similar type of drug, known as a statin. The drug, an inhibitor of HMG-CoA reductase (3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl-CoA reductase), the rate limiting enzyme in cholesterol biosynthesis, decreases blood levels of cholesterol by induce the expression of low density lipoprotein (LDL) receptors in the liver. The increased levels of the LDL-receptors stimulate the catabolism of plasma LDL, removing cholesterol from plasma, which is an important determinant of atherosclerosis. You may know of people who take a statin to help with their cholesterol levels. However, these drugs probably work slightly differently in many of those people. In some, it lowers their cholesterol significantly; in others it may lower it only moderately; and in some, it may have no significant effect at all. (Luckily for those individuals, there are multiple versions of the statins, so different drugs can be tested to find the proper combination for that individual.) Why the difference? Because of the genetic background of all people; the different single nucleotide polymorphisms that make us all different. Pharmacogenomics, a combination of pharmacology and genomics (the study of the genome) that refers to the study of the relationship between pharmaceuticals and genetics, may explain and simplify this problem. 
Story: Brad and Henry were two old friends in their 70's. Brad had very high levels of cholesterol, while Henry was healthier and had normal levels of cholesterol.
Output: Which friend takes a drug that induces the expression of low density lipoprotein (LDL) receptors in the liver?
Background Paragraph: Currently, millions of individuals with high cholesterol take a similar type of drug, known as a statin. The drug, an inhibitor of HMG-CoA reductase (3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl-CoA reductase), the rate limiting enzyme in cholesterol biosynthesis, decreases blood levels of cholesterol by induce the expression of low density lipoprotein (LDL) receptors in the liver. The increased levels of the LDL-receptors stimulate the catabolism of plasma LDL, removing cholesterol from plasma, which is an important determinant of atherosclerosis. You may know of people who take a statin to help with their cholesterol levels. However, these drugs probably work slightly differently in many of those people. In some, it lowers their cholesterol significantly; in others it may lower it only moderately; and in some, it may have no significant effect at all. (Luckily for those individuals, there are multiple versions of the statins, so different drugs can be tested to find the proper combination for that individual.) Why the difference? Because of the genetic background of all people; the different single nucleotide polymorphisms that make us all different. Pharmacogenomics, a combination of pharmacology and genomics (the study of the genome) that refers to the study of the relationship between pharmaceuticals and genetics, may explain and simplify this problem. 
Story: Brad and Henry were two old friends in their 70's. Brad had very high levels of cholesterol, while Henry was healthier and had normal levels of cholesterol.
Output: Which friend takes a drug that removes cholesterol from plasma?
Background Paragraph: Currently, millions of individuals with high cholesterol take a similar type of drug, known as a statin. The drug, an inhibitor of HMG-CoA reductase (3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl-CoA reductase), the rate limiting enzyme in cholesterol biosynthesis, decreases blood levels of cholesterol by induce the expression of low density lipoprotein (LDL) receptors in the liver. The increased levels of the LDL-receptors stimulate the catabolism of plasma LDL, removing cholesterol from plasma, which is an important determinant of atherosclerosis. You may know of people who take a statin to help with their cholesterol levels. However, these drugs probably work slightly differently in many of those people. In some, it lowers their cholesterol significantly; in others it may lower it only moderately; and in some, it may have no significant effect at all. (Luckily for those individuals, there are multiple versions of the statins, so different drugs can be tested to find the proper combination for that individual.) Why the difference? Because of the genetic background of all people; the different single nucleotide polymorphisms that make us all different. Pharmacogenomics, a combination of pharmacology and genomics (the study of the genome) that refers to the study of the relationship between pharmaceuticals and genetics, may explain and simplify this problem. 
Story: Brad and Henry were two old friends in their 70's. Brad had very high levels of cholesterol, while Henry was healthier and had normal levels of cholesterol.
Output: Which friend takes an inhibitor of HMG-CoA reductase?
Background Paragraph: Currently, millions of individuals with high cholesterol take a similar type of drug, known as a statin. The drug, an inhibitor of HMG-CoA reductase (3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl-CoA reductase), the rate limiting enzyme in cholesterol biosynthesis, decreases blood levels of cholesterol by induce the expression of low density lipoprotein (LDL) receptors in the liver. The increased levels of the LDL-receptors stimulate the catabolism of plasma LDL, removing cholesterol from plasma, which is an important determinant of atherosclerosis. You may know of people who take a statin to help with their cholesterol levels. However, these drugs probably work slightly differently in many of those people. In some, it lowers their cholesterol significantly; in others it may lower it only moderately; and in some, it may have no significant effect at all. (Luckily for those individuals, there are multiple versions of the statins, so different drugs can be tested to find the proper combination for that individual.) Why the difference? Because of the genetic background of all people; the different single nucleotide polymorphisms that make us all different. Pharmacogenomics, a combination of pharmacology and genomics (the study of the genome) that refers to the study of the relationship between pharmaceuticals and genetics, may explain and simplify this problem. 
Story: Brad and Henry were two old friends in their 70's. Brad had very high levels of cholesterol, while Henry was healthier and had normal levels of cholesterol.
Output: Which friend takes fewer statins?
Background Paragraph: Currently, millions of individuals with high cholesterol take a similar type of drug, known as a statin. The drug, an inhibitor of HMG-CoA reductase (3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl-CoA reductase), the rate limiting enzyme in cholesterol biosynthesis, decreases blood levels of cholesterol by induce the expression of low density lipoprotein (LDL) receptors in the liver. The increased levels of the LDL-receptors stimulate the catabolism of plasma LDL, removing cholesterol from plasma, which is an important determinant of atherosclerosis. You may know of people who take a statin to help with their cholesterol levels. However, these drugs probably work slightly differently in many of those people. In some, it lowers their cholesterol significantly; in others it may lower it only moderately; and in some, it may have no significant effect at all. (Luckily for those individuals, there are multiple versions of the statins, so different drugs can be tested to find the proper combination for that individual.) Why the difference? Because of the genetic background of all people; the different single nucleotide polymorphisms that make us all different. Pharmacogenomics, a combination of pharmacology and genomics (the study of the genome) that refers to the study of the relationship between pharmaceuticals and genetics, may explain and simplify this problem. 
Story: Brad and Henry were two old friends in their 70's. Brad had very high levels of cholesterol, while Henry was healthier and had normal levels of cholesterol.
Output: Which friend takes more statins?
Background Paragraph: Chemical equilibrium was studied by French chemist Henri Le Châtelier (1850-1936), and his description of how a system at equilibrium responds to a change in conditions has become known as Le Châtelier’s principle . This principle states that when a chemical system is at equilibrium and is disturbed by a stress, the system will respond by attempting to counteract that stress until a new equilibrium is established. Stresses to a chemical system include changes in the concentrations of reactants or products, changes in the temperature of the system, or changes in the pressure of the system. We will discuss each of these stresses separately. In each case, the change to the equilibrium position will cause either the forward or reverse reaction to be favored over the opposite process. When the forward reaction is favored, the concentrations of the products increase, and the concentrations of the reactants decrease. When the reverse reaction is favored, the concentrations of the products decrease, and the concentrations of the reactants increase. 
Story: David was conducting experiments on chemical equilibrium in the chemistry lab. First, he took a chemical system that was at equilibrium. He labeled it as case E. Then he changed the temperature of the system. He labeled that experiment as case T. Finally, he observed two more experiments, case A and case B. In case A forward reaction was favored, and in case B reverse reaction was favored.
Output: In which case the products concentration would decrease, case A or case B?
Background Paragraph: Chemical equilibrium was studied by French chemist Henri Le Châtelier (1850-1936), and his description of how a system at equilibrium responds to a change in conditions has become known as Le Châtelier’s principle . This principle states that when a chemical system is at equilibrium and is disturbed by a stress, the system will respond by attempting to counteract that stress until a new equilibrium is established. Stresses to a chemical system include changes in the concentrations of reactants or products, changes in the temperature of the system, or changes in the pressure of the system. We will discuss each of these stresses separately. In each case, the change to the equilibrium position will cause either the forward or reverse reaction to be favored over the opposite process. When the forward reaction is favored, the concentrations of the products increase, and the concentrations of the reactants decrease. When the reverse reaction is favored, the concentrations of the products decrease, and the concentrations of the reactants increase. 
Story: David was conducting experiments on chemical equilibrium in the chemistry lab. First, he took a chemical system that was at equilibrium. He labeled it as case E. Then he changed the temperature of the system. He labeled that experiment as case T. Finally, he observed two more experiments, case A and case B. In case A forward reaction was favored, and in case B reverse reaction was favored.
Output: In which case the products concentration would increase, case A or case B?
Background Paragraph: Chemical equilibrium was studied by French chemist Henri Le Châtelier (1850-1936), and his description of how a system at equilibrium responds to a change in conditions has become known as Le Châtelier’s principle . This principle states that when a chemical system is at equilibrium and is disturbed by a stress, the system will respond by attempting to counteract that stress until a new equilibrium is established. Stresses to a chemical system include changes in the concentrations of reactants or products, changes in the temperature of the system, or changes in the pressure of the system. We will discuss each of these stresses separately. In each case, the change to the equilibrium position will cause either the forward or reverse reaction to be favored over the opposite process. When the forward reaction is favored, the concentrations of the products increase, and the concentrations of the reactants decrease. When the reverse reaction is favored, the concentrations of the products decrease, and the concentrations of the reactants increase. 
Story: David was conducting experiments on chemical equilibrium in the chemistry lab. First, he took a chemical system that was at equilibrium. He labeled it as case E. Then he changed the temperature of the system. He labeled that experiment as case T. Finally, he observed two more experiments, case A and case B. In case A forward reaction was favored, and in case B reverse reaction was favored.
Output: In which case the reactants concentration would decrease, case A or case B?
Background Paragraph: Chemical equilibrium was studied by French chemist Henri Le Châtelier (1850-1936), and his description of how a system at equilibrium responds to a change in conditions has become known as Le Châtelier’s principle . This principle states that when a chemical system is at equilibrium and is disturbed by a stress, the system will respond by attempting to counteract that stress until a new equilibrium is established. Stresses to a chemical system include changes in the concentrations of reactants or products, changes in the temperature of the system, or changes in the pressure of the system. We will discuss each of these stresses separately. In each case, the change to the equilibrium position will cause either the forward or reverse reaction to be favored over the opposite process. When the forward reaction is favored, the concentrations of the products increase, and the concentrations of the reactants decrease. When the reverse reaction is favored, the concentrations of the products decrease, and the concentrations of the reactants increase. 
Story: David was conducting experiments on chemical equilibrium in the chemistry lab. First, he took a chemical system that was at equilibrium. He labeled it as case E. Then he changed the temperature of the system. He labeled that experiment as case T. Finally, he observed two more experiments, case A and case B. In case A forward reaction was favored, and in case B reverse reaction was favored.
Output: In which case the reactants concentration would increase, case A or case B?
Background Paragraph: Chemical equilibrium was studied by French chemist Henri Le Châtelier (1850-1936), and his description of how a system at equilibrium responds to a change in conditions has become known as Le Châtelier’s principle . This principle states that when a chemical system is at equilibrium and is disturbed by a stress, the system will respond by attempting to counteract that stress until a new equilibrium is established. Stresses to a chemical system include changes in the concentrations of reactants or products, changes in the temperature of the system, or changes in the pressure of the system. We will discuss each of these stresses separately. In each case, the change to the equilibrium position will cause either the forward or reverse reaction to be favored over the opposite process. When the forward reaction is favored, the concentrations of the products increase, and the concentrations of the reactants decrease. When the reverse reaction is favored, the concentrations of the products decrease, and the concentrations of the reactants increase. 
Story: David was conducting experiments on chemical equilibrium in the chemistry lab. First, he took a chemical system that was at equilibrium. He labeled it as case E. Then he changed the temperature of the system. He labeled that experiment as case T. Finally, he observed two more experiments, case A and case B. In case A forward reaction was favored, and in case B reverse reaction was favored.
Output: In which case the system would not try to counteract, case E or case T?
Background Paragraph: Chemical equilibrium was studied by French chemist Henri Le Châtelier (1850-1936), and his description of how a system at equilibrium responds to a change in conditions has become known as Le Châtelier’s principle . This principle states that when a chemical system is at equilibrium and is disturbed by a stress, the system will respond by attempting to counteract that stress until a new equilibrium is established. Stresses to a chemical system include changes in the concentrations of reactants or products, changes in the temperature of the system, or changes in the pressure of the system. We will discuss each of these stresses separately. In each case, the change to the equilibrium position will cause either the forward or reverse reaction to be favored over the opposite process. When the forward reaction is favored, the concentrations of the products increase, and the concentrations of the reactants decrease. When the reverse reaction is favored, the concentrations of the products decrease, and the concentrations of the reactants increase. 
Story: David was conducting experiments on chemical equilibrium in the chemistry lab. First, he took a chemical system that was at equilibrium. He labeled it as case E. Then he changed the temperature of the system. He labeled that experiment as case T. Finally, he observed two more experiments, case A and case B. In case A forward reaction was favored, and in case B reverse reaction was favored.
Output: In which case the system would try to counteract, case E or case T?
Background Paragraph: Chemical equilibrium was studied by French chemist Henri Le Châtelier (1850-1936), and his description of how a system at equilibrium responds to a change in conditions has become known as Le Châtelier’s principle . This principle states that when a chemical system is at equilibrium and is disturbed by a stress, the system will respond by attempting to counteract that stress until a new equilibrium is established. Stresses to a chemical system include changes in the concentrations of reactants or products, changes in the temperature of the system, or changes in the pressure of the system. We will discuss each of these stresses separately. In each case, the change to the equilibrium position will cause either the forward or reverse reaction to be favored over the opposite process. When the forward reaction is favored, the concentrations of the products increase, and the concentrations of the reactants decrease. When the reverse reaction is favored, the concentrations of the products decrease, and the concentrations of the reactants increase. 
Story: David was conducting experiments on chemical equilibrium in the chemistry lab. First, he took a chemical system that was at equilibrium. He labeled it as case E. Then he changed the temperature of the system. He labeled that experiment as case T. Finally, he observed two more experiments, case A and case B. In case A forward reaction was favored, and in case B reverse reaction was favored.
Output: Would the products concentration increase or decrease in case A than in case B?
Background Paragraph: Chemical equilibrium was studied by French chemist Henri Le Châtelier (1850-1936), and his description of how a system at equilibrium responds to a change in conditions has become known as Le Châtelier’s principle . This principle states that when a chemical system is at equilibrium and is disturbed by a stress, the system will respond by attempting to counteract that stress until a new equilibrium is established. Stresses to a chemical system include changes in the concentrations of reactants or products, changes in the temperature of the system, or changes in the pressure of the system. We will discuss each of these stresses separately. In each case, the change to the equilibrium position will cause either the forward or reverse reaction to be favored over the opposite process. When the forward reaction is favored, the concentrations of the products increase, and the concentrations of the reactants decrease. When the reverse reaction is favored, the concentrations of the products decrease, and the concentrations of the reactants increase. 
Story: David was conducting experiments on chemical equilibrium in the chemistry lab. First, he took a chemical system that was at equilibrium. He labeled it as case E. Then he changed the temperature of the system. He labeled that experiment as case T. Finally, he observed two more experiments, case A and case B. In case A forward reaction was favored, and in case B reverse reaction was favored.
Output: Would the products concentration increase or decrease in case B than in case A?