user: Problem: OPTIONS:
- not enough information
- her clothes
- nothing
- a blanket
Q: A few times. Mostly whilst doing this job and trying to help drunk people or assholes. Sadly it's becoming a regular occurrence for crews to be assaulted. My last time was a few days ago and the worst thing about it was watching my crew mate and several police officers curl up laughing. I'll set the scene. Imagine. If you will. A large rather expensive hotel. Then add to that image a rather drunk and buxom young lady who is lying on the floor in a drunken slumber after taking off a lot of her clothes. She was just in her underwear. We were called to look after her. On our arrival she was absolutely fine. Stood up, walked to the stretcher and lay down. Whining about how we were the ' oppressors of society', and other such drivel Because I had the cheek to try and give her a tiny bit of dignity by covering her up with a blanket. She didn't want that. We made it to the ambulance without any hassle and started to do the necessary checks we do on every patient. Blood pressure etc etc when out of the blue she decided that she wanted to release her rather large breasts. Try as I might to give her a little bit of dignity she wasn't interested so we just made sure no one could see inside the ambulance. After a few minutes she calmed down so I put the blanket over her. Something I do for almost every patient. Without warning THWACK. she hit my in the face with her boob. Then. As I reeled from this waiting for my brain to catch up and make sense of everything, THWACK she did it again. Right round the face with a large breast!! I turned around to get some support from my colleagues who were crying. Both my crew mate and the officer. Crying. Neither able to speak……….. I didn't know what to say for a while after that…something my crew mate called 'a blessing' Sigh According to the above context, answer the following question. What did the lady wear?
Answer: nothing

Problem:OPTIONS:
- returns to the FBI after a few months
- not enough information
- Does not return to working for the FBI ever
- works for a restaurant chain

U.S. President Donald Trump on Friday blasted former FBI director James Comey as an "untruthful slime ball," and said it was his "great honor" to fire him. Trump's barrage of insults comes as Comey engages in a publicity campaign for his book, "A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership," which is set to be released next week. The memoir promises a deep look at Comey's fraught relationship with the U.S. president who fired him, and whom Comey has accused of interfering in the independence of the FBI. On Twitter, Trump said Comey should be prosecuted. Trump's comments are in line with an online campaign, organized by his supporters, to discredit Comey. The Republican National Committee on Thursday launched a new website, Lyin'Comey.com, which features quotes from prominent Democrats who have criticized the former FBI director in the past. The GOP plans to fact-check Comey's book and use the website for "rapid response" to highlight any "misstatements" or "contradictions," Fox News reports. Comey's book blasts Trump as unethical and "untethered to truth'' and calls his leadership of the country "ego driven and about personal loyalty.'' The book also contains several personal jabs at Trump, including references to what Comey says are the "bright white half-moons" under Trump's eyes, which he surmises were the result of Trump using tanning goggles. Comey also casts Trump as a Mafia boss-like figure who sought to blur the line between law enforcement and politics, and tried to pressure him regarding his investigation into Russian election interference, according to multiple early reviews of the book. Trump fired Comey in May 2017, setting off a storm of charges from Democrats that the president sought to hinder an investigation into whether his campaign colluded with Russians. The firing led to the appointment of Robert Mueller as special counsel overseeing the Russia investigation. Mueller's probe has expanded to include whether Trump obstructed justice by firing Comey, an idea the president denies. Trump has... According to the above context, answer the following question. After the story ends, Comey probably:
****
A: Does not return to working for the FBI ever

input: OPTIONS:
- probably a few months to years
- probably a few weeks
- probably a few days
- not enough information Now, answer this question: Called the PURE (Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology) study, this was a very large observational study looking at the link between fat and carbohydrate consumption and longevity in 18 countries across 5 continents. Running for 7 years and involving over 135,000 people, this was a very big study so its conclusions are right to take notice of. The key finding from the work that attracted the most media attention was that a high carbohydrate diet was linked with a higher risk of earlier mortality, whereas total fat and individual types of fat were related to a lower risk of earlier mortality. Digging deeper into the study, the research team found that global diets consisted of 61 percent energy coming from carbohydrates and 24 percent energy from fats. And while those in the highest carbohydrate consumption group (a whopping 77 percent of energy) had a higher risk of earlier death, it wasn’t cardiovascular disease they were dying from. What those other causes of death were exactly is unclear. Perhaps getting hit by a car running for a Mars Bar was one of them as a recent commenter on my Facebook page theorised. A paradigm shift? Not quite Does this study turn on its head ‘everything we knew about nutrition?’ Not quite. And here’s why. Before the PURE study, there were many studies showing the opposite link between carbohydrates and longevity. So, when a conflicting study comes along, this grabs the media spotlight for the day. Here is just one example – a major systematic review and meta-analysis from 2013 involving 17 individual studies and over 242,000 people showing a higher risk of earlier mortality as carbohydrate intake decreased. And this is the problem at times with observational research in that two studies can give polar opposite results so the findings of the PURE study should be seen through this filter. I’m not going to pick apart the PURE study for its flaws. Such issues are consistent across all observational studies no matter if the conclusions support consensus views or not. What is of value to... According to the above context, answer the following question. How long did the PURE study last?
A:
output:

assistant: probably a few months to years