Problem:OPTIONS:
- His plans
- His new designs
- not enough information
- His Job

Paul knew that the plan was insane and probably illegal. Certainly the stuff he'd been helping Chloe and her gang of followers do for the last few hours was technically illegal. He'd asked them why they were helping him, what did they hope to gain? They'd told him that this is what they did for fun. Chloe assured him that they "lived for this kinda shit." Ok, fine. He could sort of see that. Once he was there, helping them come up with the plan and then actually carrying it out, it sure as hell was exciting - probably the most exciting thing he'd ever done. Now that he was home and alone with his misgivings and paranoia, it all seemed like a really stupid idea. If it weren't for Chloe and her mesmerizing enthusiasm, there's no doubt that he wouldn't be doing this at all. But it was too late now. Or was it? It was five in the morning when Paul got back to his apartment. He'd told Chloe that he wanted to get a few hours sleep before the big meeting, but he now realized that there was no way he was going to be able to relax. When he'd stepped out the door twenty-two hours earlier he'd still had his job and was looking forward to a showing the rest of the art team his new designs for some of the higher-level monsters he wanted to add to the game. Screw that, he thought, they're my monsters now. I'll use them somewhere else. It could never work. How could it? Right then and there Paul decided that he was going to call the whole thing off. It wasn't too late. They hadn't done anything yet that wasn't reversible. No one had been hurt. No money had changed hands. No one had been lied to. If he called it off right now he could just move on and try and put the whole, sorry state of affairs behind him. Question: What did Paul lose the day before? === The answer to the above question is
****
A: His Job

Relatives of a dying lady I was caring for kicking and screaming not to give their Mum pain relief because they were so terrified / knew it would probably be the thing to end her life. She had a horrible aggressive cancer that ravaged her whole body and needed very regular doses of strong pain relief which - as she had a terminal illness and was receiving end of life care - did not have an upper limit so to speak. She had pain relief as and when needed to make her comfortable and that often results in people ultimately overdosing. Mum had Alzheimer's and was howling and writhing in agony so we were giving her pain relief but daughters knew it would probably result in her death - which they were right about possibly happening and in their grief and panic, started trying to prevent us from doing anything. Didn't want us getting near her at all and we had to go through an awful scenario of trying to explain what we had to do for Mum and why and when they still wouldn't have it or allow us near, we had to do what nobody wants and go against their wishes by administering the pain relief anyway. One daughter screamed the place down, threatened to have me arrested and struck off / said she would go to the papers and tell them about how we killed her Mum and in the end she had to be removed from the bedroom. Her Mum was given the pain relief, immediately relaxed and fell asleep then died peacefully in her sleep about 15 mins later. The saddest thing is her daughter wasn't able to be there and see her Mum dropping off so peacefully and her last memory will forever be of her screaming and thrashing about as she (daughter) was physically removed from the room. Tragic. Question: what is probably true about the mother === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- not enough information
- she really loves her daughter
- she feels sorry for herself
- she is ready to die
she really loves her daughter

A federal judge on Thursday rejected efforts by Texas to stop the resettlement of Syrian refugees within its borders. The ruling comes days after presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump called to block non-citizen Muslims from entering the U.S. following the Orlando nightclub massacre. Even before the attack, Americans were divided, mostly along party lines, on the issue of refugees from war-torn countries in the Middle East. A survey conducted in late May by the Brookings Institution found of those polled, just 38 percent of Republicans supported taking in refugees from Syria and the Middle East, compared with 77 percent of Democrats. But among Trump supporters, an overwhelming 77 percent said they oppose taking in refugees. So who are these people who cause such a divide among Americans, triggering feelings of dread and suspicion in some and feelings of empathy and hospitality in others? Millions have been forced to flee the bloody conflicts in Syria, Iraq, Libya and other Middle Eastern nations. In 1951 the United Nation's Refugee Convention defined a refugee as someone who "owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality, and is unable to, or owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country." By the end of 2014, there were 19.5 million refugees worldwide, according to the United Nations, 14.4 million of whom were under the mandate of the United Nations Human Rights Council. This was an increase of 2.9 million from 2013. The remaining 5.1 million refugees were registered with the United Nations Relief and Works Agency. However, there are an estimated 59.5 million forcibly displaced persons around the world, according to United Nation's Global Trends report. This population not only includes refugees, but internally displaced persons, asylum-seekers and stateless people as well. President Barack Obama has set... Question: which people said they opposed taking in refugees === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- most of trump supporters
- democrats
- not enough information
- republicans

Answer: most of trump supporters

Problem: OPTIONS:
- magnesium, zinc, iron, and calcium
- selenium, calcium, iron, copper
- not enough information
- calcium, iron, phosphorus, copper
Q: Following up from my recent blog post explaining why dietary supplements offer few benefits for most people, new research has found that people who take a mineral supplement actually consume more minerals from their normal diet than non-supplement users. The notion of the 'worried well' is certainly alive and kicking. Vitamin and mineral supplements are big business. Reported figures in Australia suggest that 27% of women and 15% of men take some form of supplement with vitamin C, B complex, multivitamins, vitamin E and calcium all being popular choices. Contrary to the rationale for needing supplements in the first place, people who take supplements are more likely to be healthier than people who don't take supplements. Supplement users also tend to be leaner, smoke less, exercise more, and eat more fruit and vegetables. While it may seem obvious that people who take supplements likely consume more nutrients from their regular diet to start with, this hasn't been well studied in large population groups. Using data from a nationally representative government health survey, researchers from the United States looked at the mineral intake from food and supplements of over 8000 men and women between 2003 and 2006. The results were clear cut: people taking mineral supplements were consuming more minerals from their normal diet than those who didn't take supplements. The observation was even stronger in women than in men. The eight most popular mineral supplements taken were calcium, iron, magnesium, zinc, phosphorus, copper, potassium and selenium. Proving that it is possible to have too much of a good thing, supplement users were more likely to be exceeding the recommended upper level of intake for magnesium, zinc, iron and calcium. For someone who believes that they are reasonably healthy and are conscious of what they eat most of the time, taking a mineral supplement 'just in case' offers little to no benefit. Question: What are the minerals that supplement users are likely to be exceeding the upper limit? === The answer to the above question is
Answer:
magnesium, zinc, iron, and calcium