(Q).
Exciting news everyone, BIOeffect has now officially launched in Australia. The BIOeffect EGF serum is creating a huge storm world wide. It was first launched in Iceland last year (as it is made by the Icelandic company Sif Cosmetics) and within 6 months of the release it is estimated that 1 in 5 Icelandic women over the age of 30 have purchased the serum. When it was released in France, the serum sold out in the first week at the famous concept store in Paris, Colette. Now, we can finally get it here in Australia and I believe that it will be launching in the US shortly. The serum is highly scientific, and based on reviews around the world, it really appears to work. I have been using it for a week now and my angry line down the middle of my forehead is already seeming less angry. I will post a review once I have been using it for a month or so. If you want to purchase the serum, it is available from the BIOeffect Australia website or if you are looking for updates or reviews on the product then you can either like their Facebook page or follow them on Twitter. So, who is now busting to try the serum? Well, to celebrate the launch, the wonderful people behind BIOeffect Australia, Melanie and Kym, have agreed to sponsor a giveaway of some amazing BIOeffect products. First prize will be one full sized bottle of the amazing BIOeffect serum. This bottle alone is worth $180.00!! In addition there will be two runners up prizes of a 3ml travel sized bottle of the serum. These are worth $40.00 each! Entering the competition is simple. All you need to do is have a read of my article, The science behind the BIOeffect EGF Serum explained, and make a comment on that article about what excites you the most about the serum. Are you like me and are blown away by the science? Is it the fact that independent clinical trials are proving that the serum works? Or is there something else that has grabbed you? Please tell me. Where did BIOeffect first launch? Pick the correct answer from the following options: A. France B. not enough information C. Iceland D. Australia
(A).
C

(Q).
The U.S. Supreme Court signaled Wednesday it may be open to new limits on the government's ability to track someone's movements by accessing data on that person's cellphone. A case before the high court could result in a landmark decision in the ongoing debate over civil liberties protections in an era of rapid technological change. At issue is whether law enforcement will be able to access cellphone data that can reveal a person's whereabouts without having to first obtain a court-issued search warrant. The case stems from the conviction of Timothy Carpenter for a series of robberies back in 2010 and 2011. Prosecutors were able to obtain cellphone records that indicated his location over a period of months, information that proved crucial to his conviction. On Wednesday, lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union argued that law enforcement should be required to obtain a court-ordered search warrant before obtaining such information. They also argued that allowing law enforcement to access the cellphone data without a warrant would violate the prohibition on unreasonable search and seizures contained in the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. "It is impossible to go about our daily lives without leaving a trail of digital breadcrumbs that reveal where we have been over time, what we have done, who we spent time with," said ACLU attorney Nathan Freed Wessler, who spoke to reporters outside the Supreme Court following oral arguments. "It is time for the court, we think, to update Fourth Amendment doctrine to provide reasonable protections today." Some of the justices also raised concerns about privacy in the digital age. "Most Americans, I think, still want to avoid Big Brother," Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who often sides with the liberal wing of the court, said. Chief Justice John Roberts, who often sides with conservatives on the court, said the central question was whether the cellphone information should be accessible to the government "without a warrant." After the amendment, Wessler probably is Pick the correct answer from the following options: A. indifferent B. not enough information C. in favor of the warrant D. against the warrant
(A).
C

(Q).
Much like the Grand Old Duke of York, who had ten thousand men and marched them up to the top of the hill, and then marched them down again, I can't get enough of York (because he visited repeatedly, that was obvious, right?) Having visited nearly half a dozen times over the years, and somehow not managing to share it on my blog over the years, I would say that although you could visit from London for the day, I wouldn't. Go for a minimum of an overnight stay, or a few days if you can. Witness a misty morning, and a candy coloured sunset, wander out into the Dales or slip in a seaside visit somewhere like Scarborough, and really get to know the ancient city. Alas, I haven't really learned how to take my own advice, but hot on the end of a family visit in Lincolnshire we were lucky enough to spend sometime with one of my favourite expats on Yorkshire (ok, ok, I only know two, but they are definitely in the top two of that limited ranking system). It was of course Amanda, her fabulous husband Sam and we got to meet their gorgeous new addition to the family, a mischevious Dachshund pup who goes by the name of Harold. Instagram was alive with "OOOOOOOH MY GOD YOU GOT TO MEET HAROLLLLLD" Forget being a rockstar in this day and age, puppy dog eyes are all you need to make ladies weep and then squeal into their keyboards. We tumbled off the train, cheeks ruddy from the fresh the North Sea breezes (fresh from visiting the Seal colony with a litany of pups at Donna Nook, and nibbling fish and chips with the family in Cleethorpes) and went wandering. I'm going to make a big claim here if you're travelling through the UK and can only fit in one city visit outside of London, York or perhaps Bath would be excellent choices. Compact enough to really explore, full of ancient buildings and history, and good cake. What more do you even need? When did the writer meet Harold? Pick the correct answer from the following options: A. not enough information B. after they exited the train C. while they went wandering D. during time spent with expats
(A).
D