Read the following context and choose the correct option to answer the question. Context: I have 2 friends from college who completely did a 180 after they got married. We were party animals in college. Every day revolved around alcohol on some form or fashion. It literally was like the movie Animal House Now these 2 friends (let's call them Bill and Ted) were a little dorky compared to the rest of the other guys. We all played sports in high school and college and they were more like bookworms. Borderline alcoholics but bookworms. They were really awkward around girls but funny as hell around guys. Long story short. Both of them got involved into serious relationships after college and ended up marrying these girls. One girl was this born again Christian who vowed to cleanse Bill from his evil ways. Bill was so far removed from his friends (the wolfpack!) that he didn't even invite us to his wedding. It's been maybe 14-15 yrs now and I have no clue what he's doing. I think one of my friends did attend the wedding but it was only because they desperately needed a groomsmen. Ted married this girl who seemed cool at first but after marriage, he stopped coming to any and all get togethers. He always had an excuse. He ended up moving a few hrs away and eventually just stopped responding to us. He did show up to a mutual friend's wedding maybe 3 yrs ago. He has a baby now but he's alot different than how he used to be. Other than Bill and Ted, all my other friends got married and have pretty normal marriages. Meaning that family is priority but if you got some free time, go enjoy yourself. So we still get together a couple times a year (some more than others) and have a good time. Question: What did everyday revolve around in college? Options: - not enough information - something healthy - something non-alcoholic - something intoxicating
something intoxicating

Read the following context and choose the correct option to answer the question. Context: I've learnt a great amount throughout this studio, first and foremost I was taught: how the art world functions, how specific galleries such as Gertrude St Contemporary run and how artists earn a living. The studio also provided me with basic filmmaking skills such as how to: create a shooting schedule, write a shooting script, set up three-point lighting, conduct an interview, utilise visual storytelling and edit a short film. Throughout the shooting process with my artist I also developed my abilities regarding how to use a: Sony Zoom H2N (and other such handy recorders), a lapel mic, my own Canon EOS 60D and Adobe Premiere Pro editing software. Overall I think the studio functioned quite successfully, it was great to be in a studio with nineteen people who all were interested in the same topics as you. I felt that overall, the studios had a very happy and supportive environment, and you walked away knowing a great deal about the art world and how to make short documentaries. The project itself taught me a great deal about how to work with talent, as well as my group members. Having to work independently forced me to be completely all over every aspect of the shoot, whether that be choosing which questions to ask, deciding what to focus on, where I wanted the shoot to happen, deciding what gear to use, getting to the shoot, carrying all the gear, what I wanted to shoot, managing the audio, managing the lighting, managing the camera set-ups, managing the talent, editing the film, and finding a great soundtrack for it. I'm a pretty self-conscious person and I often doubt the decisions I make or ask someone else for their opinion (should I shoot this angle, or what do you think of this question etc.). Working independently pushed me to go with my gut instincts, to make decisions and to not seek others approval. It forced me to develop my aesthetic as a filmmaker and to own the work that I ended up producing, so ultimately I was really glad with how everything panned out. Question: After the end of the story, the narrator probably still is Options: - A developer - A filmmaker - not enough information - A writer
A filmmaker

*Question*
Read the following context and choose the correct option to answer the question. Context: 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 is probably true about patients from the trial with higher nutrient levels? Options: - they don't eat healthy foods - not enough information - they dislike healthy foods - they like healthy foods
**Answer**
they like healthy foods