Q: 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... Question: According to the study, when do people die at a younger age? Options: - after consuming mostly carbohydrates their whole life - during the consumption of large amounts of carbohydrates - not enough information - before consuming mostly carbohydrates their whole life === The correct answer is
A: after consuming mostly carbohydrates their whole life

Q: The classic Key West-style house just off Fleming looked much like the rest of the residences on the block - two-story wooden frame walls and peaked roofs with shallow porches nearly butting up against the sidewalk. Chloe's rusting blue Vespa was tucked away beside the house, in the narrow space separating it from the neighbors. To anyone walking by outside, everything looked quiet and peaceful. Inside, Chloe was pissed. Everything had been going great and then those stupid fuckers had decided to show up a week early, forcing her to scramble to pack a week's work into a single day. She wore a black bandana wrapped around her head, covering her buzz cut pink hair. Numerous smudges of dirt on her cheeks and the tip of her nose testified to the heavy-duty cleaning she'd been doing for the past five hours. She wore loose fitting shorts and a tight-fitting tank top that had once been white. In her bare feet she pushed a mop across the hardwood floors, grumbling to herself. She heard the door open and looked up to see Paul standing in the doorway. Even though it wasn't his fault, she glared at him as he came in. As much as Chloe liked a clean house, she hated housework, and this wasn't even her house. This particular space was sparsely decorated with just a few worn pieces of furniture and some bad condo art on the walls. After six months of being sealed up tight with the air conditioner off, it smelled of dust and mildew and needed a good airing out. "What are you doing?" asked Paul, closing the door behind him. "Mopping," she said, her voice flat. "Right. But why are you mopping here? Whose house is this anyway?" "It's one we just added to the roster last week. The cleaning service hasn't had a chance to get in here yet." "I see that," said Paul. "So why're you cleaning it tonight?" "We're cleaning it tonight because the Guidarizzi's decided to make a surprise visit to their winter home in Key West. They're coming in tomorrow afternoon. Every other decent place is filled up, so we have to use this one instead." Question: Chloe probably were cleaning the house for: Options: - not enough information - Few minutes - She just arrived - Few hours === The correct answer is
A: Few hours

Q: The U.S. State Department has asked American embassies and consulates around the world to identify certain groups that should get extra scrutiny when they apply for visas. A series of directives also instructs U.S. diplomatic posts overseas to review the social media accounts of visa applicants who are suspected of terrorist ties or of having been in Islamic State group-controlled areas. The diplomatic cables sent by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson directed embassies to convene security and intelligence working groups to determine criteria for "population sets" that would warrant increased scrutiny before traveling to the U.S. Even if the applicant otherwise qualifies for a visa, those identified as meeting the criteria would require additional scrutiny, leading to a possible visa denial. It is the first evidence of a plan for the "extreme vetting" of foreigners entering the United States that President Donald Trump promised during his campaign. The four cables sent between March 10 and March 17 do not define which groups would be considered among the "population sets" requiring more scrutiny. But in the first glimpse into what "extreme vetting" may look like under the Trump administration, one of Tillerson's memos would have added to the interview process questions about an applicant's workplaces, employers, addresses and travel history going back 15 years, as well as all email addresses and social media handles used in the last five years. The questions were withdrawn in a following memo, pending approval of the list by another federal agency. The directives, first reported by Reuters, quickly drew criticism from rights groups and others who've accused Trump of discriminating against Muslims through his now-suspended ban on travelers from six predominantly Muslim countries Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. "These measures could provide license for discrimination based on national origin and religion,'' human rights group Amnesty International wrote in a letter to Tillerson on Thursday. "They... Question: Why are human rights groups protesting the proposed guidelines for extreme vetting? Options: - The guidelines could be used to discriminate based on religion and/or national origin - not enough information - Asking questions about an applicant's workplaces, employers, addresses and travel history is a violation of privacy - Requiring all email addresses and social media handles used in the last five years is too onerous for travelers === The correct answer is
A: The guidelines could be used to discriminate based on religion and/or national origin