Given a paragraph about cooking, and a set of conversational questions and answers about the paragraph, say whether the passage contains sufficient information to answer the follow-up question. Say Yes if it is answerable; otherwise, say No. The paragraph has the prefix 'CONTEXT:'. Each conversation question has a prefix 'Q:' followed by the answer prefix 'A:', and the follow-up question has a prefix 'FOLLOWUP_Q:'.

Q: CONTEXT: While adding sugar syrups like corn syrup or invert syrup to ganache is fairly common, it will change the texture of the ganache. You'd end up with something more like a chocolate coating. If bitterness specifically is the problem, I'd suggest using a less bitter chocolate. Perhaps you can find something with lower cocoa solids that will have a smoother flavor without adding any sweeteners.Added from a comment since I remembered: A tiny amount of salt can also help to cover bitterness. You could try that. <sep> Q: How to sweeten ganache for a chocolate lining A: If bitterness specifically is the problem, I'd suggest using a less bitter chocolate Q: Will adding sugar make it grainy? A: While adding sugar syrups like corn syrup or invert syrup to ganache is fairly common, it will change the texture of the ganache. You'd end up with something more like a chocolate coating Q: What do you suggest I use to sweeten the chocolate? A: A tiny amount of salt can also help to cover bitterness. You could try that <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Is there any other important information I need?

A: No
****
Q: CONTEXT: Our brains are wired to consider food more palatable if the dedicated taste receptors (one of the six basic tastes) for salt are triggered. And in a non-urban world, salt/sodium is a valuable nutrient; the fact we might have it too readily available in the developed world doesn't change that we would DIE on a zero-sodium diet (mind that animal products like meat aren't zero-sodium, and that herbivores tend to love licking salt where they find it!). So our brains have a good evolutionary reason to like salt.Also, salt actively interferes (negatively) with another basic taste receptor - the receptor for bitterness (which can mean poison both in nature and in the developed world, or at least something we have no use for, eg an alkali). Most aromatic food (think green vegetables or spices) is bitter, and salt both attenuates that perception and balances it making the combined food still desirable for our brain. You end up with an even more palatable food since you can use an aromatic (desirable) and shut out the bitterness (not always desirable) response.Umami is a different basic taste, probably related to the presence of protein (glutamate, inosinate, guanylate... trigger it - these are amino acids or salts thereof, and an indicator of easily-digestible protein presence). <sep> Q: Why does salt enhance the flavor of food? A: Our brains are wired to consider food more palatable if the dedicated taste receptors (one of the six basic tastes) for salt are triggered <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Is salt related to umami?

A: Yes
****
Q: CONTEXT: Some ingredients do not dissolve well in hot water - the starch swells and thickens, forming lumps that may have raw powder in them and are nasty. They need to be added to cold or lukewarm water and heated after they are dissolved. Other ingredients, most notably pasta, will partially dissolve in cold water making a thick gloppy soup. But if you add them to hot water they will "seal" (in a way) and stay together as they cook. <sep> Q: Why are some kind of packets-soups boiled up in lukewarm water, while normally just stirred into already boiling water? A: if you add them to hot water they will "seal" (in a way) and stay together as they cook <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Can you explain the science behind this cooking procedure?

A:
No
****