Problem: I read this background article the other day: Unfortunately, the layer of good ozone is being destroyed by air pollution. The chief culprits are chlorine and bromine gases. They are released in aerosol sprays, coolants, and other products. Loss of ozone has created an ozone hole over Antarctica. Ozone depletion results in higher levels of UV radiation reaching Earth. In humans, this increases skin cancers and eye cataracts. It also disturbs the nitrogen cycle, kills plankton, and disrupts ocean food webs. The total loss of the ozone layer would be devastating to most life. It's rate of loss has slowed with restrictions on pollutants, but it is still at risk. I am facing a new situation today: A new Earth like planet, recently named Moolton, has been discovered near the outer rim of our galaxy. Scientists have managed to send a rover there and are currently analyzing the planet. They have discovered that the atmospheres of the two planets are composed of the same things, and the surface of Moolton and the species on it are nearly identical to Earth. The only difference is that Moolton is not populated by intelligent life such as humans. So, it is a very natural planet with no industrialization which means there is less chlorine gas being secreted into the atmosphere. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Humans on which planet would be more likely to have skin cancer?

A: Earth
Problem: Given the question: I read this background article the other day: Antifreeze could also be called "antiboil" because it also raises the boiling point of the water in a car radiator. Hot weather combined with a hot engine can easily raise the temperature of the water in the radiator above 100 C, which is the boiling point of pure water. If the water boils, it could cause the engine to overheat and become seriously damaged. However, if antifreeze has been added to the water, the boiling point is much higher. For example a 50 percent antifreeze solution has a boiling point of 129 C. Unless the water gets hotter than this, it won't boil and ruin the engine. I am facing a new situation today: John was driving through the Mohave desert. He first added antifreeze to the water in his radiator. He noted that in his journal as case A. Unfortunately, after some time he ran out of antifreeze, and couldn't add antifreeze any more. He noted that as case B. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: In case B would the engine be hotter or cooler than in case A?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The answer is:
hotter
input question: I read this background article the other day: The jejunum is the second part of the small intestine, where most nutrients are absorbed into the blood. As shown in Figure below , the mucous membrane lining the jejunum is covered with millions of microscopic, fingerlike projections called villi (singular, villus). Villi contain many capillaries, and nutrients pass from the villi into the bloodstream through the capillaries. Because there are so many villi, they greatly increase the surface area for absorption. In fact, they make the inner surface of the small intestine as large as a tennis court! I am facing a new situation today: Paul and Dirk were studying the human digestive system. paul studied more about the stomach, while Dirk studied more about the jejunum. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which student read more about villi????
output answer: Dirk
I read this background article the other day: Excess intake of calcium may cause hypercalcaemia. However, because calcium is absorbed rather inefficiently by the intestines, high serum calcium is more likely caused by excessive secretion of parathyroid hormone (PTH) or possibly by excessive intake of vitamin D, both which facilitate calcium absorption. It may also be due to bone destruction that occurs when tumours metastasize within bone. All these conditions result in excess calcium salts being deposited in the heart, blood vessels, or kidneys. Symptoms include anorexia, nausea, vomiting, memory loss, confusion, muscle weakness, increased urination, dehydration, and metabolic bone disease. Chronic hypercalcaemia typically leads to calcification of soft tissue and its serious consequences: for example, calcification can cause loss of elasticity of vascular walls and disruption of laminar blood flowand thence to plaque rupture and thrombosis. Conversely, inadequate calcium or vitamin D intakes may result in hypocalcaemia, often caused also by inadequate secretion of parathyroid hormone or defective PTH receptors in cells. Symptoms include neuromuscular excitability, which potentially causes tetany and disruption of conductivity in cardiac tissue. I am facing a new situation today: Two brothers went to the doctor's office for a medical exam and blood tests. Dan found out he is healthy and had normal blood cholesterol and calcium levels. Ben however, was told that he had a disease called hypercalcaemia and had to start a treatment for that. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which brother experienced more nausea?
----
Answer: Ben
[Q]: I read this background article the other day: Ammonia toxicity is believed to be a cause of otherwise unexplained losses in fish hatcheries. Excess ammonia may accumulate and cause alteration of metabolism or increases in the body pH of the exposed organism. Tolerance varies among fish species. At lower concentrations, around 0.05 mg/L, un-ionised ammonia is harmful to fish species and can result in poor growth and feed conversion rates, reduced fecundity and fertility and increase stress and susceptibility to bacterial infections and diseases. Exposed to excess ammonia, fish may suffer loss of equilibrium, hyper-excitability, increased respiratory activity and oxygen uptake and increased heart rate. At concentrations exceeding 2.0 mg/L, ammonia causes gill and tissue damage, extreme lethargy, convulsions, coma, and death. Experiments have shown that the lethal concentration for a variety of fish species ranges from 0.2 to 2.0 mg/l.During winter, when reduced feeds are administered to aquaculture stock, ammonia levels can be higher. Lower ambient temperatures reduce the rate of algal photosynthesis so less ammonia is removed by any algae present. Within an aquaculture environment, especially at large scale, there is no fast-acting remedy to elevated ammonia levels. Prevention rather than correction is recommended to reduce harm to farmed fish and in open water systems, the surrounding environment. I am facing a new situation today: Woodland had two nearby fish hatcheries. Pine hatchery had great result the past few years because they found a way to reduce ammonia water toxicity. Spruce hatchery has big ammonia toxicity problems and hadn't find a way to remediate them. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which hatchery found more fish with altered metabolisms?
****
[A]:
Spruce