SINGAPORE President Donald Trump will leave Singapore Tuesday night after his historic summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un the White House said Monday, adding that talks between U.S. and North Korean officials "are ongoing and have moved more quickly than expected." A White House statement said Trump will hold a one-on-one meeting with Kim Tuesday morning, with only translators present, followed by a working lunch and an expanded bilateral meeting that will include Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Chief of Staff John Kelly, and National Security Advisor John Bolton. The U.S. president will then address the media before flying out late Tuesday Singapore time. Previous reports had suggested Trump would leave on Wednesday. On the eve of the first encounter between a sitting U.S. president and a leader of North Korea, American officials are maintaining any resulting agreement must lead to an end of North Korea's nuclear weapons and ballistic missile threats. There will not be a repeat of "flimsy agreements" made between previous U.S. administrations and North Korea, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told reporters in Singapore on Monday. "The ultimate objective we seek from diplomacy with North Korea has not changed the complete, verifiable and irreversible de-nuclearization of the Korea peninsula is only outcome that the United States will accept," declared Pompeo. Sanctions will remain until North Korea completely and verifiably eliminates its weapons of mass destruction programs, added Pompeo. "If diplomacy does not move in the right direction, those measures will increase," he said. Pompeo said he is "very optimistic" the meeting Tuesday between President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un "will have a successful outcome." "It's the case in each of those two countries there are only two people that can make decisions of this magnitude and those two people are going to be sitting in the room together tomorrow," said Pompeo. He declined, however, to reveal any details of the... According to the above context, choose the correct option to answer the following question. Question: How did Trump get to Singapore for the summit? Options: - plane - boat - car - not enough information
plane

The frenetic lifestyle that many people live today is very harmful. Rushing here and there, being constantly on call, balancing multiple layers of responsibility may give you a sense of accomplishment even make you feel important, but it takes a huge toll on every aspect of life. When you constantly push yourself to take on more and more challenges, it is easy to lose sight of why you wanted to be successful in the first place. For many, the reason was to be able to spend less time working and enjoy life more. A frenetic, high-pressure lifestyle creates exactly the opposite. There is a very dark side to constantly pushing yourself to produce more and more. Unfortunately, it creeps up on you and becomes a serious case of self-negligence. When you are busy and driven every minute of every day and well into the evening, it is easy to neglect important things in life that keep you healthy, happy, and create quality of life. A continual stream of urgent tasks that must be completed will overshadow the not-so-urgent, but important activities that make life worth living. It is not just physical well-being that is neglected mental and emotional well-being also suffer when there is no time for self-care. When your daily schedule is crammed to overflowing one of the first areas of neglect is your diet. Eating regular, nutritious meals become a thing of the past. You are not only too busy to sleep or even take a deep breath now and then, there is no time to prepare decent meals Convenience foods, frozen dinners, take out and fast foods become the norm. It is a steady diet of additive filled, sugar and fat-filled dishes, loaded with empty calories that provide minimal nutrition and damage the body. It is impossible to sustain any level of good health on such a diet. According to the above context, choose the correct option to answer the following question. Question: What does the author equate eating regular nutritious meals with? Options: - being happy and healthy - having money for higher quality food - being thin and fit - not enough information
being happy and healthy

(Question)
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... According to the above context, choose the correct option to answer the following question. Question: Who is the author Options: - a participant - a researcher - not enough information - a student
(Answer)
not enough information