Problem: OPTIONS:
- irritated
- concerned
- conducting new studies
- not enough information
Q: 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: After the end of the story, the researchers probably are: === The answer to the above question is
Answer: conducting new studies

Problem:OPTIONS:
- not enough information
- valentine's is bad
- her ex ruined valentines
- it isn't a good day

Valentine's Day sucks. Which may sound odd coming from someone who ceaselessly praises love and sex, but it is true. I am not a fan. My mother and father were married in a small Baptist Church on Valentine's Day in 1959. They are no longer together. They are still technically married but my father now lives in a residential care home for dementia patients and my mother lives alone. My father's disease makes him angry and aggressive leaving my mother with blurred and fading memories of his kindness. It is a sad day for all those whose partners are transformed into strangers by illnesses. Some things aren't fair. It is my step(ish) daughter's birthday on Valentine's Day (I am not married to my boyfriend so I can't claim to be a step-mum and there is no other term for it). The end of my boyfriend's marriage has put continents between him and his children. When he hangs up the phone after talking to his daughter, his eyes are dark with pain. It is a sad day for all those whose love is diluted by oceans. Some things can't be changed. I remember the last Valentine's Day I spent with my ex-husband. I was a couple of weeks away from moving out but I hadn't told him yet. I felt sick and scared and heartbroken. My husband and I passed the entire day without speaking. As I stood on the edge of the cliff summoning up the courage to jump, I felt entirely alone. It is a sad day for all those whose love has withered away. Some things can't be fixed. I want to believe that "love is all you need" because it feels as though it could almost be true, but then I remember, on days like this, that for as many hearts that sing, there are equally as many that struggle to beat. Question: The writer believes that === The answer to the above question is
****
A: her ex ruined valentines

For years, Aimee Lind, a librarian at the Getty Research Institute, has been struggling with ways to make architecture archives more accessible to users. To help solve this problem, she co-founded the California Architecture Archives Network (or CalArchNet) with her Cal Poly SLO colleague Jessica Holada. Together they have organized a series of one-day mini-conferences designed to foster dialogue and collaboration among librarians, archivists, and curators at California institutions that house architecture archives. The goal of these semiannual meetings is to create a space for convergence among professionals who intersect with architectural archives in different ways. Architecture archives, often containing large drawings and scale models, present unique problems due to their size and fragility. CalArchNet participants are interested in improving the overall user experience for visitors to the archives by looking for solutions to obstacles to access. This space for an informal exchange of ideas provides an opportunity to be transparent about the challenges repositories face when managing and processing architecture holdings, as well as encourages investigation and experimentation into ways new technologies may help to solve accessibility issues, such as improved interaction with digitized collections via the IIIF protocol or 3D-scanned facsimile models and virtual walk-throughs. October 27 marked the third meeting of CalArchNet, held at the Palm Springs Art Museum, Architecture and Design Center, with representatives from 13 institutions in attendance. Topics discussed included historic site preservation research methodology, leveraging statewide resources to enhance discovery of collections, security considerations, GIS mapping technologies, and the use of linked open data to make connections between collections. The day concluded with a curator-led tour of the exhibition Albert Frey and Lina Bo Bardi: A Search for Living Architecture. If you're an archivist, librarian, or curator working with architecture... Question: Aimee probably thinks that === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- The conferences will foster dialogue and collaboration
- The conferences will get her a new job
- not enough information
- The conferences will allow her to sell her software
The conferences will foster dialogue and collaboration

input: OPTIONS:
- He has been running
- not enough information
- He was nervous about the carriage
- He was sweating from his work Now, answer this question: Jon's back ached. Frost had come early this year and the ground broke like stone. Jon had spent eight seasons breaking this ground to plant spring's crops and every year it got harder. Sweat beaded on his brow and he felt his cotton shirt stick to his skin under his coat. Jon took off his soft-brimmed hat and wiped his forehead. He examined the hat as he let his breath return. The hat had kept the burning sun and beating rain off his head for as long as Jon owned the farm. He wore it every day. It had been a gift given to him on the day he married Alasandra but he could not remember who gave it to him. Jon put it back on his head and pushed the tiller deep into the stubborn earth. Daven ran over the hill and down the cart path leading to their small cobblestone house. The boy had only left a short while ago and he held no sack with the bread and cheese his mother had told him to buy. Jon furrowed his brow. The boy continued to run and soon the wind carried his cry to his father's ears. "Papa! A carriage is coming! Two horses!" Jon's furrowed brow remained. Surely the boy meant a cart from a neighboring farm. No carriage made it out this far. "It's from the city! A soldier drives it!" Jon felt ice water flow over him. He turned to the house. "Sandra! Get the musket out of the pantry!" Jon saw his wife's face appear at one foggy window. Jon gestured wildly at her. "Get it!" They were too late. As Daven reached Jon, the black carriage already approached. A single figure sat on the bench, guiding the two brown horses down Jon's path. Question: Why did Jon wiped his forehead? === The answer to the above question is
A:
output:
He was sweating from his work