(Question)
I'm taking a test and have to guess the right answer to the question after the article. Article: Recently I came in contact with the true meaning of love. That would have been, Kane, a boy. Kane was the two-year-old son of Jolene, my new neighbor. At a glance Kane was a sight. He'd been born with hard sticks for legs. And on that morning I witnessed the effect that Kane's physical shortcomings had on his family. But I also witnessed much more than that. I saw an extraordinary family that embraced this special child. A family that wouldn't allow Kane to know he was different. Jolene had constructed a small cart just a few inches off the floor for his son to get around. Using his hands to move about, Kane moved the cart to "go to" any place just as everyone else was able to do. Kane worked that little cart like a master. Kane was a vital focus of the entire family. He was more than just a member of the family; he was the soul. This child was the driver, the motivator, and the founder of much of the interaction. Much later in my life, I came to realize that God had sent this child to help some of us who just weren't getting what love was all about. Even with my limited capacity for understanding at the time that Kane was a highly developed spirit with great wisdom. Kane demanded attention, but not because of his mobility challenges or other apparent shortcomings. In his mind, he had no challenges or shortcomings. The truth is that he received attention because he was alive and real and had so much to offer. Kane was and still is a lot of warm and powerful energy sent to us all, so we might learn that love surpasses all things. Kane, a fragile yet lovely baby, was here to teach us all an important lesson. And at the age of two he did just that. Question: What can we learn from Kane's story? Options: A: Love me, love my dog. B: Love is above all things. C: Many hands make light work. D: Pure gold fears no fire.
(Answer)
B

(Question)
I'm taking a test and have to guess the right answer to the question after the article. Article: Way back in 1662,John Evelyn,a brilliant Englishman known for his detailed diaries,wrote about disastrous effects of coal-burning on the city of London .In it,he described an _ scene of smog.air filled with "Columns and Clouds of Smoke''given out by small industries and residences that burned coal for fuel. I found the description in the 2003 book When Smoke Ran like Water,by epidemiologist and environmental advocator Devra Davis.In it,Davis looks back at several historic pollution events and their disastrous effect on human human health-and at how these phenomena were often Ignored or even actively covered up by then people in charge at that time. As Davis points out,John Evelyn was ahead of his time when writing about how London's polluted air affected the well-being of its residents.It wasn't until nearly 300 years later,after what became well-known as the Great Smog of 1952,that the government began to address the problem in a systematic way. For four days.Between December 5th"and 9th",due to all accident of the weather pattern,the city was buried in a heavy fog .People were still burning coal for fuel,and low-grade coal at that time, because 0f wartime condition.A temperature inversion trapped the smoke from the city's fires, creating a black cloud in which people could barely find their way down the most familiar streets Some tried to protect themselves,but most people simply went about their business. But l952's fog was far worse than any other in memory.In the same week of the previous year, 1852 people had died in London;inl952,that number was 4703 And the deaths didn't stop when the weather changed and the fog lifted.Davis and her colleagues analyzed data from the next several months and found that about 13000 more people died between December and March than one would have predicted from historical averages Many of them died of pneumonia .The government,she writes.Tried to blame a bad flu season.Her detailed analysis found that explanation simply did not pan out. Davis writes that even today in... Question: One of the reasons for the Great Smog of l952wasthat---- Options: A: people burned wood for fuel B: a forest fire created a black cloud over the city C: the government ignored the smog D: most people went abouttheirbusine00
(Answer)
C

(Question)
I'm taking a test and have to guess the right answer to the question after the article. Article: Is It Worth Buying Organic Food? Organic food, grown without artificial chemicals, is increasingly popular nowadays. Consumers have been willing to pay up to twice as much for goods with organic labels . However, if you think paying a little more for organic food gets you a more nutritious and safer product, you might want to save your money. A study led by researchers at Stanford University says that organic products aren't necessarily more nutritious, and they're no less likely to suffer from disease-causing bacteria, either. The latest results, published in the Annuals of Internal Medicine, suggest that buyers may be wasting their money. "We did not find strong evidence that organic food is more nutritious or healthier," says Dr. Crystal Smith-Spangler from Stanford. "So consumers shouldn't assume that one type of food has a lower risk or is safer." For their new study, Smith-Spangler and her colleagues conducted a review of two categories of research, including 17 studies that compared health outcomes between consumers of organic against traditional food products, and 223 studies that analyzed the nutritional content of the foods, including key vitamins, minerals and fats. While the researchers found little difference in nutritional content, they did find that organic fruit and vegetables were 20% less likely to have chemicals remaining on the surfaces. Neither organic nor traditional foods showed levels of chemicals high enough to go beyond food safety standards. And both organic and traditional meats, such as chicken and pork, were equally likely to be harmed by bacteria at very low rates. The researchers did find that organic milk and chicken contained higher levels of omega-3 fatty acids, a healthy fat also found in fish that can reduce the risk of heart disease. However, these nutritional differences were too small, and the researchers were unwilling to make much of them until further studies confirm the trends. Organic food is produced with fewer chemicals and more natural-growing practices, but... Question: Smith-Spangler and her colleagues found that _ . Options: A: organic food could reduce the risk of heart disease B: traditional food was grown with more natural methods C: both organic and traditional food they examined were safe D: there was not a presence of any forms of bacteria in organic food
(Answer)
C