instruction:
In this task, you're given an article and an answer. Your task is to generate the question for the answer based on the given article.
question:
Article: Albert Szent-Gyorgyi was born in Budapest on September 16, 1893. In 1911 he entered his uncle's laboratory where he studied until the outbreak of World War One, when he joined the army. He served on the Italian and Russian fronts, and he was permitted to leave the army in 1917 after being wounded in action. He completed his studies in Budapest before he went to Hamburg for a two-year course in physical chemistry. In 1920 he became an assistant at a university in Leiden, the Netherlands and from 1922 to 1926 he worked with H. J. Hamburger at the Physiology Institute, Groningen, the Netherlands. In 1926, Szent-Gyorgyi was ready to end his own life after an embarrassing problem in his career. The scientist, thirty-two, had written a paper and handed it to his boss for approval to publish. His boss threw it in the dustbin. Concluding his life was a failure, the young researcher quit. Unable to support his wife and child, he sent them home to her parents. His final wish was to attend one last scientific meeting, to be among scientists, to have one last good time. So he went to the 1926 International Physiological Society Congress in Sweden. Sitting in the audience, lost in self-pity, Szent-Gyorgyi listened to the president of the society, Sir Frederick Gowland Hopkins, refer to the fine work of a researcher: Szent-Gyorgyi! After the speech, collecting his courage, he introduced himself to Hopkins. The great man invited the young scientist to Cambridge to do further work. Szent-Gyorgyi's life changed. He discovered the oxidation-preventing action of vitamin C. He won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1937. He accounted for his success by saying that discovery is seeing what everyone else has seen but thinking what nobody else has thought.
Answer: His pride was hurt by his boss.
answer:
Why did Szent-Gyorgyi want to end his own life in 1926?

question:
Article: If you've ever owned a chimney, you know that it can get pretty dirty. There's a whole lot of soot that gets stuck on the inside. That stuff has to get cleaned, or you could have a serious fire risk. While nowadays we have easier ways of doing this dirty job, in the way back days somebody used to climb up the chimney and clean all that soot. And the thing is, not just anybody could do it. You had to be really small to fit up in the chimney, so they used to give the task to kids - some as young as four or five years old. They worked for their boss known as a master-sweep. They were often covered in soot, and were very likely to get burned. They often developed what became known as soot wart, a form of cancer. Are your unfairness bells ringing? William Blake's certainly were. The physical dangers and widespread unfairness of the chimney-sweeping job really stuck in his throat, so much so that he wrote not one, but two poems called "The Chimney Sweeper". The first poem (the one we're discussing here)was published in 1789 in a book called Songs of Innocence. These little poems took children and the joys of childhood innocence as their subject. As you've probably guessed by now, many of the poems in Songs of Innocence, like "The Chimney Sweeper", are about the ways in which childhood innocence is destroyed by unkind old adults. For Blake, innocence is, in many ways, a total joke. It doesn't exist, because it's always taken away by the realistic world - chimney-sweeping, death, poverty, etc. What does a five-year-old chimney sweeper in 18th-century England have to do with you? More than you might think. It is reported that 150 million kids are in child labor in developing countries. Many of them work long hours and face dangerous health risks. Like Blake's chimney sweeper, these kids are not even given a chance at innocence because experience keeps getting in the way.
Answer: Dirty and dangerous.
answer:
Which of the following can best describe the chimney-sweeping job?

question:
Article: If women are mercilessly exploited year after year, they have only themselves to blame. Because they tremble at the thought of being seen in public in clothes that are out of fashion, they are always taken advantage of by the designers and the big stores. Clothes which have been worn only a few times have to be put aside because of the change of fashion. When you come to think of it, only a woman is capable of standing in front of a wardrobe packed full of clothes and announcing sadly that she has nothing to wear. Changing fashions are nothing more than the intentional creation of waste. Many women spend vast sums of money each year to replace clothes that have hardly been worn. Women who cannot afford to throw away clothing in this way, waste hours of their time altering the dresses they have. Skirts are lengthened or shortened; neck-lines are lowered or raised, and soon. No one can claim that the fashion industry contributes anything really important to society. Fashion designers are rarely concerned with vital things like warmth, comfort and durability. They are only interested in outward appearance and they take advantage of the fact that women will put up with any amount of discomfort, as long as they look right. There can hardly be a man who hasn't at some time in his life smiled at the sight of a woman shaking in a thin dress on a winter day, or delicately picking her way through deep snow in high-heeled shoes. When comparing men and women in the matter of fashion, _ . Does the constantly changing fashion of women's clothes, one wonders, reflect basic qualities of instability? Men are too clever to let themselves be cheated by fashion designers. Do their unchanged styles of dress reflect basic qualities of stability and reliability? That is for you to decide.
Answer: New fashions in clothing are created for the commercial exploitation of women.
answer:
According to the passage, which of the following statements is TRUE?