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... Question: the author probably believes that: Options: A. a sensible diet is the best way to prevent premature death B. carbohydrates are bad for you C. not enough information D. Fats are bad for you === The correct answer is
A

(Question)
In 1981, when I was nine years old, my father took me to see Raiders of the Lost Ark. Although I had to squint my eyes during some of the scary scenes, I loved it in particular because I was fairly sure that Harrison Ford's character was based on my dad. My father was a palaeontologist at the University of Chicago, and I'd gone on several field trips with him to the Rocky Mountains, where he seemed to transform into a rock-hammer-wielding superhero. That illusion was shattered some years later when I figured out what he actually did: far from spending his time climbing dangerous cliffs and digging up dinosaurs, Jack Sepkoski spent most of his career in front of a computer, building what would become the first comprehensive database on the fossil record of life. The analysis that he and his colleagues performed revealed new understandings of phenomena such as diversification and extinction, and changed the way that palaeontologists work. But he was about as different from Indiana Jones as you can get. The intertwining tales of my father and his discipline contain lessons for the current era of algorithmic analysis and artificial intelligence (AI), and points to the value-laden way in which we "see" data. My dad was part of a group of innovators in palaeontology who identified as "palaeobiologists" meaning that they approached their science not as a branch of geology, but rather as the study of the biology and evolution of past life. Since Charles Darwin's time, palaeontology especially the study of the marine invertebrates that make up most of the record involved descriptive tasks such as classifying or correlating fossils with layers of the Earth (known as stratigraphy). Some invertebrate palaeontologists studied evolution, too, but often these studies were regarded by evolutionary biologists and geneticists as little more than "stamp collecting". Question: Why was the writer impressed with Raiders of the Lost Ark? Options: A. he liked scary movies B. he felt it emulated his father who was a paleontologist C. he liked Harrison Ford as an actor D. not enough information === The correct answer is
(Answer)
B

Question: U.S. President Donald Trump says he is considering tariffs, quotas, and retaliatory taxes on imports of steel and aluminum from countries such as China, Japan, and South Korea. The comments came during a wide-ranging trade discussion Tuesday between Trump and a bipartisan group of lawmakers at the White House. The president said U.S. steel and aluminum industries are being "decimated" by the "dumping" of cheap imports of those materials into U.S. markets. Trump has long threatened what he calls "reciprocal" trade action to deal with steel, aluminum, and other imports. But he has so far avoided taking any major steps, ostensibly out of fear of hurting the country's strong economic performance since he took office. Several lawmakers on Tuesday urged Trump to be cautious when considering retaliatory trade steps, saying such measures could spark a trade war that leads to higher prices for U.S. producers and consumers. "It's very, very much a double-edged sword," Trump conceded. "I want to keep prices down, but I also want to make sure that we have a steel industry and an aluminum industry," he added. The Trump administration is currently renegotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), as well as the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement with South Korea. Trump called the U.S.-South Korea deal "very, very bad" and "horrible." He also said Canada has "treated us very, very unfairly." Last month, the U.S. Commerce Department sent a so-called "232 report" to the White House, examining the national security impacts of steel and aluminum imports, and giving Trump 90 days to impose quotas or tariffs. Under section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, the president can initiate a probe to determine if imports threaten national security. "It's about our economy," Vice President Mike Pence during the meeting. "It's about our national security." Trade was a major topic for Trump during the presidential campaign he vowed to impose a 45 percent tax on Chinese imports and a 35 percent tax on Mexican imports. Question: Where did the US Commerce Department send a report? Options: A. China B. The White House C. Canada D. not enough information === The correct answer is
Answer:
B