Apologies again that it's been a while since I last posted. You may recall that I'd been helping out a local charity with their website? Well that is all completed now but I've had some other family stuff going on and with looking after my baby daughter spare time for blogging is pretty scarce at the moment. I haven't lost my enthusiasm though and am busy planning all sorts of new posts for the future, so watch this space! Today I wanted to tell you all about a fantastic natural brand, Moogoo. Regular readers of Beauty Best Friend may recall that I reviewed their Full Cream Moisturiser last year, but having received this Oil Cleansing Method* cleanser in a goody bag from a blogger event a couple of months ago it fired up my love for them all over again! MooGoo is an Australian natural skincare brand that was first created when the founder adapted a cream used in dairy farms to help a family member with a skin problem. Their products contain lots of natural oils and are not tested on animals well, apart from the very first of their products that was created for cows! Moogoo Oil Cleansing Method is an all natural cleansing oil that can be used in two ways. you can use it like a wash-off cleanser by applying a few drops to the face then rinsing it off with warm water, or my favourite method is to massage the oil into the skin then place a warm flannel or muslin over the face to allow the oil to draw any impurities out of the skin, before wiping away the oil. This is a great way of starting off a DIY facial at home! There are four varieties of Oil Cleansing Method, I've been using the one for Oily Skin but it's also available in Normal, Combination and Dry too. The ingredients include 'drawing oils' that help to lift dirt and germs off the skin so they can be washed away, plus the Oily one contains Juniper Oil which helps to prevent bacteria on the skin, great for helping keep spots at bay. Question: Who reviewed the moisturizer? Options: A. not enough information B. Moogoo company C. Another beauty blogger D. The narrator === The correct answer is
D

What are the worst examples of false advertising you've seen? Did you fall prey to their claims? Rather that vouch for myself - my story is trite, and not particularly interesting - I'll relay the tale one of my nurses shared with me when I was laid up in the hospital for a few weeks. Call her R. R was from an Eastern European country. We chit-chatted a lot, while she was taking my blood pressure readings and stuff. Lots of fun stories! But she relayed to me one of her first U.S. memories: She wanted to lose weight. She was impressed by some things the U.S. had to offer - "you have actual nutritional information on everything!" - and thus figured everything she encountered was on the level. And she found a "miracle cure" company who was along those lines! "These are AWESOME miracle shoe inserts! Wear them, and the pounds will melt away!" She saved her pennies and dimes; she sprung for the inserts. She received them... and they were shoe inserts; that much was true. But then there was their documentation: "using these insoles, combined with a 1200 calorie-per-day diet...." Like a 1200-calorie diet won't likely involve weight-loss, no matter what else you did, shoe inserts aside. The inserts did nothing, obviously. It was a sham. At which point she knew she was snookered, but really had no recourse. She wasn't explicit about it, but I got the feeling that it was a leading factor towards her chosen profession. "I might not have been the most sage medical person ever, but I'm gonna rectify that, and if ever I hear someone falling for that sort of gambit again, I'll be there to nip those sentiments in the bud with my own anecdotes." Which is awesome. I still feel for her. I wish I had contact information, so I could touch base, and express those thoughts personally. But that's the most personally resonant version of false advertising affecting someone that I've seen. Question: Whose claims should we not fall prey to? Options: A. The customer. B. The false advertisers C. The advertisers. D. not enough information === The correct answer is
B

Q: Is not necessarily worth two of anything, anywhere else. But it can certainly be a heck of a lot of fun. During my days as an inmate in Bridges House at the University of New Brunswick, I shared this space with about 99 other testosterone-addled 'young adults' whose charming tendency to get completely out of hand was barely held in check by the rod of authority of the Don and Resident Fellow. This is not to say that these two worthies weren't good at their jobs; more accurately, their task was more akin to herding cats -- fairly obtuse, barely socialized cats. Given the state of controlled chaos that existed, it wasn't unusual for little conflicts to arise from time to time. Being rather physically small and odd, I came in for a certain amount of abuse from someone called Scut, a large and obnoxious Newfie (hmmm, that's like saying that water is wet). I can't remember what it was he did to me, but it was serious enough that I decided to get my own back. It's been said that revenge is a dish best enjoyed cold. I think revenge is a dish best enjoyed in secret with no chance of counter-revenge to spoil the occasion. And so it was that I laid my plans against Scut. The occasion and place were set. My means of entry was secured. Now I needed material. For me, the only good fish is a live one. Even though I hale from NB, I really don't like free-swimming seafood. Considering the unimaginative cuisine of my youth, it's surprising that I eat anything at all. So with dead, smelly fish in mind, I persuaded my friend Shan to pick one up when he was down at the Saturday Farmer's Market. He returned with a four-pound shad, frozen solid. Shad has even more bones than other fish and you'll never see it featured on any cooking show (except maybe Iron Chef, where the disgusting and unusual seems to be standard). It took me all day to thaw out the fish in the lounge sink?#8364;?an activity which elicited howls of complaint from the guys trying to watch TV. Question: why was the author using the fish? Options: A. to cook it B. not enough information C. to get revenge D. to eat it === The correct answer is
A: C