input: OPTIONS:
- they are healthy and beneficial for most people
- they should be done at least once a year
- they are a scam
- not enough information Now, answer this question: I repeatedly see people asking advice on forums as to which is the best detox to do. Whenever I see this question I want to scream at the person 'no, don't do it. It is a waste of your time and money'...but I don't. I don't want to cause a scene, or start a barrage of backlash from people claiming that it worked for them. Instead, I will present the facts and let you decide for yourself if it is worth doing. Before I start, I just want to clarify that when I am referring to detox I mean the ones that you buy where you have to take a million various tablets a day and stick to a very restricted diet. If you are going to 'detox' by simply eating healthily then all power to you. That will most definitely do wonders for your body. These detox kits won't. They will produce results; however, the results will be temporary. Why detoxes don't work Firstly, the companies who are marketing the detoxes talk about removing toxins that have built up in the body. So, what are these toxins? They don't say. They remain vague and just leave you to let your imagination run wild. Do they mean chemicals, waste products from digestion, bacteria? I guess I imagined it as the waste products from digestion but it would be interesting to hear what other people perceive as the 'toxins' in their bodies. I read an interesting article on British Beauty Blogger about how Veet gave Chinese women a problem they never had. Chinese women naturally have very little body hair so hair removal products have always been poor sellers. Therefore, Reckitt Benckiser (who own Veet) devised a marketing campaign to convince Chinese that any body hair is unsightly and released ads equating hair free skin with health, confidence and "shining glory" (the full marketing concept can be read here). I feel that this is the same as what is happening in regards to detoxes. The marketers of the products have convinced us that our bodies are full of these so called 'toxins', from our unhealthy lifestyles, that need to be removed with a detox. Question: What does the author think about detox products? === The answer to the above question is
A:
output: they are a scam

I've learnt a great amount throughout this studio, first and foremost I was taught: how the art world functions, how specific galleries such as Gertrude St Contemporary run and how artists earn a living. The studio also provided me with basic filmmaking skills such as how to: create a shooting schedule, write a shooting script, set up three-point lighting, conduct an interview, utilise visual storytelling and edit a short film. Throughout the shooting process with my artist I also developed my abilities regarding how to use a: Sony Zoom H2N (and other such handy recorders), a lapel mic, my own Canon EOS 60D and Adobe Premiere Pro editing software. Overall I think the studio functioned quite successfully, it was great to be in a studio with nineteen people who all were interested in the same topics as you. I felt that overall, the studios had a very happy and supportive environment, and you walked away knowing a great deal about the art world and how to make short documentaries. The project itself taught me a great deal about how to work with talent, as well as my group members. Having to work independently forced me to be completely all over every aspect of the shoot, whether that be choosing which questions to ask, deciding what to focus on, where I wanted the shoot to happen, deciding what gear to use, getting to the shoot, carrying all the gear, what I wanted to shoot, managing the audio, managing the lighting, managing the camera set-ups, managing the talent, editing the film, and finding a great soundtrack for it. I'm a pretty self-conscious person and I often doubt the decisions I make or ask someone else for their opinion (should I shoot this angle, or what do you think of this question etc.). Working independently pushed me to go with my gut instincts, to make decisions and to not seek others approval. It forced me to develop my aesthetic as a filmmaker and to own the work that I ended up producing, so ultimately I was really glad with how everything panned out. Question: When did the narrator develop his ability regarding how to use a lapel mic? === The answer to the above question is

OPTIONS:
- After he went to the studio
- After he used a Sony Zoom
- not enough information
- Before he went to the studio

Answer: After he went to the studio

WASHINGTON U.S. President Donald Trump disclosed in a financial report filed with the government's ethics watchdog Tuesday that he had reimbursed his personal lawyer more than $100,000 for unspecified expenses. In his annual financial disclosure form, which was released by the Office of Government Ethics (OGE) on Wednesday, Trump acknowledged that he had "fully reimbursed" his personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, in the range of $100,000 to $250,000 in 2016. Trump's lawyers have previously said the president reimbursed Cohen for $130,000 Cohen paid to adult film star Stormy Daniels in the final weeks of the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign to keep her quiet about a sexual tryst she said she had with Trump 10 years earlier. Trump has denied the affair but recently confirmed reimbursing Cohen through a monthly retainer to stop "false and extortionist accusations" made by Daniels about an affair. Cohen has also acknowledged making the payment. The disclosure said that while the payment to Cohen was not a "reportable" liability, Trump chose to list it "in the interest of transparency." It did not say why Trump had left it out of his 2017 financial disclosure documents, though one of the president's lawyers, Rudy Giuliani, has said that Trump didn't know about the payment when he reported his finances last year. The Office of Government Ethics, in a letter to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, said it had determined that the payment to Cohen constituted a loan that should have been reported. However, it said the information Trump provided in his latest financial form met "the disclosure requirements for a reportable liability" under the Ethics in Government Act. Under the Ethics in Government Act, top government officials are required to report all debts in excess of $10,000 during the previous reporting period. "Knowingly or willfully" falsifying or failing to file reports carries civil and criminal penalties. Trump listed several hundred million dollars in liabilities in his financial report. Critics seized on... Question: Who said that the information Trump provided in his financial forms met the requirements? === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- Office of Government Ethics
- Michael Cohen
- not enough information
- Donald Trump

Answer:
Office of Government Ethics