Just a quick review today to talk about these haircare and bodycare products from Yes to Regular readers of Beauty Best Friend will know that I'm always looking out for new natural skincare and bodycare ranges as I'm passionate about products that don't contain lots of nasty chemicals. Yes to is one of these natural brands, based in California their products are always made from at least 95% natural ingredients, are free of parabens, phthalates and SLS, and made with recyclable materials. There are 6 collections, each involves saying 'Yes to' a different fruit or vegetable. The products I've been trying out are Yes to Grapefruit Rejuvenating Body Wash* and Yes to Carrots Nourishing Shampoo and Pampering Conditioner*. Yes to Grapefruit Rejuvenating Body Wash the grapefruit range is aimed at those with uneven or dull skintone. This pearlised white shower gel has a gentle zingy grapefruit scent to wake you up in the morning and exfoliating fruit acids help to remove dead skin cells leaving your skin glowing and smooth. The ingredients are 98% natural and the body wash gives a light foam in the shower. I really like it, grapefruit is one of my favourite fruity scents and the large 280ml tube will last me for ages. Yes to Carrots Nourishing Shampoo & Pampering Conditioner I always avoid sodium laureth sulphate (SLS) in my haircare products as I have a very sensitive scalp and SLS makes it really itchy and sore, so I was really pleased to read that this shampoo and conditioner are SLS free. Made from 97% and 95% natural ingredients respectively this shampoo and conditioner have been formulated for those with a dry scalp and contain carrot seed oil. Both products have a pleasant sweet scent although I wouldn't say they smell of carrots! My thick hair feels clean and soft after using this duo and my favourite thing is that the conditioner totally prevents my hair from tangling in the shower leaving it manageable afterwards. I can run a brush straight through it when drying without having to get all the knots out first! According to the above context, choose the correct option to answer the following question. Question: Why does the reviewer probably avoid chemicals? Options: - probably allergic - possible toxic containers - not enough information - possible harm to environment
probably allergic

"Did you ever have one of those days," inquired Julia of her cat, Cecil, who lay in the crook of her arm and was pushing his head into the fingers of Julia's right hand, "when you think you've noticed something everyone else has missed?" Cecil didn't respond directly, but instead rubbed the side of his cheeks against the spine of Gravity's Rainbow which Julia held lopsidedly in her left hand. "Pynchon keeps bleating about the preterit, right?" Cecil, who began licking his paw and washing his face, did not respond. "-and the elect who are out to destroy them, but he's the one who's treating his characters savagely. I mean, how can you go off on God for malpractice when you treat your characters like you treat cockroaches?" Cecil looked at her for a moment, and resumed washing. "OK, listen to this: 'Nobody ever said a day has to be juggled into any kind of sense at day's end.' I can see that. But I don't throw you against the wall and call the universe evil, do I?" Cecil snorted a tiny snort through his nostrils. "But as far as making trying to make sense of everything... I can see that. That's why I wonder sometimes. Like about Uncle Justin," she continued, aware that Cecil was now standing, arching his back, and attempting to find a comfortable position on her stomach, "who was a science teacher for twenty-two years, who gave up everything, just because... you know..." Julia shook her head and returned the book to its level reading elevation. As a matter of interest, Cecil did not know, but was content enough to curl up again, feeling Julia's hand press against his fur, causing his throat to vibrate with greater volume. That is, until the book slipped and roundly thumped Cecil on the head. According to the above context, choose the correct option to answer the following question. Question: After the end of this story, Cecil is probably Options: - not enough information - happy - hurt - excited
hurt

Q: Today, many academics feel stuck between a rock and a hard place. They're under huge pressure to write and publish but an ever-growing mountain of teaching and admin is stopping them doing just that. Our research finds that whilst nobody is immune to these pressures, some academics cope better than others and that's because over the years, they've developed personal "systems" to help them write. We recently carried out in-depth interviews with 23 scholars across the UK, Europe and the US. We deliberately chose a diverse group so as to not make any assumptions based on age, seniority, or research background. Academic experience ranged from six months to 27 years and subject fields ranged from social sciences, economics, business, and arts. We did this as part of our user research to inform the development of Prolifiko a digital coaching tool for writers. Whilst every academic had developed a writing productivity system personal to them, we found there were six common "habits" that the most prolific (and generally least stressed) academics tended to use. 1. They "time-block" their writing in advance Scheduling booking in time to write in advance was the single most common habit of our writers. It didn't appear to matter what type of time-blocking method a scholar chose to use or how lengthy a writing session was. Some blocked out long periods of time on sabbatical, whilst others preferred to block out short, regular times throughout the day or across a week. What seemed to matter far more was the act of planning, as this mentally prepared the individual for writing and so made the process easier and less stressful. "When I need to write I block out time. I'm lucky in that I can work from home I block out a couple of straight days to do the writing and I plan it in beforehand. I couldn't really write in any other way than blocking out that time." According to the above context, choose the correct option to answer the following question. Question: Who blocks their writing in advance? Options: - Students - Academics - Researchers - not enough information
A: Academics