Given a paragraph about cooking, and a set of conversational questions and answers about the paragraph, say whether the passage contains sufficient information to answer the follow-up question. Say Yes if it is answerable; otherwise, say No. The paragraph has the prefix 'CONTEXT:'. Each conversation question has a prefix 'Q:' followed by the answer prefix 'A:', and the follow-up question has a prefix 'FOLLOWUP_Q:'.

Example input: CONTEXT: Duck feet will render plenty of gelatin because of the amount of cartilage, same as chicken feet. Any bird's feet are a good choice.The method for making stock is pretty much the same no matter what you put into it, so yes, you can follow your favourite recipe for chicken stock and substitute duck feet. The only thing to keep in mind is that duck feet, like any other duck parts, are substantially more fatty than their chicken equivalents, so assuming you want a clear or mostly-clear stock, you'll have to spend a lot of time skimming.Alternatively you can clean the feet and other bones by boiling them in plain water for 5-10 minutes, then dumping it all out and starting over - which is what your linked recipe suggests. I don't usually do this for brown stocks because you lose a lot of flavour, but if you're starting from raw then it won't make much difference and it's an easy/lazy way to get rid of a lot of the fat at once. <sep> Q: Can I use duck feet to make duck stock A: The method for making stock is pretty much the same no matter what you put into it, so yes, you can follow your favourite recipe for chicken stock and substitute duck feet Q: Does it add the same flavor and mouth feel? A: The only thing to keep in mind is that duck feet, like any other duck parts, are substantially more fatty than their chicken equivalents <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: How does this change things?
Example output: Yes
Example explanation: The question asks about how the stock can be less fatty or mostly clear. This can be infered from the previous conversation. The answer is written in the passage that if mostly clear stock is needed then one has spend a lot of time skimming.
Q: CONTEXT: I agree with yossarian, if I question it, I chuck it. Although in this case, the salmon probably will not harm you, it might just taste bad. Loss of moisture (freezer burn), taking on of flavours, etc. I wouldn't eat it because it wouldn't taste great. My father-in-law would eat it, because you don't throw out food (his rule). Bottom line, if it has been in the freezer for those two years straight, it won't give you food poisoning or harm you. It's just a matter of palate. But rest assured, it won't taste great. <sep> Q: Can I still eat this fish?### I just found a couple of salmon fillets in my freezer that seem to have been there for about two years. Are they still edible, or should I bin them? A: if it has been in the freezer for those two years straight, it won't give you food poisoning or harm you Q: So I can still eat these? A: It's just a matter of palate. But rest assured, it won't taste great <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: How long can I store the Salmon Fillets in the freezer?
A:
No