Dietary supplements are big business, with around half of the Australian population using at least one type per year; most commonly a multivitamin and mineral pill. Many people take supplements as a form of dietary insurance in case they are not meeting their nutrient needs from foods alone. Others take them as a form of health insurance to protect against certain diseases. Some just take them out of habit. Supplements do have a role to play in some situations. People with a diagnosed deficiency, those with malabsorption conditions, women planning pregnancy, and people with very poor diets all can benefit from specific nutrient supplementation. But what about the benefit of supplements across the broad population? The mantra of most health professionals, which is even etched on the label of many supplements, is that supplements may only be of assistance if dietary sources are lacking. To see if this is supported by solid evidence, a systematic review of 63 clinical trials involving some form of supplementation in non-pregnant adults was carried out by a team of medical researchers. The clinical trials were broad in their nature with many nutrients studied including vitamins A, B6, B12, C, D and E; folic acid; calcium; selenium, omega-3 fatty acids; ginkgo biloba; glucosamine; saw palmetto; and milk thistle. All of the studies were randomised controlled trials and evaluated a range of health outcomes including risk of heart disease, cancer, diabetes, bone fractures, cognitive function and all-cause mortality. From the 63 studies, no benefit was seen in 45 studies with 10 of these showing a trend towards harm and just two showing a trend towards a benefit. Of the remaining studies, four showed harm with a greater risk of cancer with beta-carotene and a higher risk of fractures with a once-yearly dose of vitamin D. One study showed a lower risk of cancer with selenium supplementation, but this was not validated in much larger trials. Twelve studies showed a benefit and these mostly involved vitamin D... How many people participated in the trials? A. not enough information B. 100 C. 300 D. 200
A

(Question)
Diane's heart felt leaden as she prepared to leave. Each face she looked at, she knew she was seeing for the last time. As if she were dying and they all were going to live on. Oh, why must I leave? Now, when all of you are about to put on the martyr's crown, how can you cast me out? I want to die with you. I do not want to go on, stumbling through this world alone. For years these people had been her only family. When she was a child, her faith was preached and practiced openly all over the south of France. The crusade was already twenty years old then, but the perfecti still taught crowds of people in the streets of great cities like Toulouse and Beziers, still won converts away from the Church of Rome. From the lords and ladies in their castles to the peasants on the mountainsides, over half the people were Cathars. Now this year, one thousand two hundred forty-four, might come to be remembered as the year Catharism in France disappeared. From now on there would be nothing but a remnant in hiding, having to sneak about. No, she didn't want to live that way. She longed to throw herself down and beg Bishop Bertran once again to let her stay. But duty pressed down upon her like a mail shirt. It was burdensome, but it protected her from error. She quietly made ready. Before long, Diane and Roland were standing on the northeast wall amid a group of perfecti. From a family that had taken refuge on Mont Segur had come a red and green costume for Diane, the tunic and hose of a well-to-do boy, an equerry. They had cut her hair short and tucked it under a cap topped with a long partridge feather. They had sewn the red cross back on Roland's black surcoat, and had made one for Diane's tunic from a gentlewoman's crimson scarf. A rope to form a sling was tied around her waist and another around her knees. Roland was similarly tied. Who prepared to leave? A. Bishop Bertran B. not enough information C. Roland D. Diane
(Answer)
D

Ques: I had the joy, absolute joy, of observing an ER nurse just about lose it and the poor pompous MD (who had left the room) was still clueless. I was in the ER with my dad and my sister. It was late. Dad had taken a tumble, hit his head and because he was on a blood thinner, he had to be checked out at the ER. This ER was in the same hospital we always went to. As we completed the history etc. I noted "stroke effecting speech." They had a complete synopsis of dad's history which I gave them as we checked in. Dad is getting tired and his speech was getting more slurred. My Dad was in work clothes. I was in something pretty casual and my sister was in the same clothes (business attire) that she had put on at 6 a.m. I am sure we looked pretty ragged. In waltzes Dr. Hotshot. He looks around and asks my sister and I who we are. My sister introduced us making sure to introduce me as "Dr. Lea (I think that was the first, last, and only time she called me 'Dr."). He then turns to my dad and asked what happened. Knowing how difficult it is to understand Dad, I start to answer. My bad. The doctor abruptly stops me and says, "I didn't ask you. I want him to tell me." In hindsight, I realize he wanted to hear dad's speech as a part of his assessment. Dad begins. His speech is slow and very very slurred. Dr. Hotshot looks totally befuddled. Dad had gotten out about 3 sentences out when Dr. Hotshot stops him and abruptly asks, "Does he always talk like that?" My sister, without missing a beat, replies, "No, sometimes he speaks French." As I am trying to not swallow my head to keep from laughing, I notice the nurse in the room has buried her mouth in her shoulder. Dr. Hotshot exits. A scan shows no damage. And, for the record, Dad never did learn to speak French. How long was the family in the ER? A. a short time B. not enough information C. a long time D. too quickly.
Ans:
C