Q: Having good social relationships -- friends, marriage or children -- may be every bit as important to a healthy life as quitting smoking, losing weight or taking certain medicines. U. S. researchers reported on Tuesday.

People with strong social relationships were SO percent less likely to die early than people without such support, the team at Brigham Young University in Utah found. They suggest that the government look at ways to help people keep social relationships as a way of keeping the population healthy.

"A lack of social relationships was equal to smoking up to 15 cigarettes a day," psychologist Julianne Holt-Lunstad, who led the study, said in a telephone interview.

Her team conducted a study that examined social relationships and their effects on health. They looked at 148 studies that covered more than 308,000 people, published in the Public Library of Science journal PLoS Medicine at www.plosmedicine.org.

Having low levels of social relationships was equal to being an alcoholic, was more harmful than not exercising and was twice as harmful as obesity. Social relationships had a bigger effect on early death than getting an injection to prevent pneumonia ,than taking drugs for high blood pressure and far more important than living in air pollution, they found.

"I certainly don't want to _ these other risk factors because of course they are very important," Holt-Lunstad said. We need to start taking social relationships just as seriously. " But Holt-Lundstad said there was some evidence that assigning caretakers does not help improve people's health. "Naturally occurring relationships may be different than the support received from someone who is hired for that purpose." she said.

1. People with strong social relationships
2. Brigham Young University
3. smoking up to 15 cigarettes a day
4. Julianne Holt-Lunstad
5. psychologist
6. 148
7. 308,000
8. Public Library of Science journal PLoS Medicine
9. no

Numbered questions:
1. Early death was less common with what type of relationships?
2. What institution found this?
3. Lack of social relations was equivalent to what?
4. Who came to this conclusion?
5. What is her job title?
6. How many studies did her team look at?
7. Covering how many individuals?
8. Where were these published to?
9. Were low levels of social relationships worse than alcoholism?

input: Make use of the article to answer the questions. CHAPTER III.

FRANCO

Franco followed the boys all that forenoon, as they went back and forth for their wood. At dinner, they did not say any thing about him to the farmer, because they supposed that he would go away, when they came in and left him, and that they should see no more of him in the afternoon. But when Jonas went out, after dinner, to get the old General, to harness him for work again, he found Franco lying snugly in the General's stall, under the crib.

At night, therefore, he told the farmer about him. The farmer said that he was some dog that had strayed away from his master; and he told Jonas to go out after supper and drive him away. Josey begged his uncle to keep him, but his aunt said she would not have a dog about the house. She said it would cost as much to keep him as to keep a sheep, and that, instead of bringing them a good fleece, a dog was good for nothing, but to track your floors in wet weather, and keep you awake all night with his howling.

So the farmer told Jonas to go out after supper, and drive the dog away.

"Let us give him some supper first, father," said Oliver.

"No," said his father; "the more you give him, the more he won't go away. I expect now, you've fooled with him so much, that it will be hard to get him off, at any rate." 1. Who is Franco?
2. Did he live at his home?
3. What did the farmer want to do with him?
4. Did anyone want to keep the dog?
5. Who?
6. What did his aunt think?
7. why not?
8. would the dog be useful?
9. Did Oliver want to make the dog leave immediately?
10. What did he want to do first?
11. Did Oliver's fatehr agree with this idea?
12. Why did he think it would be a problem?
13. When was Franco following the boys?
14. Did they tell the farmer immediately?
15. Why not?
16. Was the dog gone after dinner?
17. Where was he?
18. Who found him there?
numbered_answers: 1. A dog
2. No
3. Drive him away
4. Yes
5. Josey
6. she didn't want to have a dog about the house
7. it would cost as much to keep him as to keep a sheep
8. no
9. No
10. Give him some supper
11. No
12. Because the more you give him, the more he won't go away.
13. all that forenoon
14. No
15. because they supposed that he would go away
16. No
17. in the General's stall, under the crib.
18. Jonas

Chapter XVII. Foo-foo the First.

Miles Hendon hurried along toward the Southwark end of the bridge, keeping a sharp look-out for the persons he sought, and hoping and expecting to overtake them presently. He was disappointed in this, however. By asking questions, he was enabled to track them part of the way through Southwark; then all traces ceased, and he was perplexed as to how to proceed. Still, he continued his efforts as best he could during the rest of the day. Nightfall found him leg-weary, half-famished, and his desire as far from accomplishment as ever; so he supped at the Tabard Inn and went to bed, resolved to make an early start in the morning, and give the town an exhaustive search. As he lay thinking and planning, he presently began to reason thus: The boy would escape from the ruffian, his reputed father, if possible; would he go back to London and seek his former haunts? No, he would not do that, he would avoid recapture. What, then, would he do? Never having had a friend in the world, or a protector, until he met Miles Hendon, he would naturally try to find that friend again, provided the effort did not require him to go toward London and danger. He would strike for Hendon Hall, that is what he would do, for he knew Hendon was homeward bound and there he might expect to find him. Yes, the case was plain to Hendon--he must lose no more time in Southwark, but move at once through Kent, toward Monk's Holm, searching the wood and inquiring as he went. Let us return to the vanished little King now. What are the answers to this following set of questions: 1. What are we returning to?
2. To what person are we returning?
3. How big was the king?
4. From where did he need to leave?
5. Where was he going after Southwark?
6. And then where?
7. And where did he search there?
8. Who was searching?
9. And his first name?
10. Was he looking for a person?
11. Did somebody escape?
12. From whom?
13. How is his dad described?
14. Did Miles eat a meal?
15. Which one?
16. Did he spend the night there?
17. Which hotel?
18. What time did he leave the next day?
Answer:
1. London
2. Southwark.
3. Little.
4. Southwark.
5. Through Kent.
6. Toward Monk's Holm.
7. The wood.
8. Hendon.
9. Miles.
10. Yes.
11. Yes.
12. His father.
13. Reputed.
14. Yes.
15. Supper.
16. Yes.
17. Tabard Inn.
18. Early.