TASK DEFINITION: Write a question from the passage such that it identifies a character (a person or a thing) in the passage.
PROBLEM: I never have feed a baby something that they shouldn't have but I know of an instance where someone did
A neighbor of Mine was babysitting for her granddaugther. The mother had placed a water bottle filled with VODKA in the refrigerator. The grandmother used that VODKA to fill the bottle with the powder added.
At some point after the baby wouldn't drink the bottle (because of the taste I imagine) but had drank some the Grandmother realized it was Vodka instead of WATER. She gave the baby Powdered Charcoal and the baby vomited the milk mix up. The baby was Ok and no harm done.
She was lucky to have the powdered charcoal around. It is hard to find now in the stores. When I was a child (50's-60) it was common for All medicine chests to be supplied with Charcoal. I still keep some of that in My medicine chest. I live in a rural area. It would take me 45 minutes to get to a Medical facility. An ambulance takes 14 minutes to get to my house and 45 minutes to get to a hospital.
Now I can say that I have feed babies things that are not recommended at their age. For example, If a baby is not getting full feeling off of just formula, I would make rice cereal and feed the baby that. Some babies are just to big to be satisfied on just milk. Rice is a good filler and does No harm. (like I would not use wheat cereal)
I also would give a baby warm tea when they had a stomach ache. Tea of course has caffeine in it. That would not be considered kosher. I also feed My grand daughters sweet tea. They love it. it is better than many sugary corn syrup infested drinks other chose for their children. I use 3/4 cup of sugar for every 2 gallons, so it is NOT much sugar.

SOLUTION: Who gave the baby vodka?

PROBLEM: Imagine the person you would most like to be, the version of you that is living the life you always imagined. This person has somehow found the solution to all the challenges you face right now. You don't know how, but you can tell that she has her shit together at long last. She is not perfect because she is still growing and learning but she is what you ache to be.
Can you see a picture of this wonderful evolved future you?
PHYSICAL
What does she look like? What clothes is she wearing? What colour and style is her hair? How does she stand and walk? How does she speak? How often does she smile? Make the physical image colourful and bright and see the beauty, love and light in her eyes.
EMOTIONAL
How does the wonderful evolved future you connect with your partner and children? How is she at work? What does she do after a bad day? What are her sources of rest and renewal?
MENTAL
How does the wonderful evolved future you think about her life? Is she filled with positive optimism for the future? Is she grateful for the past struggles that have made her strong? Does she think kind and loving thoughts towards herself? Does she take great care of herself?
BEHAVIOUR
How does the wonderful evolved future you behave around food? Does she eat fresh, healthy food in appropriate amounts? Does she move her body in ways that fill her with energy and vitality? Does she indulge in treats occasionally? Does she forget about food unless she is hungry? Does she get enough sleep? Does she take great care of herself?
NOW PUT HER TO WORK
Once you have a brilliant, clear, detailed description of the wonderful evolved future you it is time to put her to work.
Every time you are faced with a behavioural choice ~ what to eat, how to train, believing negative thoughts ~ ask yourself "What would the wonderful evolved me do?" Vividly imagine her in the situation you are now in and take note of what she would do.

SOLUTION: Who does the author say you ache to be?

PROBLEM: Called the PURE (Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology) study, this was a very large observational study looking at the link between fat and carbohydrate consumption and longevity in 18 countries across 5 continents. Running for 7 years and involving over 135,000 people, this was a very big study so its conclusions are right to take notice of.
The key finding from the work that attracted the most media attention was that a high carbohydrate diet was linked with a higher risk of earlier mortality, whereas total fat and individual types of fat were related to a lower risk of earlier mortality.
Digging deeper into the study, the research team found that global diets consisted of 61 percent energy coming from carbohydrates and 24 percent energy from fats. And while those in the highest carbohydrate consumption group (a whopping 77 percent of energy) had a higher risk of earlier death, it wasn't cardiovascular disease they were dying from. What those other causes of death were exactly is unclear. Perhaps getting hit by a car running for a Mars Bar was one of them as a recent commenter on my Facebook page theorised.
A paradigm shift? Not quite
Does this study turn on its head 'everything we knew about nutrition?' Not quite. And here's why.
Before the PURE study, there were many studies showing the opposite link between carbohydrates and longevity. So, when a conflicting study comes along, this grabs the media spotlight for the day.
Here is just one example a major systematic review and meta-analysis from 2013 involving 17 individual studies and over 242,000 people showing a higher risk of earlier mortality as carbohydrate intake decreased. And this is the problem at times with observational research in that two studies can give polar opposite results so the findings of the PURE study should be seen through this filter.
I'm not going to pick apart the PURE study for its flaws. Such issues are consistent across all observational studies no matter if the conclusions support consensus views or not. What is of value to look at is the positive messages the study gave and how when you look at the full research field, it takes you back to some pretty sensible advice.

SOLUTION:
Who was eating?