input: The kid was going for a quick swim. He loved to get out and hop back into the water. When he was out of the pool he liked to dance and run around. Sometimes when he got out he would sit in the chair and get some sun. He liked to work on his skin color. Just like his mommy. He would take his toys and hop in the water with them. He liked to play football in the water the most. He was taller than the other kids his age, so he could play football and not worry about the bigger kids. He could jump into the deeper section of the pool as long as he got back to where he could touch before his mom worried too much. The pool was his favorite place in the world. The boy could imagine he was doing anything. All of his problems went away. It was a very nice place for him to get his energy out and make friends for when he wasn't at the pool. He loved making friends. 1. did the kid like to tan?
2. did he go for a long swim?
3. when he was out of the pool what would he do?
4. did his mom like to tan too?
5. where did he take his toys?
6. what was his favorite sport to play in the water?
7. did he have to worry about big kids?
8. why not?
9. what was his favorite place?
10. how many of his problems went away while swimming?
11. did he hate making friends? Return numbered answers in your output.

output: 1. yes
2. no
3. dance and run around
4. yes
5. in the water with them
6. football
7. no
8. He was taller
9. The pool
10. All of them
11. no

input: New Spain () was a colonial territory of the Spanish Empire in the New World north of the Isthmus of Panama. It was established following the Spanish conquest of the Aztec Empire in 1521, and following additional conquests, it was made a viceroyalty (Spanish: "virreinato") in 1535. The first of four viceroyalties Spain created in the Americas, it comprised Mexico, Central America, much of the Southwestern and Central United States, and Spanish Florida as well as the Philippines, Guam, Mariana and Caroline Islands.

After 1535 the colony was governed by the Viceroy of New Spain, an appointed minister of the King of Spain, who ruled as monarch over the colony from its capital, Mexico City. New Spain lost parts of its territory to other European powers and independence, but the core area remained under Spanish control until 1821, when it achieved independence as the Mexican Empire when the latter dissolved, it became modern Mexico and Central America.

New Spain developed highly regional divisions, reflecting the impact of climate, topography, the presence or absence of dense indigenous populations, and the presence or absence of mineral resources. The areas of central and southern Mexico had dense indigenous populations with complex social, political, and economic organization. The northern area of Mexico, a region of nomadic and semi-nomadic indigenous populations, was not generally conducive to dense settlements, but the discovery of silver in Zacatecas in the 1540s drew settlement there to exploit the mines. Silver mining not only became the engine of the economy of New Spain, but vastly enriched Spain and transformed the global economy. New Spain was the New World terminus of the Philippine trade, making the viceroyalty a vital link between Spain's New World empire and its Asian empire. 1. Did the northern area of Mexico have a small population?
2. Did the Southern and central area of Mexico have a complex social and economic
3. Did the central and southern areas of Mexico have a small population?
4. Did the Northern area of Mexico have many cities and settlements?
5. What mineral was found there?
6. When?
7. Where specifically?
8. Who controlled New Spain beginning in 1521?
9. How many centuries did they retain control for?
10. Was the land in New Spain similar throughout the whole area?
11. What person appointed the Viceroy of New Spain in 1535?
12. Where did the Viceroy of New Spain rule from?
13. Was this the capital?
14. The region that became the Mexican empire in 1821, became what when it was later dissolved? Return numbered answers in your output.

output: 1. yes
2. yes
3. no
4. no
5. silver
6. in the 1540s
7. Zacatecas
8. the Spanish
9. three
10. no
11. the King of Spain
12. Mexico City
13. yes
14. Mexico and Central America

input: Why Are Pig Farmers Still Using Growth-Promoting Drugs?

It's one of the most controversial practices in agriculture: feeding small amounts of antibiotics to animals in order to make them grow faster. But what if the drugs don't even work very well? There's some good evidence that they don't, at least in pigs. They used to deliver a boost in growth, but that effect has disappeared in recent years or declined greatly. The reason for this is interesting and even paradoxical. Researchers think the antibiotics used to work by suppressing low-grade infections. In recent years, however, pork producers found other ways to accomplish the same thing through improved hygiene . As a result, the drugs have become largely superfluous -- yet many farmers still use them.

To understand how this happened, you have to step back in time, says Steve Dritz, a specialist in pig nutrition at Kansas State University. Sixty years ago, when antibiotics were new, "people started treating animals, and feeding [the antibiotics], and finding that they had increased growth rates and feed efficiencies," he says. Nursery-age pigs, for instance, grew 12 to 15 percent faster with antibiotics. The animals also needed less feed to reach full weight. Other studies showed similar results in chickens and cattle. In the 1980s, a new set of studies found similar effects. So the growth-promoting effects of antibiotics became standard practice among meat producers.

Fast forward to the 1990s. Dritz was starting his career as a scientist at Kansas State University, and pork production was changing dramatically.

Previously, pigs were born and raised in one barn or in several barns close together. This meant infections could easily pass from one generation to the next, the way that kids share germs between their friends on the playground and their parents at home. Under the new system, when piglets are weaned, they move to a whole different place. That new site is carefully scrubbed and free of disease.

Craig Rowles, who runs a large swine operation in Carroll, Iowa, shows me one such room. There's not a piglet in sight. "This room just got completely washed and disinfected, and now it's going to sit here and dry for a while," he says.

A whole group of pigs will come in here together, and later they will move out together to yet another site. "That group of pigs will stay together until they go to market," Rowles says.

The groups are kept strictly separated from each other. If workers move between the groups, they first have to change their boots.

When farmers adopted multisite production, it cut down on disease -- and pigs actually grew faster. 1. what are they feeding to the pigs
2. what were they used for at first Return numbered answers in your output.

output: 1. antibiotics
2. unknown

input: Even though there is a broad scientific agreement that essentialist and typological conceptualizations of race are untenable, scientists around the world continue to conceptualize race in widely differing ways, some of which have essentialist implications. While some researchers sometimes use the concept of race to make distinctions among fuzzy sets of traits, others in the scientific community suggest that the idea of race often is used in a naive or simplistic way,[page needed] and argue that, among humans, race has no taxonomic significance by pointing out that all living humans belong to the same species, Homo sapiens, and subspecies, Homo sapiens sapiens.

There is a wide consensus that the racial categories that are common in everyday usage are socially constructed, and that racial groups cannot be biologically defined. Nonetheless, some scholars argue that racial categories obviously correlate with biological traits (e.g. phenotype) to some degree, and that certain genetic markers have varying frequencies among human populations, some of which correspond more or less to traditional racial groupings. For this reason, there is no current consensus about whether racial categories can be considered to have significance for understanding human genetic variation. 1. What is in wide consensus?
2. Do scientists agree? Return numbered answers in your output.

output:
1. that essentialist and typological conceptualizations of race are untenable
2. Yes