Q: Cooking food is something we have done since the first caveman threw a mammoth steak on the fire. While it is true that cooking does cause chemical changes in food and a loss of some nutrients, it is a clear case of being alert and not alarmed. Every time we cook food, there is some degree of nutrient loss. Exposing food to heat, oxygen or light alters the nutrients found in food. It is not all bad news though because cooking food also has its advantages. Cooking food can increase its digestibility, meaning you will get more nutrients out of it. And even though there may be less of some nutrients from cooking, it is swings and roundabouts as the availability of certain phytonutrients increases. And of course, let's not forget that heating food kills some of the nasty microbes that can cause food poisoning. The principle behind a raw food diet is that cooking food destroys the natural enzymes and nutrients that would otherwise give us optimal health and control body weight. A raw food diet is almost entirely plant-based and includes fruits, vegetables, nuts, seeds, grains, vegetable oils and juices in their natural uncooked state. Now on the pro side for a raw food diet, it means if you are currently eating a lot of processed food, then switching to raw food will be a clear nutritional win. So that gets a big tick. Unquestionably, there are many benefits to eating plenty of fruits and vegetables. These foods are high in nutrients and fibre and low in kilojoules. But is raw superior to cooked? A review of 28 research studies found eaters of both cooked and raw vegetables had a lower risk of cancer compared to people who did not eat many vegetables in the first place. Where the science gets murky is the claim that raw food is better because cooking destroys the enzymes found in plants. It is 100 percent correct that cooking will do this. But so too does digestion. Few enzymes survive their trip through the hydrochloric acid spa bath in the stomach. And those plant enzymes are essential only to the plants. The... Question: Which foods are high in nutrients and fibre? === The answer to the above question is

OPTIONS:
- fruits and vegetables
- not enough information
- processed food
- mammoth steak

A: fruits and vegetables

input: OPTIONS:
- Clark Baine
- not enough information
- Claire Bridge
- Chloe Brook Now, answer this question: The collaborative process between me and Claire Bridge has been good so far. Upon finding out her email address we had a brief email exchange culminating in me sending her a list of potential questions for the interview. Claire quite liked a lot of the questions, but overall there were too many, so we proceeded to reduce the number of questions to six main questions. These questions would then form the basis of the artist portrait, with an attempt to limit answers to no more than a minute, so little had to be cut for the final edit. The six questions we arrived at are as follows: How would you define creativity? What does it mean to you to be an artist? Do you feel a painting or piece of art can house an energy/a feeling from the original artist? Do you feel that your own works house this energy? Change and transformation are recurrent themes in your work. What are you exploring and why do these fascinate you? And recently we saw a change in your medium too, incorporating video works and photography. You seem to draw on many influences in your work, from quantum physics, astrophysics, to environmental ecology, psychology, philosophy and metaphysics. With titles like "Dark Matter", "Touching Infinity", "We are made of Stars", "Rising tides" and "A drop in the ocean" or "Alchemy". Can you tell us something more about the convergence of these ideas and influences? What continues to motivate and inspire you as an artist? We both felt these questions addressed the initial topic of exploring creativity, explored why Claire became an artist, gives insight into Claire's work and practise and looks toward the future of Claire's practice. After refining the questions, we proceeded to organise a day to film, which will be on the 16th September. Hopefully if all goes well we will both have an artist portrait that lives up to our expectations. Question: Who is the author going to film on September 16th? === The answer to the above question is
A:
output: Claire Bridge

Problem:OPTIONS:
- After her conversation with the protagonist.
- not enough information
- Before her conversation with the protagonist.
- During her conversation with the protagonist.

"Congratulations, jackass, you just got us sued." My editor, Sharon, was standing in front of my desk. She was apparently not happy. I shrugged, slouching further down in my chair, trying to hide from her gigantic crazy eyes behind my computer. It was a white laptop with a sticker that said "This Machine Kills Yuppies" slapped over the corporate logo on back. She reached out with one of her freakish man-hands and slammed the screen shut. "Let me try this again. You just got us sued six times over." Sharon Sinclair was a six-foot-tall beast of a woman with a huge mane of wiry black and gray hair pulled back in a pony tail. I had every confidence that she could tear me in two and use my bloody carcass in some kinky hedonistic lesbian cult ritual or something. So I usually tried to choose my words with the appropriate care around her. "Jesus-fucking-Christ, I haven't even had my morning coffee yet, and my head's still reeling from the Louisville Slugger that pummeled it last night. So I really don't feel like dealing with whatever annoying hormonal episode you have going on here." She glared at me silently, watching me squirm a little before asking, "Are you done?" "Probably." "Good," she said with a suppressed grin as she took a seat next to me. "Because I just let you publicly accuse the mayor and the valley's most powerful corporations of conspiring to defraud the taxpayers. So what's your plan for keeping my ass off the firing line?" I tilted back in my chair and met Sharon's gaze. "Look, we knew we'd get a strong reaction. Let them sue. We have e-mails to back us up." "These legal briefings say your e-mails were forged," she responded, waving a thick stack of papers in my face. "Of course they're gonna say that. That's why I made sure to get corroboration. Abrasax confirmed that the e-mails between Dylan Maxwell and City Hall are legit. But you know all this, so I don't know why we're wasting time going over it again." Question: When did Sharon sit down? === The answer to the above question is
****
A:
During her conversation with the protagonist.