Question: Question: Today is not a good day. It is my own fault of course ~ I thought I had lost weight so I stood on the scales. Once again my number was way higher than I wanted it to be and it brought all my darkest fears to the surface once again. My mind keeps telling me, “Of course this will never work!” I FEEL LIKE THE SPECIAL NEEDS KID IN CLASS I no longer feel like I am part of the ‘in’ crowd. I don’t have a gang to hang out with. I feel like I have gone weird and no-one wants to play with me anymore. If I’m not blogging about how much weight I’ve lost or how I’ve fallen head first into a binge then no-one seems to care. IT IS SO FUCKING SLOW I have been ‘off’ diet for nearly 2 months and I am still figuring things out. I haven’t lost any weight even though my intention is to drop a few kilos. I swing from perfectly happy to confused and bewildered for no apparent reason. I just want to be fixed. I want to easily achieve my naturally slender body and I want it NOW thank you very much. I MISS MY OLD LIFE When I was a very small child I used to suck my thumb. Once I stopped and I got braces my mouth shape was totally different and my thumb never fit properly again. I can still remember the comforting sensation of sucking my thumb that has now is gone forever. Same thing with my old life. I miss the control, I miss the joy of a low scale number and I miss the pride in winning against all the odds. I know it is only because I forgotten the pain … but my old life was familiar and predicitable and this one isn’t. I HAVE NOWHERE ELSE TO GO It is clear that dieting will never be a long term solution for managing my weight as I have proven over and over again in the past 5 years, so if listening to my body doesn’t work either, then I’ll have nowhere else to go … except blobsville. I feel like this is my last chance and I’m stuffing it up. Question: Who does the author blame for not having a good day? Options:  A. No one  B. Themselves  C. not enough information  D. Their old friends  === The correct answer is
Answer: B

Question: U.S. President Donald Trump is sending a $4.4 trillion budget request to Congress that includes money for a southern border wall and building up the military, but is projected to increase the federal deficit by more than $1 trillion. White House officials all but acknowledged the proposal unveiled Monday has little chance of becoming law — Congress alone controls federal government spending. But the White House insisted the budget proposal still sends an important message about Trump's priorities. "This is a messaging document," White House budget director Mick Mulvaney told reporters at a briefing Monday. The Trump budget calls for major cuts to domestic programs such as Medicare, Medicaid and food stamps. But the plan would still not balance the federal budget, in part because of reduced federal revenue due to tax cuts passed last year. Democrats widely rejected the plan. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi called the proposal a "brutal collection of broken promises and staggering cuts." The proposal's failure to eliminate debt is also likely to upset some Republicans, who have traditionally opposed budget deficits. "It's simply adjusting to the Washington, D.C., we live in," Mulvaney said, stressing that the new budget plan would help "turn the tide" on national debt. The White House proposal builds on the massive, two-year spending bill passed last week by Congress and signed by the president. That bill includes a major boost for the military, as well as domestic programs. Mulvaney, a former lawmaker and long-time opponent of federal debt, has acknowledged he likely would not have supported the bill were he still in Congress. But he said the new White House proposal does not mean that all of the money approved by Congress must be spent. "These are spending caps, these are not spending floors," he said. Under the two-year budget deal reached last week by Congress, the Pentagon will get a record-high $700 billion for 2018 — fulfilling a Trump campaign pledge. "We took care of the military like it's never... Question: When did President Trump call for cuts to domestic programs? Options:  A. not enough information  B. After he was elected  C. When requesting wall funding  D. Before he requested wall funding  === The correct answer is
Answer: C

Question: 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... Question: How long did the study probably last? Options:  A. 20 minutes  B. 1 week  C. not enough information  D. over 7 years  === The correct answer is
Answer:
Answer: D