Given a paragraph about cooking, and a set of conversational questions and answers about the paragraph, say whether the passage contains sufficient information to answer the follow-up question. Say Yes if it is answerable; otherwise, say No. The paragraph has the prefix 'CONTEXT:'. Each conversation question has a prefix `Q:` followed by the answer prefix `A:`, and the follow-up question has a prefix `FOLLOWUP_Q:`.
Example: CONTEXT: Duck feet will render plenty of gelatin because of the amount of cartilage, same as chicken feet. Any bird's feet are a good choice.The method for making stock is pretty much the same no matter what you put into it, so yes, you can follow your favourite recipe for chicken stock and substitute duck feet. The only thing to keep in mind is that duck feet, like any other duck parts, are substantially more fatty than their chicken equivalents, so assuming you want a clear or mostly-clear stock, you'll have to spend a lot of time skimming.Alternatively you can clean the feet and other bones by boiling them in plain water for 5-10 minutes, then dumping it all out and starting over - which is what your linked recipe suggests. I don't usually do this for brown stocks because you lose a lot of flavour, but if you're starting from raw then it won't make much difference and it's an easy/lazy way to get rid of a lot of the fat at once. <sep> Q: Can I use duck feet to make duck stock A: The method for making stock is pretty much the same no matter what you put into it, so yes, you can follow your favourite recipe for chicken stock and substitute duck feet  Q: Does it add the same flavor and mouth feel? A: The only thing to keep in mind is that duck feet, like any other duck parts, are substantially more fatty than their chicken equivalents  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: How does this change things?
Example solution: Yes
Example explanation: The question asks about how the stock can be less fatty or mostly clear. This can be infered from the previous conversation. The answer is written in the passage that if mostly clear stock is needed then one has spend a lot of time skimming.

Problem: CONTEXT: You are probably stirring the pudding too much. Cornstarch starts thickening at about 205Â°F/95Â°C. Once the pudding has got to that point and has thickened, stop stirring, otherwise you will interfere with the starch formation that causes the thickening. Using electric beaters probably means you are missing the point when the pudding has thickened and quickly beating the living daylights out of any starch formation that has occurred.It may also be the case that you are beating so much air into the pudding that it just doesn't get hot enough to activate the cornstarch in the first place. I would use @ecnerwal's suggestion of a double boiler, along with a balloon whisk, and some patience.  <sep>  Q: Why won't my pudding thicken up? A: You are probably stirring the pudding too much  Q: Will over stirring cause it not to thicken? A: Cornstarch starts thickening at about 205Â°F/95Â°C. Once the pudding has got to that point and has thickened, stop stirring  Q: I've already doubled the corn starch, should I try adding even more corn starch? A: Once the pudding has got to that point and has thickened, stop stirring, otherwise you will interfere with the starch formation that causes the thickening  Q: I am cooking it on hotplates, do you think that could be the problem? A: I would use @ecnerwal's suggestion of a double boiler, along with a balloon whisk, and some patience  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Where would I get a double boiler?

Solution: No