To be honest, people don’t usually ask me this. Instead, they want to know things like “How do I keep my mother from falling?” or “What should I do? My grandfather’s been falling.” After all, falls are a scary thing. Most people know that falls are dangerous for older adults. The Center for Disease Control (CDC) reports that one in five falls causes a serious injury such as a broken bone or head injury. Fear of falling can also seriously affect an aging adult’s quality of life and sadly, can keep a person from being active and thriving. So, many seniors and family caregivers are interested in fall prevention because the risks are so great. And the good news is that although it’s not possible to prevent all falls, it almost always IS possible to take actions that will reduce the chance of a bad fall. If you want to learn more, you’re in the right place. In this post, I’ll cover: * How understanding why aging adults fall can help you keep an older parent — or yourself — safer, * Why personalized fall prevention plans work better than relying on general fall prevention tips, * The four-step process I use to help older adults prevent falls, * A practical example showing you how to use these steps to avoid falls yourself. First, understand why older people fall There are many reasons that aging adults fall. Most older people will be falling due to their own unique combination of reasons. So how, exactly, should YOU go about reducing fall risk? Now, you can — and should — try to implement the general tips that are often listed in most fall prevention resources: exercise, medication review with the doctor, vision checks, and home safety reviews. But if you really want to help an older loved one avoid falls, I recommend you learn to better understand why he or she, in particular, might fall. According to the above context, answer the following question. What is probably true about the elderly?
OPTIONS:
- They probably want to avoid things that make them fall
- they probably want to be very active despite the risk of falls
- they probably want to take many risks
- not enough information
They probably want to avoid things that make them fall


Hello I have been chased by a couple of angry dogs. I was visiting one of my clients, when, suddenly, out of the bushes, two snarling dogs attacked me. They weren’t necessarily mad, as in crazy, but they were very angry. They were large dogs, and they attacked my legs, knocking me down. I knew it was very dangerous to be down on the ground, as I was most vulnerable. I covered my genitalia, my neck and my face, as I struggled to regain my feet. Fortunately, during my fall, I saw a large tree branch on the ground near me. I grabbed it, and starting beating the dogs with it. I managed to land a few good hits. As I was hitting the dogs, their owner (my client) came outside, stood on her porch and laughed at me. When she saw me hitting her dogs with a stick, she called the dogs off of me. I asked her why her dogs attacked me, and why she laughed at me. She said that she had just given her dogs a big steak bone and they were upset when I came near and attacked me. I asked her why she would set me up in this way when she knew I was on the way over. She admitted that she wanted to see what happened, and she said that when she saw what happened she thought that it was funny. I did not keep the appointment with her. My trousers were torn, and my ankles, legs, and hands were bleeding. I told her that I would not be back, and left. Later that night, her husband called to apologize on her behalf. I told him that I appreciated the call, but he wasn’t the one who needed to apologize. Peace According to the above context, answer the following question. Why was the writer attacked?
OPTIONS:
- not enough information
- Because the writer antagonized the dogs.
- Because the dogs were mad.
- Because the woman set him up to be attacked.

Answer: Because the woman set him up to be attacked.


The black-and-white aerial footage shows a line of purported Taliban insurgents slowly walking along a path in a lightly forested desert in Afghanistan's western Farah province. Suddenly, the screen flashes to white as the men disappear in a fireball — the result of a bomb dropped from a U.S. MQ-9 "Reaper" drone. "Taliban fighters on the run following Afghan-led offensive in #Farah province, #Afghanistan. Video shows U.S. airpower (MQ-9s) in support," declared a short message accompanying the video, which was posted on the official account of the U.S. military in Afghanistan. Subsequent footage showed more Taliban scrambling, in an unsuccessful attempt to avoid the airstrikes. The Pentagon footage was released Wednesday, as U.S., NATO and Afghan government forces were locked in a fierce battle with the Taliban for control of the capital of Farah, which borders Iran. The tweet was unusually graphic. While the U.S. military often releases footage of buildings or vehicles being destroyed, it does not as frequently distribute videos that show individuals being bombed. Less than 24 hours later, the U.S. Air Force posted its own Afghanistan-related tweet that raised eyebrows — this one referencing a viral audio clip that has sparked a lighthearted online debate among those who hear the word "Laurel" and others who hear "Yanny." "The Taliban Forces in Farah city #Afghanistan would much rather have heard #Yanny or #Laurel than the deafening #BRRRT they got courtesy of our #A10," read the Air Force tweet. The Air Force has since apologized and deleted the tweet, saying it was sent in "poor taste." The USFOR-A tweet remains. In a statement to VOA, a Pentagon spokesperson said the tweets do not represent a new social media strategy. "As with any other organization, the post was an attempt to bring awareness to a major/ongoing organizational activity by tying it to references or conversations already trending with their established audiences," said Lieutenant Colonel Kone Faulkner. According to the above context, answer the following question. Why did the Air Force send the tweet?
OPTIONS:
- Because it had a new social media strategy
- Because it was in poor taste
- not enough information
- Because it felt superior to the dead terrorists

Because it felt superior to the dead terrorists