I am a vegetarian as well as my parents and all my family members. I've been a vegetarian for as long as I can remember. There have been times during my years of vegetarianism when I've wondered if I may indeed grow out of it. I've wondered if there might come a day when I'll put aside my childish aversion to the thought of dead stuff travelling through my intestines, like a corpse on a raft ride.

However, it could never happen, and not because I'm so enlightened, sensitive or any of the other euphemisms for "whining hippie" usually dumped on vegetarians. My conversion to flesh-⁠eating couldn't happen because, frankly, I'm not stupid enough. As in, I can read.

Analysis of more than 6,000 pancreatic cancer cases published in the British Journal of Cancer says that eating just 50g of processed meat a day (one sausage or a couple of slices of bacon) raises the likelihood of pancreatic cancer by a fifth. 100 g a day (the equivalent of a medium burger) raises it by 38%, 150 g by 57%. Men are worst hit, as they tend to eat the most processed meat. And while pancreatic cancer is not the most common of cancers, it's frequently diagnosed late, with four-⁠fifths of sufferers dying within a year of diagnosis.

It should be pointed out that this is about processed meat. However, many past studies have stated a probable link between too much meat and all manner of cancers and heart problems, as well as links to other conditions, from diabetes and high blood pressure to obesity and Alzheimer's.

If, by now, you're thinking that I'm out to shock you, then you couldn't be more wrong. I'd be shocked if any of this was considered new enough to shock anyone. This information has popped up regularly for years in all forms of popular media  — newspapers and numerous TV and radio programs, to say nothing of the Internet. Indeed, in this era of info overload, if you've never come across the "burgers and kebabs are unhealthy" revelation, one would have to presume you've been lying in a coma.

Sympathy is in short supply these days. You can't move for people being blamed for their own miserable situations: smokers who "burden" the NHS; alcoholics who don't "deserve" liver transplants; obese people who "should" pay more for flights. By this logic, people who've been regularly informed of the dangers of meat, particularly the cheap processed variety, but who continue to wolf it down should be held just as accountable.

Yet if these meat eaters are mentioned at all, it's in general poor lifestyle terms, as an afterthought to drinking, smoking, and lack of exercise. You just don't get people making emotional pronouncements about bacon lovers not deserving cancer treatment or kebab fans burdening the NHS.

It's not as if they haven't been warned countless times about the dangers  — how willfully ill-⁠informed can people be? Or maybe they're just hard. In fact, when I say I'm not dumb enough to eat meat, I should probably add brave enough. With so much frightening information, so readily available for so long, the modern committed carnivore must have nerves of steel. And yet, we should admit it, meat eaters still predominate and even grow in number. Must all of them be deaf and blind, and immune to a general sense of self-⁠safety?

I am a vegetarian as well as my parents and all my family members. I've been a vegetarian for as long as I can remember. There have been times during my years of vegetarianism when I've wondered if I may indeed grow out of it. I've wondered if there might come a day when I'll put aside my childish aversion to the thought of dead stuff travelling through my intestines, like a corpse on a raft ride.

However, it could never happen, and not because I'm so enlightened, sensitive or any of the other euphemisms for "whining hippie" usually dumped on vegetarians. My conversion to flesh-⁠eating couldn't happen because, frankly, I'm not stupid enough. As in, I can read.

Analysis of more than 6,000 pancreatic cancer cases published in the British Journal of Cancer says that eating just 50g of processed meat a day (one sausage or a couple of slices of bacon) raises the likelihood of pancreatic cancer by a fifth. 100 g a day (the equivalent of a medium burger) raises it by 38%, 150 g by 57%. Men are worst hit, as they tend to eat the most processed meat. And while pancreatic cancer is not the most common of cancers, it's frequently diagnosed late, with four-⁠fifths of sufferers dying within a year of diagnosis.

It should be pointed out that this is about processed meat. However, many past studies have stated a probable link between too much meat and all manner of cancers and heart problems, as well as links to other conditions, from diabetes and high blood pressure to obesity and Alzheimer's.

If, by now, you're thinking that I'm out to shock you, then you couldn't be more wrong. I'd be shocked if any of this was considered new enough to shock anyone. This information has popped up regularly for years in all forms of popular media  — newspapers and numerous TV and radio programs, to say nothing of the Internet. Indeed, in this era of info overload, if you've never come across the "burgers and kebabs are unhealthy" revelation, one would have to presume you've been lying in a coma.

Sympathy is in short supply these days. You can't move for people being blamed for their own miserable situations: smokers who "burden" the NHS; alcoholics who don't "deserve" liver transplants; obese people who "should" pay more for flights. By this logic, people who've been regularly informed of the dangers of meat, particularly the cheap processed variety, but who continue to wolf it down should be held just as accountable.

Yet if these meat eaters are mentioned at all, it's in general poor lifestyle terms, as an afterthought to drinking, smoking, and lack of exercise. You just don't get people making emotional pronouncements about bacon lovers not deserving cancer treatment or kebab fans burdening the NHS.

It's not as if they haven't been warned countless times about the dangers  — how willfully ill-⁠informed can people be? Or maybe they're just hard. In fact, when I say I'm not dumb enough to eat meat, I should probably add brave enough. With so much frightening information, so readily available for so long, the modern committed carnivore must have nerves of steel. And yet, we should admit it, meat eaters still predominate and even grow in number. Must all of them be deaf and blind, and immune to a general sense of self-⁠safety?

I am a vegetarian as well as my parents and all my family members. I've been a vegetarian for as long as I can remember. There have been times during my years of vegetarianism when I've wondered if I may indeed grow out of it. I've wondered if there might come a day when I'll put aside my childish aversion to the thought of dead stuff travelling through my intestines, like a corpse on a raft ride.

However, it could never happen, and not because I'm so enlightened, sensitive or any of the other euphemisms for "whining hippie" usually dumped on vegetarians. My conversion to flesh-⁠eating couldn't happen because, frankly, I'm not stupid enough. As in, I can read.

Analysis of more than 6,000 pancreatic cancer cases published in the British Journal of Cancer says that eating just 50g of processed meat a day (one sausage or a couple of slices of bacon) raises the likelihood of pancreatic cancer by a fifth. 100 g a day (the equivalent of a medium burger) raises it by 38%, 150 g by 57%. Men are worst hit, as they tend to eat the most processed meat. And while pancreatic cancer is not the most common of cancers, it's frequently diagnosed late, with four-⁠fifths of sufferers dying within a year of diagnosis.

It should be pointed out that this is about processed meat. However, many past studies have stated a probable link between too much meat and all manner of cancers and heart problems, as well as links to other conditions, from diabetes and high blood pressure to obesity and Alzheimer's.

If, by now, you're thinking that I'm out to shock you, then you couldn't be more wrong. I'd be shocked if any of this was considered new enough to shock anyone. This information has popped up regularly for years in all forms of popular media  — newspapers and numerous TV and radio programs, to say nothing of the Internet. Indeed, in this era of info overload, if you've never come across the "burgers and kebabs are unhealthy" revelation, one would have to presume you've been lying in a coma.

Sympathy is in short supply these days. You can't move for people being blamed for their own miserable situations: smokers who "burden" the NHS; alcoholics who don't "deserve" liver transplants; obese people who "should" pay more for flights. By this logic, people who've been regularly informed of the dangers of meat, particularly the cheap processed variety, but who continue to wolf it down should be held just as accountable.

Yet if these meat eaters are mentioned at all, it's in general poor lifestyle terms, as an afterthought to drinking, smoking, and lack of exercise. You just don't get people making emotional pronouncements about bacon lovers not deserving cancer treatment or kebab fans burdening the NHS.

It's not as if they haven't been warned countless times about the dangers  — how willfully ill-⁠informed can people be? Or maybe they're just hard. In fact, when I say I'm not dumb enough to eat meat, I should probably add brave enough. With so much frightening information, so readily available for so long, the modern committed carnivore must have nerves of steel. And yet, we should admit it, meat eaters still predominate and even grow in number. Must all of them be deaf and blind, and immune to a general sense of self-⁠safety?

I am a vegetarian as well as my parents and all my family members. I've been a vegetarian for as long as I can remember. There have been times during my years of vegetarianism when I've wondered if I may indeed grow out of it. I've wondered if there might come a day when I'll put aside my childish aversion to the thought of dead stuff travelling through my intestines, like a corpse on a raft ride.

However, it could never happen, and not because I'm so enlightened, sensitive or any of the other euphemisms for "whining hippie" usually dumped on vegetarians. My conversion to flesh-⁠eating couldn't happen because, frankly, I'm not stupid enough. As in, I can read.

Analysis of more than 6,000 pancreatic cancer cases published in the British Journal of Cancer says that eating just 50g of processed meat a day (one sausage or a couple of slices of bacon) raises the likelihood of pancreatic cancer by a fifth. 100 g a day (the equivalent of a medium burger) raises it by 38%, 150 g by 57%. Men are worst hit, as they tend to eat the most processed meat. And while pancreatic cancer is not the most common of cancers, it's frequently diagnosed late, with four-⁠fifths of sufferers dying within a year of diagnosis.

It should be pointed out that this is about processed meat. However, many past studies have stated a probable link between too much meat and all manner of cancers and heart problems, as well as links to other conditions, from diabetes and high blood pressure to obesity and Alzheimer's.

If, by now, you're thinking that I'm out to shock you, then you couldn't be more wrong. I'd be shocked if any of this was considered new enough to shock anyone. This information has popped up regularly for years in all forms of popular media  — newspapers and numerous TV and radio programs, to say nothing of the Internet. Indeed, in this era of info overload, if you've never come across the "burgers and kebabs are unhealthy" revelation, one would have to presume you've been lying in a coma.

Sympathy is in short supply these days. You can't move for people being blamed for their own miserable situations: smokers who "burden" the NHS; alcoholics who don't "deserve" liver transplants; obese people who "should" pay more for flights. By this logic, people who've been regularly informed of the dangers of meat, particularly the cheap processed variety, but who continue to wolf it down should be held just as accountable.

Yet if these meat eaters are mentioned at all, it's in general poor lifestyle terms, as an afterthought to drinking, smoking, and lack of exercise. You just don't get people making emotional pronouncements about bacon lovers not deserving cancer treatment or kebab fans burdening the NHS.

It's not as if they haven't been warned countless times about the dangers  — how willfully ill-⁠informed can people be? Or maybe they're just hard. In fact, when I say I'm not dumb enough to eat meat, I should probably add brave enough. With so much frightening information, so readily available for so long, the modern committed carnivore must have nerves of steel. And yet, we should admit it, meat eaters still predominate and even grow in number. Must all of them be deaf and blind, and immune to a general sense of self-⁠safety?

I am a vegetarian as well as my parents and all my family members. I've been a vegetarian for as long as I can remember. There have been times during my years of vegetarianism when I've wondered if I may indeed grow out of it. I've wondered if there might come a day when I'll put aside my childish aversion to the thought of dead stuff travelling through my intestines, like a corpse on a raft ride.

However, it could never happen, and not because I'm so enlightened, sensitive or any of the other euphemisms for "whining hippie" usually dumped on vegetarians. My conversion to flesh-⁠eating couldn't happen because, frankly, I'm not stupid enough. As in, I can read.

Analysis of more than 6,000 pancreatic cancer cases published in the British Journal of Cancer says that eating just 50g of processed meat a day (one sausage or a couple of slices of bacon) raises the likelihood of pancreatic cancer by a fifth. 100 g a day (the equivalent of a medium burger) raises it by 38%, 150 g by 57%. Men are worst hit, as they tend to eat the most processed meat. And while pancreatic cancer is not the most common of cancers, it's frequently diagnosed late, with four-⁠fifths of sufferers dying within a year of diagnosis.

It should be pointed out that this is about processed meat. However, many past studies have stated a probable link between too much meat and all manner of cancers and heart problems, as well as links to other conditions, from diabetes and high blood pressure to obesity and Alzheimer's.

If, by now, you're thinking that I'm out to shock you, then you couldn't be more wrong. I'd be shocked if any of this was considered new enough to shock anyone. This information has popped up regularly for years in all forms of popular media  — newspapers and numerous TV and radio programs, to say nothing of the Internet. Indeed, in this era of info overload, if you've never come across the "burgers and kebabs are unhealthy" revelation, one would have to presume you've been lying in a coma.

Sympathy is in short supply these days. You can't move for people being blamed for their own miserable situations: smokers who "burden" the NHS; alcoholics who don't "deserve" liver transplants; obese people who "should" pay more for flights. By this logic, people who've been regularly informed of the dangers of meat, particularly the cheap processed variety, but who continue to wolf it down should be held just as accountable.

Yet if these meat eaters are mentioned at all, it's in general poor lifestyle terms, as an afterthought to drinking, smoking, and lack of exercise. You just don't get people making emotional pronouncements about bacon lovers not deserving cancer treatment or kebab fans burdening the NHS.

It's not as if they haven't been warned countless times about the dangers  — how willfully ill-⁠informed can people be? Or maybe they're just hard. In fact, when I say I'm not dumb enough to eat meat, I should probably add brave enough. With so much frightening information, so readily available for so long, the modern committed carnivore must have nerves of steel. And yet, we should admit it, meat eaters still predominate and even grow in number. Must all of them be deaf and blind, and immune to a general sense of self-⁠safety?

I am a vegetarian as well as my parents and all my family members. I've been a vegetarian for as long as I can remember. There have been times during my years of vegetarianism when I've wondered if I may indeed grow out of it. I've wondered if there might come a day when I'll put aside my childish aversion to the thought of dead stuff travelling through my intestines, like a corpse on a raft ride.

However, it could never happen, and not because I'm so enlightened, sensitive or any of the other euphemisms for "whining hippie" usually dumped on vegetarians. My conversion to flesh-⁠eating couldn't happen because, frankly, I'm not stupid enough. As in, I can read.

Analysis of more than 6,000 pancreatic cancer cases published in the British Journal of Cancer says that eating just 50g of processed meat a day (one sausage or a couple of slices of bacon) raises the likelihood of pancreatic cancer by a fifth. 100 g a day (the equivalent of a medium burger) raises it by 38%, 150 g by 57%. Men are worst hit, as they tend to eat the most processed meat. And while pancreatic cancer is not the most common of cancers, it's frequently diagnosed late, with four-⁠fifths of sufferers dying within a year of diagnosis.

It should be pointed out that this is about processed meat. However, many past studies have stated a probable link between too much meat and all manner of cancers and heart problems, as well as links to other conditions, from diabetes and high blood pressure to obesity and Alzheimer's.

If, by now, you're thinking that I'm out to shock you, then you couldn't be more wrong. I'd be shocked if any of this was considered new enough to shock anyone. This information has popped up regularly for years in all forms of popular media  — newspapers and numerous TV and radio programs, to say nothing of the Internet. Indeed, in this era of info overload, if you've never come across the "burgers and kebabs are unhealthy" revelation, one would have to presume you've been lying in a coma.

Sympathy is in short supply these days. You can't move for people being blamed for their own miserable situations: smokers who "burden" the NHS; alcoholics who don't "deserve" liver transplants; obese people who "should" pay more for flights. By this logic, people who've been regularly informed of the dangers of meat, particularly the cheap processed variety, but who continue to wolf it down should be held just as accountable.

Yet if these meat eaters are mentioned at all, it's in general poor lifestyle terms, as an afterthought to drinking, smoking, and lack of exercise. You just don't get people making emotional pronouncements about bacon lovers not deserving cancer treatment or kebab fans burdening the NHS.

It's not as if they haven't been warned countless times about the dangers  — how willfully ill-⁠informed can people be? Or maybe they're just hard. In fact, when I say I'm not dumb enough to eat meat, I should probably add brave enough. With so much frightening information, so readily available for so long, the modern committed carnivore must have nerves of steel. And yet, we should admit it, meat eaters still predominate and even grow in number. Must all of them be deaf and blind, and immune to a general sense of self-⁠safety?

I am a vegetarian as well as my parents and all my family members. I've been a vegetarian for as long as I can remember. There have been times during my years of vegetarianism when I've wondered if I may indeed grow out of it. I've wondered if there might come a day when I'll put aside my childish aversion to the thought of dead stuff travelling through my intestines, like a corpse on a raft ride.

However, it could never happen, and not because I'm so enlightened, sensitive or any of the other euphemisms for "whining hippie" usually dumped on vegetarians. My conversion to flesh-⁠eating couldn't happen because, frankly, I'm not stupid enough. As in, I can read.

Analysis of more than 6,000 pancreatic cancer cases published in the British Journal of Cancer says that eating just 50g of processed meat a day (one sausage or a couple of slices of bacon) raises the likelihood of pancreatic cancer by a fifth. 100 g a day (the equivalent of a medium burger) raises it by 38%, 150 g by 57%. Men are worst hit, as they tend to eat the most processed meat. And while pancreatic cancer is not the most common of cancers, it's frequently diagnosed late, with four-⁠fifths of sufferers dying within a year of diagnosis.

It should be pointed out that this is about processed meat. However, many past studies have stated a probable link between too much meat and all manner of cancers and heart problems, as well as links to other conditions, from diabetes and high blood pressure to obesity and Alzheimer's.

If, by now, you're thinking that I'm out to shock you, then you couldn't be more wrong. I'd be shocked if any of this was considered new enough to shock anyone. This information has popped up regularly for years in all forms of popular media  — newspapers and numerous TV and radio programs, to say nothing of the Internet. Indeed, in this era of info overload, if you've never come across the "burgers and kebabs are unhealthy" revelation, one would have to presume you've been lying in a coma.

Sympathy is in short supply these days. You can't move for people being blamed for their own miserable situations: smokers who "burden" the NHS; alcoholics who don't "deserve" liver transplants; obese people who "should" pay more for flights. By this logic, people who've been regularly informed of the dangers of meat, particularly the cheap processed variety, but who continue to wolf it down should be held just as accountable.

Yet if these meat eaters are mentioned at all, it's in general poor lifestyle terms, as an afterthought to drinking, smoking, and lack of exercise. You just don't get people making emotional pronouncements about bacon lovers not deserving cancer treatment or kebab fans burdening the NHS.

It's not as if they haven't been warned countless times about the dangers  — how willfully ill-⁠informed can people be? Or maybe they're just hard. In fact, when I say I'm not dumb enough to eat meat, I should probably add brave enough. With so much frightening information, so readily available for so long, the modern committed carnivore must have nerves of steel. And yet, we should admit it, meat eaters still predominate and even grow in number. Must all of them be deaf and blind, and immune to a general sense of self-⁠safety?

William and Philippa were rivals. They were considered the best students at New College. At the beginning of the third year they applied for the Charles Oldham Shakespeare prize for an essay. The chosen theme for the prize essay that year was "Satire in Shakespeare". Troilus and Cressida clearly called for the most attention, but both students 30 ______ to find satirical nuances in almost every play by Shakespeare. As the year was coming to an end, 31 ______ anyone doubted that either William or Philippa would win the prize while the other would come in second. 32 ______, no one was willing to express an opinion as to who the victor would be.

Before the prize essay submission date, they both had to take their final degree examinations. 33 ______ students studied as hard as William and Philippa. It came as no surprise to anyone that they both achieved first-⁠class degrees in the final honors school. Rumor spread around the university that the two rivals had been awarded As in every one of their nine papers.

"I would be willing to believe that is the case," Philippa 34 ______ William. "But I feel I must point out to you that there is a considerable difference between an A-⁠plus and an A-⁠minus."

"I couldn't agree with you more," said William. "But 35 ______, when you discover who has won the Charles Oldham, you will know who was awarded less."

It turned 36 ______ that the examiners felt unable on this occasion to award the prize to one person and had therefore decided that it should be shared by William and Philippa.

William and Philippa were rivals. They were considered the best students at New College. At the beginning of the third year they applied for the Charles Oldham Shakespeare prize for an essay. The chosen theme for the prize essay that year was "Satire in Shakespeare". Troilus and Cressida clearly called for the most attention, but both students 30 ______ to find satirical nuances in almost every play by Shakespeare. As the year was coming to an end, 31 ______ anyone doubted that either William or Philippa would win the prize while the other would come in second. 32 ______, no one was willing to express an opinion as to who the victor would be.

Before the prize essay submission date, they both had to take their final degree examinations. 33 ______ students studied as hard as William and Philippa. It came as no surprise to anyone that they both achieved first-⁠class degrees in the final honors school. Rumor spread around the university that the two rivals had been awarded As in every one of their nine papers.

"I would be willing to believe that is the case," Philippa 34 ______ William. "But I feel I must point out to you that there is a considerable difference between an A-⁠plus and an A-⁠minus."

"I couldn't agree with you more," said William. "But 35 ______, when you discover who has won the Charles Oldham, you will know who was awarded less."

It turned 36 ______ that the examiners felt unable on this occasion to award the prize to one person and had therefore decided that it should be shared by William and Philippa.

William and Philippa were rivals. They were considered the best students at New College. At the beginning of the third year they applied for the Charles Oldham Shakespeare prize for an essay. The chosen theme for the prize essay that year was "Satire in Shakespeare". Troilus and Cressida clearly called for the most attention, but both students 30 ______ to find satirical nuances in almost every play by Shakespeare. As the year was coming to an end, 31 ______ anyone doubted that either William or Philippa would win the prize while the other would come in second. 32 ______, no one was willing to express an opinion as to who the victor would be.

Before the prize essay submission date, they both had to take their final degree examinations. 33 ______ students studied as hard as William and Philippa. It came as no surprise to anyone that they both achieved first-⁠class degrees in the final honors school. Rumor spread around the university that the two rivals had been awarded As in every one of their nine papers.

"I would be willing to believe that is the case," Philippa 34 ______ William. "But I feel I must point out to you that there is a considerable difference between an A-⁠plus and an A-⁠minus."

"I couldn't agree with you more," said William. "But 35 ______, when you discover who has won the Charles Oldham, you will know who was awarded less."

It turned 36 ______ that the examiners felt unable on this occasion to award the prize to one person and had therefore decided that it should be shared by William and Philippa.

William and Philippa were rivals. They were considered the best students at New College. At the beginning of the third year they applied for the Charles Oldham Shakespeare prize for an essay. The chosen theme for the prize essay that year was "Satire in Shakespeare". Troilus and Cressida clearly called for the most attention, but both students 30 ______ to find satirical nuances in almost every play by Shakespeare. As the year was coming to an end, 31 ______ anyone doubted that either William or Philippa would win the prize while the other would come in second. 32 ______, no one was willing to express an opinion as to who the victor would be.

Before the prize essay submission date, they both had to take their final degree examinations. 33 ______ students studied as hard as William and Philippa. It came as no surprise to anyone that they both achieved first-⁠class degrees in the final honors school. Rumor spread around the university that the two rivals had been awarded As in every one of their nine papers.

"I would be willing to believe that is the case," Philippa 34 ______ William. "But I feel I must point out to you that there is a considerable difference between an A-⁠plus and an A-⁠minus."

"I couldn't agree with you more," said William. "But 35 ______, when you discover who has won the Charles Oldham, you will know who was awarded less."

It turned 36 ______ that the examiners felt unable on this occasion to award the prize to one person and had therefore decided that it should be shared by William and Philippa.

William and Philippa were rivals. They were considered the best students at New College. At the beginning of the third year they applied for the Charles Oldham Shakespeare prize for an essay. The chosen theme for the prize essay that year was "Satire in Shakespeare". Troilus and Cressida clearly called for the most attention, but both students 30 ______ to find satirical nuances in almost every play by Shakespeare. As the year was coming to an end, 31 ______ anyone doubted that either William or Philippa would win the prize while the other would come in second. 32 ______, no one was willing to express an opinion as to who the victor would be.

Before the prize essay submission date, they both had to take their final degree examinations. 33 ______ students studied as hard as William and Philippa. It came as no surprise to anyone that they both achieved first-⁠class degrees in the final honors school. Rumor spread around the university that the two rivals had been awarded As in every one of their nine papers.

"I would be willing to believe that is the case," Philippa 34 ______ William. "But I feel I must point out to you that there is a considerable difference between an A-⁠plus and an A-⁠minus."

"I couldn't agree with you more," said William. "But 35 ______, when you discover who has won the Charles Oldham, you will know who was awarded less."

It turned 36 ______ that the examiners felt unable on this occasion to award the prize to one person and had therefore decided that it should be shared by William and Philippa.

William and Philippa were rivals. They were considered the best students at New College. At the beginning of the third year they applied for the Charles Oldham Shakespeare prize for an essay. The chosen theme for the prize essay that year was "Satire in Shakespeare". Troilus and Cressida clearly called for the most attention, but both students 30 ______ to find satirical nuances in almost every play by Shakespeare. As the year was coming to an end, 31 ______ anyone doubted that either William or Philippa would win the prize while the other would come in second. 32 ______, no one was willing to express an opinion as to who the victor would be.

Before the prize essay submission date, they both had to take their final degree examinations. 33 ______ students studied as hard as William and Philippa. It came as no surprise to anyone that they both achieved first-⁠class degrees in the final honors school. Rumor spread around the university that the two rivals had been awarded As in every one of their nine papers.

"I would be willing to believe that is the case," Philippa 34 ______ William. "But I feel I must point out to you that there is a considerable difference between an A-⁠plus and an A-⁠minus."

"I couldn't agree with you more," said William. "But 35 ______, when you discover who has won the Charles Oldham, you will know who was awarded less."

It turned 36 ______ that the examiners felt unable on this occasion to award the prize to one person and had therefore decided that it should be shared by William and Philippa.

William and Philippa were rivals. They were considered the best students at New College. At the beginning of the third year they applied for the Charles Oldham Shakespeare prize for an essay. The chosen theme for the prize essay that year was "Satire in Shakespeare". Troilus and Cressida clearly called for the most attention, but both students 30 ______ to find satirical nuances in almost every play by Shakespeare. As the year was coming to an end, 31 ______ anyone doubted that either William or Philippa would win the prize while the other would come in second. 32 ______, no one was willing to express an opinion as to who the victor would be.

Before the prize essay submission date, they both had to take their final degree examinations. 33 ______ students studied as hard as William and Philippa. It came as no surprise to anyone that they both achieved first-⁠class degrees in the final honors school. Rumor spread around the university that the two rivals had been awarded As in every one of their nine papers.

"I would be willing to believe that is the case," Philippa 34 ______ William. "But I feel I must point out to you that there is a considerable difference between an A-⁠plus and an A-⁠minus."

"I couldn't agree with you more," said William. "But 35 ______, when you discover who has won the Charles Oldham, you will know who was awarded less."

It turned 36 ______ that the examiners felt unable on this occasion to award the prize to one person and had therefore decided that it should be shared by William and Philippa.