Definition: 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:`.
Input: CONTEXT: A vegan is not going to eat your pan, just the food that was made on it. As no animals were harmed in the making of your pan (well, probably but how would you know) the pan itself wouldn't be an issue. Of course if a tiny bit of pan seasoning could go into the food, however anything else used in the preparation of the meal like cutting boards could cause a small amount of meat product to go into the food as well. Your kitchen is not vegan, and if a vegan has a problem with that they should not come over for a meal. I'd be extremely surprised if the subject of your pots and pans came up to be honest, vegans I know appreciate people going to the effort of making a vegan meal for them.  <sep>  Q: Is cast iron skillet suitable for vegans? A: A vegan is not going to eat your pan, just the food that was made on it  Q: But if the pan had been seasoned with lard wouldn't it go against a vegan code of ethics to eat food prepared in that pan? A: Your kitchen is not vegan, and if a vegan has a problem with that they should not come over for a meal  Q: Is it ok to trick your vegan friends? A: As no animals were harmed in the making of your pan (well, probably but how would you know) the pan itself wouldn't be an issue  Q: Whether they know what you did or not, don't you run the risk of being a horrible person for serving them something you know was seasoned with dead animal? A: Of course if a tiny bit of pan seasoning could go into the food  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Wouldn't it just be easier to find another pan?

No