Model: vladargunov/pubhealth-sentence-similarity
Author: vladargunov
Pipeline: sentence-similarity
Library: sentence-transformers
Tags: sentence-transformers, safetensors, bert, sentence-similarity, feature-extraction, generated_from_trainer, dataset_size:16158, loss:CosineSimilarityLoss, en, dataset:bigbio/pubhealth, arxiv:1908.10084, base_model:sentence-transformers/all-MiniLM-L6-v2, base_model:finetune:sentence-transformers/all-MiniLM-L6-v2, text-embeddings-inference, endpoints_compatible, deploy:azure, region:us
Base models (finetune): id: sentence-transformers/all-MiniLM-L6-v2
Card metadata: language: en
library_name: sentence-transformers
tags: sentence-transformers, sentence-similarity, feature-extraction, generated_from_trainer, dataset_size:16158, loss:CosineSimilarityLoss
base_model: sentence-transformers/all-MiniLM-L6-v2
datasets: bigbio/pubhealth
widget: source_sentence: The fruit (soursop, guyabano), leaves, and bark of the graviola tree (A. muricata), have long been utilized as a folk remedy in parts of Africa and South America for myriad conditions. Claims of their potential to “cure” cancer, similarly, have long been a fixture in certain regions of the Internet — fringe health websites and supplement hucksters, primarily. In their most exaggerated form, such claims take the form of a widespread conspiracy alleging a pharmaceutical coverup to squash evidence of viable, powerful, and universal cure for cancer in favor of financial gain. The dubious Health Sciences Institute, (promoter of a previously debunked claim that Hillary Clinton has worked to hide a cancer cure dubbed “sour honey”) described the plant’s potential this way: Since the 1970s, the bark, leaves, roots, fruit, and fruit seeds of the Amazonian Graviola tree have been studied in numerous laboratory tests and have shown remarkable results with this deadly disease. Several years ago, a major pharmaceutical company began extensive independent research on it. They learned that certain extracts of the tree actually seek out, attack, and destroy cancer cells. […] After more than seven years of work behind closed doors, researchers at this company realized they couldn’t duplicate the tree’s natural properties with a patentable substance. So they shut down the entire project. It basically came down to this—if they couldn’t make huge profits, they would keep the news of this possible cure a well-guarded secret. But one researcher couldn’t bear that, and decided to risk his job with the hope of saving lives. Indeed, there has been research on many parts of, and chemicals within, the graviola tree with regard to their ability to kill cancerous cells. In terms of a possible mechanism, most ideas revolve around unique chemicals contained within the fruit — annonaceous acetogenins — that may present a novel pathway to kill cancer cells. These chemicals are found only in the family of plants Graviola belongs to (Annonaceae) and some research indicates they may have the ability to inhibit chemicals that aid cellular respiration, which can cause a “programmed death” of cancer cells. Perhaps most notably, this mechanism has been explored using extracts from graviola material against human lung, colorectal, and liver cancer cell lines. Such studies have found that extracts were indeed able to cause programmed cell death as hypothesized. Other studies have shown limited potential in reducing the proliferation of cancer cells in some animals and cell lines as well. It is worth mentioning, however, that many chemicals that show anti-cancer properties in laboratory settings do not translate to viable cures or treatments for cancer. Investigations on laboratory animals, too, have shown limited but somewhat positive results with regard to the plant’s anticancer potential. Studies on rats and mice, respectively, have shown some anti-tumor potential with prostate cancer and breast cancer, and studies on rats have, as well, shown potential preventive effects for colon cancer. Outside of singular case reports from people alleging benefits from the plant, no large scale clinical human studies have been published on its efficacy as a legitimate treatment for cancer (at least one clinical trial has been registered, however). As such, the view of the UK based Cancer Research, and other Cancer groups, is as follows: There have not been any studies [of Graviola] in humans. So we don’t know whether it can work as a cancer treatment or not. Many sites on the internet advertise and promote graviola capsules as a cancer cure but none of them are supported by any reputable scientific cancer organisations. Both the United States Food and Drug administration as well as the United States Federal Trade Commission have issued warnings to groups selling graviola extract with claims of its cancer-curing potential. In 2008, in a press release describing a “sweep” of graviola supplement sellers, the FTC described their products as “bogus“. Outside of overblown claims, there are also legitimate concerns about the safety of these products. Numerous studies have suggested that the potentially active chemicals within the graviola tree may be neurotoxic. Epidemiological studies of cultures that regularly use the plant in traditional medicine have shown associations between the plant’s consumption and Parkinson’s disease: Epidemiological studies, however, linked the consumption of Annonaceae to a high prevalence of atypical parkinsonism, in Guadeloupe, in parts of the Afro-Caribbean and Indian population in London and New Caledonia. In several patients who desisted in their consumption of Annonaceae fruits, the progression of atypical parkinsonism ceased […]. Chemical investigations of active components within the plant reveal strong evidence of its neurotoxicity, as well: The fruit pulp extract of A. muricata revealed the strongest neurotoxic effect, with 67% cell death at a concentration of 1 µg/mL. A high reduction in cell viability coupled with pronounced cell death was found at 0.1 µg/mL for an Annonaceous seed extract. These results demonstrate that the intake of dietary supplements containing plant material from Annonaceae may be hazardous to health in terms of neurotoxicity.
sentences: U.S. President Donald Trump issued a pardon for the leader of the armed group that held migrants at gunpoint in New Mexico., Thanks to the immigrants who illegally cross the U.S. Mexican border, and the Democrats who refuse to stop them, the Measles virus has been declared a public health emergency in 2019., """The animated film """"Incredibles 2"""" contains scenes that prompted an epilepsy warning at movie theaters.""", source_sentence: """In a regular feature called """"How the Left Destroys the Nation,"""" a website founded by the leader of a far-right group posted this headline about one state’s coronavirus response: """"Michigan Governor Bans Gardening, Sale Of Fruit and Vegetable Seeds, Gardening Supplies Prohibited."""" The attack on Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, a Democrat who has been touted as a potential running mate for presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat  news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) That’s because it’s wrong. Whitmer has issued orders directing people to stay home and limiting some commercial activity, but this claim goes too far. The headline appears on the Geller Report, a website by Pamela Geller. She is an activist who co-founded Stop Islamization of America, also known as the American Freedom Defense Initiative. Below the headline is an article that originally appeared in The Daily Caller, a conservative-leaning publication, that reports on an executive order issued by Whitmer in response to the COVID-19 outbreak. The article does not say that the order bans gardening, but that it does restrict the sale of gardening supplies. In reality, executive order 2020-42, which went into effect April 9, 2020, requires larger stores to block off certain areas of their sales floors as a way of limiting the number of people in those stores. The order does not ban gardening or the sale of any product, including, as we mentioned in a previous fact-check, American flags. The numbers of coronavirus cases in Michigan have surged in recent weeks. As of April 14, the Wolverine State ranked fourth — behind New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts, according to the New York Times. Nearly half of Michigan’s cases are in Wayne County, which includes Detroit, according to Johns Hopkins University. Both the state and the county have a COVID-19 fatality rate of 6%. It’s in that climate that Whitmer issued this order, subtitled the """"Temporary requirement to suspend activities that are not necessary to sustain or protect life,"""" which extended and added to a stay-at-home order issued March 23. Tiffany Brown, a spokeswoman for the governor, told PolitiFact that Whitmer’s order does not ban Michiganders from buying any item. The order says that stores larger than 50,000 square feet must close areas — """"by cordoning them off, placing signs in aisles, posting prominent signs, removing goods from shelves, or other appropriate means — that are dedicated to the following classes of goods: Carpet or flooring, furniture, garden centers and plant nurseries, and paint."""" Referring to that restriction at a news conference announcing the order, Whitmer said: """"If you’re not buying food or medicine or other essential items, you should not be going to the store."""" As to gardening, a frequently asked questions document released by the governor’s office states: """"The order does not prohibit homeowners from tending to their own yards as they see fit."""" Grocery stores, of course, remain open. And neither the order nor the FAQs mention any restriction on the sale of fruit or seeds. A headline shared on social media inaccurately describes an order that Whitmer issued in response to the coronavirus. The order does not prohibit gardening or the sale of any particular product in Michigan. Stores in Michigan larger than 50,000 square feet must close areas for garden centers and plant nurseries, as well as those that sell carpet or flooring, furniture and paint."""
sentences: Bushfires rage out of control across southeast Australia., Iran records 4,585 coronavirus deaths as restrictions eased., """The Republican budget plan """"says that 10 years from now, if you’re a 65-year-old who’s eligible for Medicare, you should have to pay nearly $6,400 more than you would today.""", source_sentence: An old hoax about Charles Manson being paroled that was started by a known fake news website in June 2014 resurfaced in June 2017. The rumor stems from a 2014 report that appeared at Empire News under the headline, “Charles Manson Granted Parole,” that reports Manson had been granted parole due to prison overcrowding: The ruling, issued by three judges overseeing the state’s efforts to ease the overcrowding, gives California until February 2016 to achieve their goals. But, the judges said, the state has to make elderly inmates and those with serious illnesses eligible for parole immediately. Manson, who was denied parole in April of 2012 and wasn’t scheduled for another parole hearing until 2027, was re-evaluated due to his age and health and the Parole Board recommended his parole. The site’s disclaimer, however, states that it’s content is “intended for entertainment purposes only,” meaning that its reporting should not be taken as fact. It’s not clear why Charles Manson parole rumors resurfaced in June 2017. Manson was denied parole by the California Department of Corrections in 2012 and his next parole hearing was scheduled for 2027, when Manson would be 92 years old. In January 2017, however, Manson was transferred to a hospital for treatment of gastrointestinal bleeding, and Manson’s condition was described as “serious” by family members. He had been transferred back to prison by the time the rumor resurfaced. It’s possible that parole decisions regarding the release of other former Manson Family members could have contributed to Charles Manson parole rumors resurfacing. A panel recommended the release of  a former Manson Family member named Bruce Davis who murdered musician Gary Hinman and stuntman Donald “Shorty” Shea in 1969. The final decision, however, will rest with California Gov. Jerry Brown, who had about five months to make a decision. the Los Angeles Times reports. Meanwhile, an appeals panel postponed a decision on wether or not to recommend the release of former Manson Family member Patricia Krenwinkel in December 2016, Fox News reports. Krenwinkel was present at the 1969 murder of Sharon Tate and four others. But regardless of developments with other members of the Manson Family, all Charles Manson parole rumors should be considered “fiction” until at least 2027, when his next hearing is scheduled. Comments
sentences: """Common usage of the phrase """"Always a bridesmaid but never a bride"""" originated with an advertising campaign for Listerine mouthwash.""", Colorado governor signs recreational marijuana regulations into law., State to consider 6 conditions to treat with medical pot., source_sentence: A “Chicken Soup”-like tale warning us against the folly of judging people solely by appearances hit the Internet in mid-1998. As usual, the framework of the tale bore some general resemblance to the truth, but details were greatly altered so as to turn it into something quite different from the real story:  The President of Harvard made a mistake by prejudging people and it cost him dearly. A lady in a faded gingham dress and her husband, dressed in a homespun threadbare suit, stepped off the train in Boston, and walked timidly without an appointment into the president’s outer office. The secretary could tell in a moment that such backwoods, country hicks had no business at Harvard and probably didn’t even deserve to be in Cambridge. She frowned. “We want to see the president,” the man said softly. “He’ll be busy all day,” the secretary snapped. “We’ll wait,” the lady replied. For hours, the secretary ignored them, hoping that the couple would finally become discouraged and go away. They didn’t. And the secretary grew frustrated and finally decided to disturb the president, even though it was a chore she always regretted to do. “Maybe if they just see you for a few minutes, they’ll leave,” she told him. And he signed in exasperation and nodded. Someone of his importance obviously didn’t have the time to spend with them, but he detested gingham dresses and homespun suits cluttering up his outer office. The president, stern-faced with dignity, strutted toward the couple. The lady told him, “We had a son that attended Harvard for one year. He loved Harvard. He was happy here. But about a year ago, he was accidentally killed. And my husband and I would like to erect a memorial to him, somewhere on campus.” The president wasn’t touched; he was shocked. “Madam,” he said gruffly, “We can’t put up a statue for every person who attended Harvard and died. If we did, this place would look like a cemetery.” “Oh, no,” the lady explained quickly, “We don’t want to erect a statue. We thought we would like to give a building to Harvard.” The president rolled his eyes. He glanced at the gingham dress and homespun suit, then exclaimed, “A building! Do you have any earthly idea how much a building costs? We have over seven and a half million dollars in the physical plant at Harvard.” For a moment the lady was silent. The president was pleased. He could get rid of them now. And the lady turned to her husband and said quietly, “Is that all it costs to start a University? Why don’t we just start our own?” Her husband nodded. The president’s face wilted in confusion and bewilderment. And Mr. and Mrs. Leland Stanford walked away, traveling to Palo Alto, California, where they established the University that bears their name, a memorial to a son that Harvard no longer cared about. The very premise of the tale was completely implausible. Leland Stanford (1824-93) was one of the most prominent men of his time in America: He was a wealthy railroad magnate who built the Central Pacific Railroad (and drove the gold spike to symbolize the completion of the first transcontinental rail line at Promontory Summit, Utah, in 1869), as well as a Republican Party leader who served as California’s eighth governor (1862-63) and later represented that state in the U.S. Senate (1885-93). He was an imposing figure, hardly the type of man to dress in a “homespun threadbare suit,” walk “timidly” into someone’s office without an appointment, and sit cooling his heels “for hours” until someone deigned to see him. Harvard’s president would had to have been an ignorant buffoon not to recognize Stanford’s name and promptly greet him upon hearing of his arrival:  Moreover, the Stanfords’ only son (Leland Stanford, Jr.) died of typhoid fever at age 15, in Florence, Italy. His death would hardly have been described as “accidental,” nor had he spent a year studying at Harvard while barely into his teens:  The family was in Italy in 1884 when Leland contracted typhoid fever. He was thought to be recovering, but on March 13 at the Hotel Bristol in Florence, Leland’s bright and promising young life came to an end, a few weeks before his 16th birthday. Stanford, who had remained at Lelands’ bedside continuously, fell into a troubled sleep the morning the boy died. When he awakened he turned to his wife and said, “The children of California shall be our children.” These words were the real beginning of Stanford University. The closest this story came to reality was in its acknowledgement that in 1884, a few month’s after their son’s death, the Stanfords did pay a visit to Harvard and met with that institution’s president, Charles Eliot. However, the couple did not go there with the purpose of donating a building to Harvard as a memorial to their dead son — they intended to establish some form of educational facility of their own in northern California, and so they visited several prominent Eastern schools to gather ideas and suggestions about what they might build, as Stanford’s website described the meeting:  The Stanfords … visited Cornell, Yale, Harvard and Massachusetts Institute of Technology. They talked with President Eliot of Harvard about three ideas: a university at Palo Alto, a large institution in San Francisco combining a lecture hall and a museum, and a technical school. They asked him which of these seemed most desirable and President Eliot answered, a university. Mrs. Stanford then asked him how much the endowment should be, in addition to land and buildings, and he replied, not less than $5 million. A silence followed and Mrs. Stanford looked grave. Finally, Mr. Stanford said with a smile, “Well, Jane, we could manage that, couldn’t we?” and Mrs. Stanford nodded her assent. They settled on creating a great university, one that, from the outset, was untraditional: coeducational, in a time when most were all-male; nondenominational, when most were associated with a religious organization; avowedly practical, producing “cultured and useful citizens” when most were concerned only with the former. Although they consulted with several of the presidents of leading institutions, the founders were not content to model their university after eastern schools. The Stanfords did found their university, modeled after Cornell and located on the grounds of their horse-trotting farm, in memory of their son (hence the school’s official name of “Leland Stanford Junior University”) — not because they were rudely rebuffed by Harvard’s president, but rather because it was what they had planned all along. The “rudely-spurned university endowment” theme of the Stanford story has reportedly played out at least once in real life. In July 1998, William Lindsay of Las Vegas said he contacted an unnamed Scottish institution of higher learning by telephone and told them he intended to give some money to a university in Scotland. Taking him for a crank, the person he spoke to rudely dismissed him. His next call to Glasgow University met with a warmer reception, and in March 2000 that school received a check for £1.2 million, enough to endow a professorship in Lindsay’s name.
sentences: Early study results suggest 2 Ebola treatments saving lives., """Honduras """"bans citizens from owning guns"""" and has the """"highest homicide rate in the entire world."""" Switzerland, with a similar population, """"requires citizens to own guns"""" and has the """"lowest homicide rate in the entire world.""", Pat Robertson asserted the Orlando nightclub shooting was God's punishment for legalizing same-sex marriage., source_sentence: """A chain message circulating on messaging apps claims the United States is about to enter a period of federally mandated quarantine. The source: """"my aunt’s friend"""" who works for the government. There is no evidence of this. The message, which a reader sent us a screenshot of on March 16, appears in a group chat on iMessage. The sender claims to have information from """"my aunt's friend"""" who works for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and """"just got out of a meeting with Trump."""" """"He’s announcing tomorrow that the U.S. is going into quarantine for the next 14 days,"""" the message reads. """"Meaning everyone needs to stay in their homes/where they are."""" We’ve seen screenshots of similar messages circulating on WhatsApp, a private messaging app that’s popular abroad. Misinformation tends to get passed around via chain messages during major news events, so we looked into this one. (Screenshots) There is no evidence that the federal government is set to announce a nationwide lockdown like the ones seen in France, Italy and Spain. President Donald Trump and the National Security Council have both refuted the claim. So far, officials have advised Americans to practice """"social distancing,"""" or avoiding crowded public spaces. In a press conference March 16, Trump outlined several recommendations to prevent the spread of the coronavirus. Among them is avoiding gatherings of 10 or more people. """"My administration is recommending that all Americans, including the young and healthy, work to engage in schooling from home when possible, avoid gathering in groups of more than 10 people, avoid discretionary travel and avoid eating and drinking in bars, restaurants and public food courts,"""" he said. In response to a question, he said the administration is not considering a national curfew or quarantine. He reiterated that point in another press conference March 17. """"It’s a very big step. It’s something we talk about, but we haven’t decided to do that,"""" he said. Andrew Cuomo ordered a one-mile containment zone on March 10. Large gathering spots were closed for 14 days and National Guard troops are delivering food to people. In the San Francisco Bay Area, local officials on March 16 announced sweeping measures to try to contain the coronavirus. Residents of six counties have been ordered to """"shelter in place"""" in their homes and stay away from others as much as possible for the next three weeks. The move falls short of a total lockdown. At the federal level, the CDC does have the power to quarantine people who may have come in contact with someone infected by the coronavirus, but most quarantines are done voluntarily. And decisions are usually left up to states and localities. We reached out to the CDC for comment on the chain message, but we haven’t heard back. The chain message is inaccurate. If you receive a chain message that you want us to fact-check, send a screenshot to [email protected]."""
sentences: Texas guard Andrew Jones diagnosed with leukemia., Treadmill classes mix it up with workhorse of the gym., Drug overdoses are now the second-most common cause of death in New Hampshire.
pipeline_tag: sentence-similarity
Likes: 0 | All-time downloads: 2600
Created: 2024-06-11 18:02:23