Given a paragraph, generate a claim that is supported by the given paragraph. 1) The claim must contain information from within the paragraph. 2) A sentence within the paragraph can be used as a claim. 3) The claim should not have contradictions within the paragraph. 4) The claim should be at most one sentence long.

Example Input: "The Republican Party of Texas marveled — not in a good way — at an admission of sorts by U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi about the long-stalled health care overhaul before Congress. According to an e-mail the GOP sent Friday, Pelosi said “the Democrats have to pass their terrible health care bill so that the American people can actually find out what's in it.” Talk about a banana-peel moment. Did Pelosi improbably denigrate her party’s promised legislation and say people can find out what’s in it after it passes? GOP spokesman Bryan Preston pointed us to the text of Pelosi’s March 9 speech in Washington to the National Association of Counties. We learned, for starters, that while the Texas GOP thinks the legislation is terrible, Pelosi clearly doesn't. Instead, Pelosi's remarks celebrate aspects such as a ban on denying health coverage because of a pre-existing conditions, “robust support for public health infrastructure,” more spending on community health centers and reductions in uncompensated care by hospitals. Pelosi also says in the speech that the plan won't require anyone to pay a deductible for preventive health care doctor visits. She summarizes: “It’s going to be very, very exciting.” Yet there’s heft to the GOP's claim that Pelosi said the legislation has to pass so people can find out what’s in it. Pelosi adds: “But we have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of controversy.” Pelosi's words stirred critics from the right including Marguerite Higgins, a senior editorial services associate at The Heritage Foundation. In a blog, Higgins named the moment the video of the week and called Pelosi’s statement a “stunning demonstration of political condescension.” Separately, Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly offered this interpretation of Pelosi's comment: ""She meant there was so much talk about process (in Congress) that people have lost sight of what’s actually in the bill. Once it’s passed, we can remind them of all the good things that are in it."" Capital fusses aside, we wondered if Pelosi spoke accurately; will the plan need to pass before people know what's in it? We called the non-partisan Kaiser Family Foundation, which has posted side-by-side comparisons online of health care plans approved by the House and Senate. Its spokesman, Craig Palosky, reminded us that Congress posts the entire legislation online. Of course, that's not to say the final deal is settled — or, it stands to reason, open to public view. Palosky declined to comment precisely on Pelosi's forecast, saying her comment seemed more about politics than policy. ""It’s not our role to police such comments,"" he said. ""If you want to know what members of Congress are doing, you have to speak to members of Congress.” His nudge led us to call U.S. Rep. Michael Burgess, R-Lewisville, among a handful of physicians in Congress and an opponent to the Democrats' proposal. Burgess told us it's often true that the ins and outs of legislation aren't widely known until after a measure passes into law; that held true, for instance, for the Republican-steered measure providing government aid toward prescription drugs for seniors. Pelosi's ""right,"" Burgess said, though ""I don’t think that’s a good strategy (to declare as much). I wouldn’t recommend anyone actually broadcasting that."" So how does the GOP's statement shake out? The party's e-mail errs when it makes it sound as if Pelosi thinks the health-care measure is terrible. It's very much the opposite. But it accurately quotes Pelosi as saying people will find out what's in the plan after it passes."
Example Output: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said this week that the Democrats have to pass their terrible health care bill so that the American people can actually find out what's in it.

Example Input: If true, it would be a profound leap of science and ethics. A U.S. scientist said he took part in the work in China, but this kind of gene editing is banned in the United States because the DNA changes can pass to future generations and it risks harming other genes. Many mainstream scientists think it’s too unsafe to try, and some denounced the Chinese report as human experimentation. The researcher, He Jiankui of Shenzhen, said he altered embryos for seven couples during fertility treatments, with one pregnancy resulting thus far. He said his goal was not to cure or prevent an inherited disease, but to try to bestow a trait that few people naturally have — an ability to resist possible future infection with HIV, the AIDS virus. He said the parents involved declined to be identified or interviewed, and he would not say where they live or where the work was done. There is no independent confirmation of He’s claim, and it has not been published in a journal, where it would be vetted by other experts. He revealed it Monday in Hong Kong to one of the organizers of an international conference on gene editing that is set to begin Tuesday, and earlier in exclusive interviews with The Associated Press. “I feel a strong responsibility that it’s not just to make a first, but also make it an example,” He told the AP. “Society will decide what to do next” in terms of allowing or forbidding such science. Some scientists were astounded to hear of the claim and strongly condemned it. It’s “unconscionable ... an experiment on human beings that is not morally or ethically defensible,” said Dr. Kiran Musunuru, a University of Pennsylvania gene editing expert and editor of a genetics journal. “This is far too premature,” said Dr. Eric Topol, who heads the Scripps Research Translational Institute in California. “We’re dealing with the operating instructions of a human being. It’s a big deal.” However, one famed geneticist, Harvard University’s George Church, defended attempting gene editing for HIV, which he called “a major and growing public health threat.” “I think this is justifiable,” Church said of that goal. In recent years scientists have discovered a relatively easy way to edit genes, the strands of DNA that govern the body. The tool, called CRISPR-cas9, makes it possible to operate on DNA to supply a needed gene or disable one that’s causing problems. It’s only recently been tried in adults to treat deadly diseases, and the changes are confined to that person. Editing sperm, eggs or embryos is different — the changes can be inherited. In the U.S., it’s not allowed except for lab research. China outlaws human cloning but not specifically gene editing. He Jiankui (HEH JEE’-an-qway), who goes by “JK,” studied at Rice and Stanford universities in the U.S. before returning to his homeland to open a lab at Southern University of Science and Technology of China in Shenzhen, where he also has two genetics companies. The university said He’s work “seriously violated academic ethics and standards” and planned to investigate. A spokesman for He confirmed that he has been on leave from teaching since early this year, but he remains on the faculty and has a lab at the school. The U.S. scientist who worked with him on this project after He returned to China was physics and bioengineering professor Michael Deem, who was his adviser at Rice in Houston. Deem also holds what he called “a small stake” in — and is on the scientific advisory boards of — He’s two companies. The Chinese researcher said he practiced editing mice, monkey and human embryos in the lab for several years and has applied for patents on his methods. He said he chose embryo gene editing for HIV because these infections are a big problem in China. He sought to disable a gene called CCR5 that forms a protein doorway that allows HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, to enter a cell. All of the men in the project had HIV and all of the women did not, but the gene editing was not aimed at preventing the small risk of transmission, He said. The fathers had their infections deeply suppressed by standard HIV medicines and there are simple ways to keep them from infecting offspring that do not involve altering genes. Instead, the appeal was to offer couples affected by HIV a chance to have a child that might be protected from a similar fate. He recruited couples through a Beijing-based AIDS advocacy group called Baihualin. Its leader, known by the pseudonym “Bai Hua,” told the AP that it’s not uncommon for people with HIV to lose jobs or have trouble getting medical care if their infections are revealed. Here is how He described the work: The gene editing occurred during IVF, or lab dish fertilization. First, sperm was “washed” to separate it from semen, the fluid where HIV can lurk. A single sperm was placed into a single egg to create an embryo. Then the gene editing tool was added. When the embryos were 3 to 5 days old, a few cells were removed and checked for editing. Couples could choose whether to use edited or unedited embryos for pregnancy attempts. In all, 16 of 22 embryos were edited, and 11 embryos were used in six implant attempts before the twin pregnancy was achieved, He said. Tests suggest that one twin had both copies of the intended gene altered and the other twin had just one altered, with no evidence of harm to other genes, He said. People with one copy of the gene can still get HIV, although some very limited research suggests their health might decline more slowly once they do. Several scientists reviewed materials that He provided to the AP and said tests so far are insufficient to say the editing worked or to rule out harm. They also noted evidence that the editing was incomplete and that at least one twin appears to be a patchwork of cells with various changes. “It’s almost like not editing at all” if only some of certain cells were altered, because HIV infection can still occur, Church said. Church and Musunuru questioned the decision to allow one of the embryos to be used in a pregnancy attempt, because the Chinese researchers said they knew in advance that both copies of the intended gene had not been altered. “In that child, there really was almost nothing to be gained in terms of protection against HIV and yet you’re exposing that child to all the unknown safety risks,” Musunuru said. The use of that embryo suggests that the researchers’ “main emphasis was on testing editing rather than avoiding this disease,” Church said. Even if editing worked perfectly, people without normal CCR5 genes face higher risks of getting certain other viruses, such as West Nile, and of dying from the flu. Since there are many ways to prevent HIV infection and it’s very treatable if it occurs, those other medical risks are a concern, Musunuru said. There also are questions about the way He said he proceeded. He gave official notice of his work long after he said he started it — on Nov. 8, on a Chinese registry of clinical trials. It’s unclear whether participants fully understood the purpose and potential risks and benefits. For example, consent forms called the project an “AIDS vaccine development” program. The Rice scientist, Deem, said he was present in China when potential participants gave their consent and that he “absolutely” thinks they were able to understand the risks. Deem said he worked with He on vaccine research at Rice and considers the gene editing similar to a vaccine. “That might be a layman’s way of describing it,” he said. Both men are physics experts with no experience running human clinical trials. The Chinese scientist, He, said he personally made the goals clear and told participants that embryo gene editing has never been tried before and carries risks. He said he also would provide insurance coverage for any children conceived through the project and plans medical follow-up until the children are 18 and longer if they agree once they’re adults. Further pregnancy attempts are on hold until the safety of this one is analyzed and experts in the field weigh in, but participants were not told in advance that they might not have a chance to try what they signed up for once a “first” was achieved, He acknowledged. Free fertility treatment was part of the deal they were offered. He sought and received approval for his project from Shenzhen Harmonicare Women’s and Children’s Hospital, which is not one of the four hospitals that He said provided embryos for his research or the pregnancy attempts. Some staff at some of the other hospitals were kept in the dark about the nature of the research, which He and Deem said was done to keep some participants’ HIV infection from being disclosed. “We think this is ethical,” said Lin Zhitong, a Harmonicare administrator who heads the ethics panel. Any medical staff who handled samples that might contain HIV were aware, He said. An embryologist in He’s lab, Qin Jinzhou, confirmed to the AP that he did sperm washing and injected the gene editing tool in some of the pregnancy attempts. The study participants are not ethicists, He said, but “are as much authorities on what is correct and what is wrong because it’s their life on the line.” “I believe this is going to help the families and their children,” He said. If it causes unwanted side effects or harm, “I would feel the same pain as they do and it’s going to be my own responsibility.” ___ AP science writer Christina Larson, video journalist Emily Wang and researcher Fu Ting contributed to this report from Beijing and Shenzhen, China. ___ This Associated Press series was produced in partnership with the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
Example Output: Chinese researcher claims first gene-edited babies.

Example Input: The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department’s latest attempt to justify the violent arrest of a journalist was clearly exposed as false by video footage of the attack posted by the reporter and other news outlets.Huang, a reporter for KPCC (Southern California Public Radio) and LAist in Los Angeles, was arrested on September 12 2020 while filming an arrest on her cell phone, and subsequently charged with obstructing a peace officer.In a statement following the arrest, the department claimed:After deputies issued a dispersal order for the unlawful assembly of a group of protesters blocking the hospital emergency entrance & exits, a male adult protester refused to comply & cooperate. During his arrest, a struggle ensued at which time a female adult ran towards the deputies, ignored repeated commands to stay back as they struggled with the male and interfered with the arrest. The female adult, who was later identified as a member of the press, did not identify herself as press and later admitted she did not have proper press credentials on her person.However, video Huang posted after she was released the following day debunked LASD’s account of the arrest.In one clip filmed on her mobile phone, Huang walks toward deputies (refuting another claim from the department that she “ran.”) She is taken into custody seconds after someone off-screen says “back up” rapidly several times.“I saw a commotion ahead of me. Deputies rushed one man and chased another,” she wrote. “I was filming an arrest when suddenly deputies shout ‘back up.’ Within seconds, I was getting shoved around. There was nowhere to back up.”Here’s more of the video, the zoom is still on.I saw a commotion ahead of me. Deputies rushed one man and chased another.I was filming an arrest when suddenly deputies shout “back up.” Within seconds, I was getting shoved around. There was nowhere to back up. pic.twitter.com/Y0amc46NZr— Josie Huang (@josie_huang) September 13, 2020A second clip captures Huang clearly identifying herself as a reporter and naming her station multiple times:Somehow I was able to start a new video right away. You see my phone clatter to the ground and I start shouting “I’m a reporter…I’m with KPCC.” I scream for help from the TV reporters I know are around the corner doing their 11 p.m. live hits pic.twitter.com/O9CZNuSrQI— Josie Huang (@josie_huang) September 13, 2020According to Huang, her phone kept recording while she was being arrested. She posted video showing two deputies stepping on the phone and kicking it:After my phone drops, it keeps recording and it captures two deputies damaging my phone by kicking and stepping on it. I can hear myself in the background shouting: “You guys are hurting me” and “Stop it.” It feels very out-of-body to play this back. pic.twitter.com/8o1kdjqlA9— Josie Huang (@josie_huang) September 13, 2020“I can hear myself in the background shouting: ‘You guys are hurting me’ and ‘Stop it'” Huang wrote after her release. “It feels very out-of-body to play this back.”Huang’s account was also corroborated by footage of her arrest taken by KABC-TV, which shows an object matching the description of a press lanyard hanging from her neck while she is being taken into custody:LAist reported that Max Huntsman, the county’s inspector general, said he would open an investigation into Huang’s arrest. County Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas, who represents the area where the incident took place, called for a special meeting of the Citizens Oversight Commission to further investigate.We contacted the Sheriff’s Department seeking comment on the footage Huang’s posted but did not hear back. However, a spokesperson had told LAist that she “didn’t have proper credentials” and was “interfering with a lawful arrest,” two claims that were quickly debunked by the various video clips.Huang was arrested following a press conference by Los Angeles Sheriff Alex Villanueva concerning the shooting of two deputies who were inside their patrol car. One of the deputies, a 31-year-old woman, is listed in “critical but stable condition.” The other, a 24-year-old man, was described by KABC as “alert.”Villanueva blamed Huang for her arrest during a September 14 2020 press conference. He said:What she had around her neck was not a press credential. I think it said SCPR, that or KPCC. For the average deputy, doesn’t mean anything. Unless it had a household name that they recognize, OK that’s a reporter. You have two of their colleagues shot in the hospital, you have a crowd of protesters chanting for them to die. I think it’s unrealistic to expect them to separate friend from foe and do it in a correct way. If they felt they were justified because she was interfering with a lawful arrest, well then the elements of the crime are met and they took action based on that. Could they have done it better? Everyone could have done better.Joel Bellman, a board member for the Los Angeles chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists, strongly questioned Villanueva’s claim.“She was in a public space, she was not behind the line. She was not trying to get behind the line,” Bellman told KABC. “She was not in a disaster area or a crime scene. She was entirely within her rights from everything we could see.”Associated Press reporter Stefanie Dazio also posted video of Villanueva falsely claiming that Huang’s station had published a story the previous month about a private event for “first responders” that defied statewide measures regarding both the bar being open and the use of facial coverings and social distancing to stop the spread of COVID-19.Last clip: After I asked @LACoSheriff how we can trust his department’s statements after an @LASDHQ tweet inaccurately characterized @josie_huang’s arrest, the sheriff disparaged @KPCC reporting on a separate + unrelated, story. pic.twitter.com/SnnIKuozvz— Stefanie Dazio (@steffdaz) September 15, 2020The Sheriff’s Department denied that any of its personnel attended the event. The local police department later confirmed that two officers were present.KPCC/LAist said in a statement that Huang’s arrest was “the latest in a series of troubling interactions” between law enforcement and reporters, such as tear-gassings:So thankful for all the folks who helped me after the police started shooting tear gas into the protest. pic.twitter.com/bkamzDom52— Jose Salvador (@chavatweets1) May 31, 2020Beatings:Here's a short clip of the @LAPDHQ officer jabbing me in the stomach with a baton, sending me flying back into a crowd of people. https://t.co/R3qUiBgZ5L pic.twitter.com/IIi9Yf9gOd— Lexis-Olivier Ray (@ShotOn35mm) May 31, 2020And attacks with projectile weapons:I just got hit by a rubber bullet near the bottom of my throat. I had just interviewed a man with my phone at 3rd and Pine and a police officer aimed and shot me in the throat, I saw the bullet bounce onto the street @LAist @kpcc OK, that’s one way to stop me, for a while pic.twitter.com/9C2u5KmscG— Adolfo Guzman-Lopez (@AGuzmanLopez) June 1, 2020“We offer condolences to the two sheriff deputies who were shot Saturday evening,” the station said. “These are challenging and stressful times for everyone, but Josie Huang was arrested while doing her job. The charges should be dropped.”Update 11:15 a.m. PST September 15, 2020: Updated with comments from Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva.Comments
Example Output:
KPCC-FM reporter Josie Huang told Los Angeles County Sheriffs deputies she is a journalist as she was arrested in September 2020.