instruction:
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.
question:
As the NFL preseason schedule commenced in August 2018, President Donald Trump resumed his fierce criticism of players who protested against racial injustice and police brutality by kneeling or declining to stand on the field during the playing of the U.S. national anthem. After similar protests occurred during several games held on 9 August, President Trump the following morning posted a series of tweets claiming that the players themselves did not understand why they were demonstrating and calling for them to be suspended without pay: The NFL players are at it again – taking a knee when they should be standing proudly for the National Anthem. Numerous players, from different teams, wanted to show their “outrage” at something that most of them are unable to define. They make a fortune doing what they love…… — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 10, 2018   …..Be happy, be cool! A football game, that fans are paying soooo much money to watch and enjoy, is no place to protest. Most of that money goes to the players anyway. Find another way to protest. Stand proudly for your National Anthem or be Suspended Without Pay! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 10, 2018   In response to this tweetstorm, Twitter user Anna Gallardo posted a meme about one particular fatal police shooting of a black man, writing: “Since Donald Trump doesn’t know why NFL players are protesting, let’s retweet this.”   The meme, which was retweeted 120,000 times within three days, gave the following account of the death of an Ohio man named John Crawford III: He was 22 years old. A father to two young sons. He went into Walmart to buy marshmallows, chocolate and graham crackers to make s’mores at a family cookout. While shopping, he picked up an unpackaged BB/pellet air rifle at the store’s sporting goods section. A customer called 911, claiming that John was pointing the gun at people walking by. Since the security video has been released, the customer has recanted. John was carrying a BB gun in the store that sold the gun, in an open carry state. The police arrived, went directly to John and shot him twice before he even knew what was going on. He died at the hospital soon after. A grand jury decided not to indict the officers. John Crawford III mattered. THE INJUSTICE OF HIS MURDER IS WHY THEY KNEEL. The text of the meme was a modified version of an account which the progressive political action committee Voters for Equality published on Facebook in October 2017: His name was John Crawford III. He was 22 years old, a father to two young sons. He went into Walmart to buy marshmallows, chocolate and graham crackers to make s’mores at a family cookout. While shopping, he picked up a un-packaged BB/pellet air rifle inside the store’s sporting goods section. Another customer called 911, claiming that John was pointing the gun at people walking by. Since the security video has been released, the customer has recanted, stating “At no point did he shoulder the rifle and point it at somebody.” John was carrying a BB gun in the store that sold the gun, in an open carry state. The police arrived. Crawford was talking on his cell phone while holding the BB/Pellet air rifle when officers shot him; store video shows the officers fired immediately without giving any verbal commands and without giving Crawford any time to drop the bb gun, even if he had heard them. He died at the hospital soon after. A grand jury decided not to indict the officers. John Crawford III mattered. His life matters, and the injustice of his murder is #WhyTheyKneel #WhyWeKneel. The widely-shared August 2018 tweet prompted enquiries from readers about the overall veracity of the account presented in the meme. On the whole, the meme is highly accurate, but the claim that Crawford was shot “before he even knew what was going on” is a significant point of contention, based on the accounts presented by the police officers involved. Crawford’s Trip to Walmart John Crawford III was shot dead on 5 August 2014 by Sean Williams, a police officer in the city of Beavercreek, Ohio, near Dayton. Crawford was shopping in the Walmart store at 3360 Pentagon Boulevard in the city. As the meme stated, he was indeed the father of two young sons aged five months and under two years old, according to the Cincinnati Enquirer. As reported by the Guardian, Crawford’s girlfriend Tasha Thomas told police in an interview after the shooting that the couple had gone to the Walmart to buy the ingredients to make s’mores for a family cookout, as the meme stated. Multiple news reports confirm the claim in the meme that Crawford picked up an unpackaged pellet gun from a shelf in the Walmart store and walked around with it. The 911 Call Another Walmart customer, later identified as Ronald Ritchie, called 911 to report Crawford to police. Excerpts from an audio recording of the call were later published by multiple news organizations, in which Ritchie told dispatchers that Crawford had loaded a rifle and was “pointing it at people,” including children. Ritchie and his wife’s initial characterizations of Crawford as a threat to shoppers were significantly discredited when surveillance video footage of the incident was released, and when Ritchie himself told the Guardian that “At no point did [Crawford] shoulder the rifle and point it at somebody.”  Several witness statements later seen by the Guardian also negated the notion that Crawford was perceived as a threat by other shoppers: Ritchie and his wife, April, claimed afterwards that Crawford was causing panic among fellow shoppers. Yet only one of seven other customers interviewed by Ohio’s bureau of criminal investigation recalled seeing Crawford. The customer, Billie Brewer, told investigators that he was not alarmed and presumed the 22-year-old was a Walmart employee taking a gun on sale at the store to a storeroom. Ritchie stated repeatedly on his 911 call that Crawford was pointing the gun at people, including two children in particular. This was relayed to the officers on the ground, and before shooting Crawford, [office Sean] Williams called back to the 911 dispatcher to confirm the gun was being pointed at people. In a written statement to Beavercreek police the following day, Ritchie repeated again that Crawford was “pointing the gun at people as they walked by”. Yet Ritchie “later explained that the man with the gun wasn’t actually pointing the gun at the family,” according to a report of his interview with state investigators, but rather “swinging the gun around and flashing the muzzle at children”. Ritchie later made similar remarks to the Guardian in an interview. Later still, the surveillance footage showed Crawford occasionally swinging the gun at his side and pointing it at a shelf, but not in the direction of anyone. April Ritchie gave a similar account to investigators, adding that Crawford was acting “very shady”…[She] said she traveled around warning shoppers about Crawford. No one interviewed by investigators recounted this. Surveillance footage showed Crawford continued to look straight ahead. Yet April Ritchie, who had been standing to his left, “said that despite what the video camera was showing, they maintained eye contact with Crawford”. So while Ritchie did not take back every claim he made during his 911 call (he insisted that Crawford was “waving [the pellet gun] around”), he did later contradict a very significant claim which likely fuelled the escalated police response: that Crawford was pointing the “gun” at other shoppers, including children. The meme is again accurate in this respect. A judge in nearby Fairborn later ruled that sufficient grounds existed to charge Ritchie with raising false alarms, but Hamilton County special prosecutor Mark Piepmeier declined to proceed, deciding that the  evidence was not clear that Ritchie knew his descriptions of Crawford’s movements and actions were factually inaccurate. As the meme stated, Ohio is indeed an “open carry” state, meaning the carrying of a visible firearm (even a rifle) in public is lawful. However, the legality of open carry does not extend to using a firearm to threaten others. Although Crawford was apparently not threatening anyone and was carrying only a pellet gun, it’s worth noting that police arriving at the scene had only one source of information (Ronald Ritchie) who had told them Crawford was carrying a loaded rifle and pointing it at children. The Shooting The claim that police shot Crawford “before he even knew what was going on” is the most contentious assertion made in the meme. The surveillance footage shows that a relatively very short period of time (mere seconds) elapsed between the arrival on the scene of Officer Sean Williams and Sergeant David Darkow, and Williams’ fatal shooting of Crawford. However, Williams asserted that within that period of time, Darkow repeatedly shouted at Crawford to drop what the policemen thought was a loaded rifle, and that Crawford failed to do so. Williams also claimed that Crawford made an aggressive motion just before he fired two shots at Crawford. Here’s how Williams described the incident in a statement he wrote on 5 August 2014: We then made it to the final row of the pet department. Sergeant Darkow checked to the left and I covered his back by checking the long row to the right. As I quickly checked to the right I immediately heard Sergeant Darkow yell, “Drop the weapon!” As I turned towards the pet department I immediately saw a black male standing in the center of the aisle. He was holding a rifle. I quickly identified that he was holding a rifle and I could see the silhouette of the magazine seated in the weapon. Sergeant Darkow repeatedly yelled, “Drop the weapon!” The black male, who matched the description of the black male waving the rifle around (blue pants and blue shirt) did not drop the rifle. After repeated commands to drop the weapon the male turned towards us in an aggressive manner with the rifle in hand. At that time the black male was in a position where he could shoot me or Sergeant Darkow. I felt at that moment that my life was in immediate danger, that Sergeant Darkow’s life was in immediate danger, and that the lives of all the families, children and customers were in immediate danger. I then fired two rounds at the suspect. As I shot the suspect he began to move from my right to my left. Once I fired the shots he retreated backwards and dropped the rifle. He then fell backwards behind the end of the row and out of sight. At that time the rifle was in the open. I then quickly closed the distance between me and the suspect. As I neared the weapon, which was lying on the floor, I identified it again as being a black rifle with a seated magazine. As I neared the rifle the black male jumped from behind the aisle and charged towards the weapon. He began to reach for it as he neared it and I yelled for him to get on the ground. Just before reaching the rifle he collapsed to the floor … Elements of Williams’ account were contradicted both by Darkow and civilian witnesses, as the Guardian reported: Reports from interviews of Williams and the other officer who responded, sergeant David Darkow, said that they apparently did not identify themselves as police to Crawford as they turned the corner into the aisle where he was standing. They specified that they shouted at Crawford repeatedly “drop your weapon”, “drop your gun” or “drop the gun”. Yet three witnesses separately said they heard one, less specific, command: “Put it down, put it down”. Crawford’s family have said surveillance footage suggests that while speaking on his phone, he may not have heard an order or realised that it was directed at him. One witness said she did hear police say “drop your weapon”; another said that he heard “get down”. In a recording of the 911 call, a word that sounds like “down” is shouted as officers round a corner in the Walmart, about a second before two shots ring out. Darkow confirmed to investigators that the time between the “last command” being given and shots being fired was “fairly close”. Darkow also told his interviewers that before opening fire, he and Williams separately instructed Crawford to put down the gun. Yet Williams said that he did “not recall personally giving any commands”, and that only Darkow had done so. Darkow further said that Crawford “made a movement that seemed to indicate an attempt to run or an attempt to take cover” just before the 22-year-old was shot. This description appears to be supported by the store surveillance footage, which was released last week. Williams, however, apparently made no mention of this, telling the officials in his interview that he opened fire after Crawford made an “aggressive” move. He added in a written narrative that the 22-year-old had “turned towards us in an aggressive manner with the rifle in hand”. By the time Darkow filed his own written narrative, 10 days after his interview, he described Crawford’s final action differently. Darkow said only that it was a “quick movement”, and did not repeat his earlier remarks that Crawford appeared to be trying to retreat. In his 911 call, Ritchie can be heard telling a dispatcher that Crawford was “on his phone” thirty seconds before his fatal shooting. It’s plausible that Crawford, distracted by his phone call, was not aware of the presence of police or their instructions until it was too late. Accounts of two other important details also vary: how clear and specific the order police gave to Crawford was (and who exactly issued that order), and whether Crawford made an aggressive or defensive movement immediately before Williams shot him. At the 8:26:54 mark in the video published by WLWT, a voice can be heard shouting what appears to be “Down!” followed by what sounds like “Put the weapon down,” but two shots were seemingly fired before the second order was completed. Crawford also appeared to retreat sharply after the word “Down” was heard rather than moving towards the officers, who had not identified themselves as police. However, it’s unclear whether Williams and Darkow issued any earlier instructions not captured in the background of Ritchie’s 911 call, or how Crawford’s movements and gestures appeared to Williams in person (rather than as seen on somewhat grainy surveillance footage). Ultimately, we can’t say with certainty whether Crawford was shot “before he even knew what was going on,” as the meme claims, but evidence to that effect can be interpreted in various ways. Aftermath Williams shot Crawford in his torso and left arm, and Crawford died later that day at the hospital, as the meme states. Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine appointed Hamilton County prosecutor Mark Piepmeier to head a grand jury prosecution in Greene County, and in September 2014 that grand jury decided against indicting either Williams or Darkow on charges of murder, reckless homicide or negligent homicide. The U.S. Department of Justice investigated whether the shooting of Crawford involved a civil rights violation but ultimately decided it did not and declined to launch a federal civil rights prosecution against Williams: Based on a legal analysis of the investigative materials, the Civil Rights Division and the U.S. Attorney have concluded that there is insufficient evidence to establish that Officer Williams acted with the requisite criminal intent necessary to pursue a federal prosecution. To establish that Officer Williams acted willfully, the government would be required both to disprove his stated reason for the shooting — that he was in fear of death or serious bodily injury — and to affirmatively establish that Officer Williams instead acted with the specific intent to violate Mr. Crawford’s rights. Williams returned to full duty a few days after the Justice Department announced their decision not to proceed with a civil rights prosecution. Crawford’s family is suing Sean Williams, the city of Beavercreek, and Walmart in a federal civil wrongful death lawsuit.
answer:
We evaluate the claims made in a viral 2018 meme about the police shooting death of John Crawford III.


question:
The decision by Dewayne Johnson, who sued Monsanto in 2016, brings the total award to $78 million, down from the jury’s verdict on Aug. 10 of $289 million - $39 million in compensatory and $250 million in punitive damages. Johnson’s law firm said in a statement that he accepted the reduction “to hopefully achieve a final resolution within his lifetime.”   Judge Suzanne Bolanos of San Francisco’s Superior Court of California, who oversaw the trial, earlier this month affirmed the liability portion of the verdict, but ordered punitive damages to be slashed to concur with California and federal law. Bayer denies allegations that glyphosate can cause cancer and said it will appeal the decision as the verdict was not supported by the evidence presented at trial. The verdict, which marked the first such decision against Monsanto, wiped 10 percent off the value of the company and shares have since dropped nearly 30 percent from their pre-verdict value. The company, which faces more than 8,700 U.S. lawsuits over glyphosate, says decades of scientific studies and real-world use have shown glyphosate to be safe for human use. Regulators around the world, including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, have found glyphosate was not a likely carcinogen to humans and approved the chemical, but the cancer unit of the World Health Organization in 2015 classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans.”  The jury found the company’s glyphosate-containing RoundUp and Ranger Pro products responsible for causing Johnson’s non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and said the company had failed to warn him and other consumers of the risks. Johnson could decide whether to accept the reduction or face a new trial on the punitive damages portion. His lawyers on Wednesday said they would challenge the amount of damages during Bayer’s appeal.
answer:
Groundskeeper in Bayer in U.S. weed-killer case accepts reduced award.


question:
“It’s because my body has been suppressed for so long, it can’t fight it (cancer),” the Wisconsin resident said. Patty, who has worked at her father’s restaurant for 27 years, now struggles to handle full-time duties. “I’m trying to get disability, but I’ve been denied once already. I don’t plan on quitting working. I just need help. I need help because I can’t do a full-time job,” Patty said. In March 2017, a friend who lives in New Mexico, where medical marijuana is legal, mailed her Buddha Tears, a cannabis oil product containing cannabidiol (CBD), and THC, the psychotropic component of cannabis. After consuming a tiny amount of the oil each day — as well as smoking marijuana — Patty said she saw a massive improvement in her condition. “Unfortunately, I have to smoke everyday, because if I don’t, I will be in the bathroom all the time,” said Patty, who asked that her last name not be published because she is using an illegal substance. But these days, Patty is again struggling with the symptoms. “My connection (for CBD and marijuana) got cut off,” she said. “I’m very angry.” While Patty and others have found success treating their medical ailments with cannabis, the drug remains illegal in Wisconsin. And because of its status as a Schedule I drug — the most restrictive classification — there has been limited research in the United States about its effectiveness as medicine. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has authorized one component of cannabis to treat serious and rare seizure disorders, as well as three drugs with synthetic cannabis substances; no other uses have been approved. ___ The nonprofit news outlet Wisconsin Watch provided this article to The Associated Press through a collaboration with Institute for Nonprofit News. ___ Although it remains illegal federally, 33 states and the District of Columbia have authorized medical use of cannabis. A bipartisan group of lawmakers has proposed legalizing it for medical use in Wisconsin, and another group of Democratic lawmakers introduced a bill in October to decriminalize possession of less than 28 grams. But Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald, R-Juneau, remains opposed. An April poll conducted by the Marquette Law School Poll showed that 83% of registered voters polled support the use of marijuana for medical purposes with a doctor’s prescription. “When issues receive more than 70% support from registered voters in Wisconsin, the Legislature needs to listen and act,” said Rep. David Bowen, D-Milwaukee. According to Dr. Angela Janis, director of psychiatry for University of Wisconsin-Madison’s University Health Services, Schedule I drugs, including marijuana, are considered to have no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse, whereas for Schedule II drugs, there is less potential for abuse, and there is some therapeutic benefit. Janis is intimately familiar with this distinction. In addition to her university job, Janis is chief medical officer at LeafLine Labs, a Minnesota-based medical marijuana company. “To put this in perspective: methamphetamine is Schedule II because it’s approved for obesity. Cocaine is Schedule II because it’s approved for nasal surgery since it can constrict your blood vessels as they do surgery in your nose. So that’s the bar for what ‘medical benefit’ means,” Janis said. According to Janis, cannabis has less abuse potential than any of those substances. “Cannabis is not appropriately scheduled. And that’s one of the barriers, but not the only barrier, to research,” Janis said. Janis recommends rescheduling the drug so researchers can further study its properties. Even Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM), which opposes marijuana legalization, is “fully supportive” of drugs containing cannabis that have been approved by the FDA, said Colton Grace, a spokesman for the group. According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse, cannabinoids are substances within the cannabis plant that act on specific receptors in the human brain and body. They are the main active ingredients in the medical products derived from cannabis. These receptors affect many essential functions, including one’s memory, thinking, concentration and coordination. Interfering with it can have profound effects — both positive and negative. Two of the most extensively studied cannabinoids are delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and CBD. However, there are dozens of cannabinoids that may also have medical uses. “Many strains of the cannabis plant can have 60, 70, 80 cannabinoids in them that all interact in different ways,” Janis said. The National Institutes of Health reported spending $191 million on researching cannabinoids for medicinal use in 2017-18. Some effects are already known. For example, THC can affect the central nervous system, producing benefits such as decreased vomiting and nausea, increased appetite, reduced pain and anti-inflammatory effects. CBD also acts as an anti-inflammatory, increasing immune function, reducing pain and keeping certain cells from proliferating. Cannabinoid receptors are not in areas that control breathing, which is why there are no fatal overdoses with marijuana, Janis said. CBD actually blocks the psychotropic effects of THC, Janis said. In addition to all those cannabinoids, the cannabis sativa plant has a lot of other chemicals. For instance, terpenes, which give each strain its particular smell, such as lemon or pine, “are thought to have a lot of effects, but we just don’t know what they actually do in the body,” Janis said. In 2017, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine came out with one of the most comprehensive reviews of scientific research on what is known about the health effects of cannabis and cannabis-derived products. The committee considered more than 10,000 scientific abstracts. It reached nearly 100 conclusions, finding substantial evidence for just a few indications — the biggest one being pain. The report found there is substantial evidence that cannabis is an effective treatment for chronic pain in adults, specifically nerve pain, Janis said. The group also found conclusive evidence for cannabis treating chemotherapy-associated nausea and vomiting and MS-associated muscle spasms. The report also showed moderate evidence that cannabis or cannabinoids are effective for improving sleep in individuals with sleep apnea, fibromyalgia, chronic pain and multiple sclerosis. It also found limited evidence for cannabis as effective for increasing appetite and decreasing weight loss associated with HIV/AIDS, relaxing muscle tightness and pain from MS, symptoms of Tourette syndrome, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Anecdotal evidence has also proven the effectiveness of cannabinoids for treating Rett syndrome. Norah Lowe, 10, started feeling relief from the rare neurological disorder one year ago when she began using CBD to treat her symptoms. Rett syndrome impacts nearly every part of a child’s life, including the ability to speak, walk, eat and breathe. A distinct feature of the condition is repetitive, almost constant hand movements. At a news conference arranged by state Rep. Melissa Sargent, D-Madison, to introduce her latest bill to legalize medical and recreational marijuana, Norah’s father, Josh Lowe, said he is frustrated that state law prohibits her from trying medical marijuana, which has helped others with her condition. Norah, who uses a wheelchair, has experienced “increased flexibility, decreased pain and muscle cramping, increased communication, cognitive ability, reduction in seizures, better mood control, and the list goes on and on,” Lowe said. A 2017 study published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews analyzed several studies, concluding that cannabis-based medicines were better than placebos for pain relief — and that these medications also improved sleep and psychological distress — it concluded that any potential benefits might be outweighed by their potential harms. According to the Marijuana Policy Project, the most common conditions accepted by states that allow medicinal cannabis relate to the relief of the symptoms of cancer, glaucoma, HIV/AIDS and MS. Some other common indicators include Alzheimer’s disease, inflammatory bowel disease, Crohn’s, Parkinson’s disease and PTSD, according to the group, which advocates for marijuana legalization. Additionally, the University of Michigan published a study in the February issue of Health Affairs to understand the reasons why people are using cannabis for medical purposes, and whether those purposes are evidence-based. The authors found that 85.5% t of uses of medical cannabis were for conditions for which there was substantial or conclusive evidence of their therapeutic effectiveness. Even more, they found that chronic pain is currently the most common qualifying condition reported by medical cannabis patients, used by 64.9% of such patients in 2016. “That’s a good sign,” Janis said. “Even though a physician can write it (a cannabis prescription) for a variety of things, it seems to be being used for what it’s intended for.” Since cannabis is a Schedule I drug, it is “very difficult to study at any institutional level” because, in order to do so, researchers need sign-offs from the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency, which has “historically been unwilling to provide them,” said David Abernathy, vice president of data and government affairs for the Arcview Group, a firm that advises investors in the cannabis industry. Because of this, “Things like double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trials weren’t happening in the U.S.,” Abernathy said. But there has been a lot of research in the past decade in other countries including Israel, Canada, China and Italy, and “now we’re starting to see more research in the U.S.,” he said. The 2017 National Academies review of cannabis research agreed that the drug’s status as a Schedule I substance made it hard to study. “Researchers also often find it difficult to gain access to the quantity, quality, and type of cannabis product necessary to address specific research questions,” the review found. Patty, the Crohn’s patient, believes that her cannabis treatment not only alleviated her Crohn’s symptoms, but she credits it with keeping her aggressive skin cancer at bay. According to a 2018 article published in Biochemical Pharmacology, studies have shown the potential of cannabinoids to reduce of skin cancer progression. However, there is a significant lack of clinical studies promising enough to make any conclusive statements at this time. “I haven’t had the cannabis oil since March of 2018, and once I couldn’t get it anymore, I mean I just finished my 12th surgery (for cancer),” Patty said. “So, you tell me, what do you think?”
answer:

Wisconsin residents using medical cannabis amid restrictions.