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.

[Q]: Irish-born William Campbell and Japan’s Satoshi Omura won half of the prize for discovering avermectin, a derivative of which has been used to treat hundreds of millions of people with river blindness and lymphatic filariasis, or elephantiasis. China’s Tu Youyou was awarded the other half of the prize for discovering artemisinin, a drug that has slashed malaria deaths and has become the mainstay of fighting the mosquito-borne disease. She is China’s first Nobel laureate in medicine. Some 3.4 billion people, most of them living in poor countries, are at risk of contracting the three parasitic diseases. “These two discoveries have provided humankind with powerful new means to combat these debilitating diseases that affect hundreds of millions of people annually,” the Nobel Assembly at Sweden’s Karolinska Institute said. “The consequences in terms of improved human health and reduced suffering are immeasurable.”  Today, the medicine ivermectin, a derivative of avermectin made by Merck & Co, is used worldwide to fight roundworm parasites, while artemisinin-based drugs from firms including Novartis and Sanofi are the main weapons against malaria. Omura and Campbell made their breakthrough in fighting parasitic worms, or helminths, after studying compounds from soil bacteria. That led to the discovery of avermectin, which was then further modified into ivermectin. The treatment is so successful that river blindness and lymphatic filariasis are now on the verge of being eradicated. Omura, 80, said the real credit for the achievement should go to the ingenuity of the Streptomyces bacteria, whose naturally occurring chemicals were so effective at killing off parasites. “I really wonder if I deserve this,” he said after learning he had won the prize. “I have done all my work depending on microbes and learning from them, so I think the microbes might almost deserve it more than I do.”  Omura is professor emeritus at Kitasato University in Japan, while Campbell is research fellow emeritus at Drew University in Madison, New Jersey. “This was the work of a team of researchers so it is by no means my work, it’s our work,” said Campbell, 85, who learned of his prize in a pre-dawn phone call from Reuters that woke him at his home in North Andover, Massachusetts. “In the first decade, there were 70 authors that I co-authored papers with. That gives you some idea of the number of people involved,” he said. Tu, meanwhile, turned to a traditional Chinese herbal medicine in her hunt for a better malaria treatment, following the declining success of the older drugs chloroquine and quinine. She found that an extract from the plant Artemisia annua was sometimes effective but the results were inconsistent, so she went back to ancient literature, including a recipe from AD 350, in the search for clues. This eventually led to the isolation of artemisinin, a new class of anti-malaria drug, which was available in China before it reached the West. Tu, 84, has worked at the China Academy of Traditional Chinese Medicine since 1965. World Health Organization spokesman Gregory Hartl said the award of a Nobel prize for the discovery was a great tribute to the contribution of Chinese science in fighting malaria. “We now have drugs that kill these parasites very early in their life-cycle,” said Juleen Zierath, chair of the Nobel Committee. “They not only kill these parasites but they stop these infections from spreading.”     Death rates from malaria have plunged 60 percent in the past 15 years, although the disease still kills around half a million people a year, the vast majority of them babies and young children in the poorest parts of Africa. The 8 million Swedish crowns ($960,000) medicine prize is the first of the Nobel prizes awarded each year. Prizes for achievements in science, literature and peace were first awarded in 1901 in accordance with the will of dynamite inventor and businessman Alfred Nobel. Last year, the medicine prize went to three scientists who discovered the brain’s inner navigation system.
[A]: Beating parasites wins three scientists Nobel prize for medicine.


[Q]: The giant Asian insect, with a sting that could be fatal to some people, is just now starting to emerge from winter hibernation. “They’re like something out of a monster cartoon with this huge yellow-orange face,” said Susan Cobey, a bee breeder at Washington State University. “It’s a shockingly large hornet,” said Todd Murray, a WSU Extension entomologist and invasive species specialist. “It’s a health hazard, and more importantly, a significant predator of honey bees.” The hornet was sighted for the first time in the U.S. last December, when the state Department of Agriculture verified two reports near Blaine, Washington, close to the Canadian border. It also received two probable, but unconfirmed reports from sites in Custer, Washington, south of Blaine. The hornet can sting through most beekeeper suits, deliver nearly seven times the amount of venom as a honey bee, and sting multiple times, the department said, adding that it ordered special reinforced suits from China. The university said it isn’t known how or where the hornets arrived in North America. It normally lives in the forests and low mountains of eastern and southeast Asia and feeds on large insects, including wasps and bees. It was dubbed the “Murder Hornet” in Japan, where it is known to kill people. The hornet’s life cycle begins in April, when queens emerge from hibernation, feed on plant sap and fruit, and look for underground dens to build their nests. Hornets are most destructive in the late summer and early fall. Like a marauding army, they attack honey bee hives, killing adult bees and devouring larvae and pupae, WSU said. Their stings are big and painful, with a potent neurotoxin. Multiple stings can kill humans, even if they are not allergic, the university said. Farmers depend on honey bees to pollinate many important northwest crops such as apples, blueberries and cherries. With the threat from giant hornets, “beekeepers may be reluctant to bring their hives here,” said Island County Extension scientist Tim Lawrence. An invasive species can dramatically change growing conditions, Murray said, adding that now is the time to deal with the predators. “We need to teach people how to recognize and identify this hornet while populations are small, so that we can eradicate it while we still have a chance,″ Murray said. The state Department of Agriculture will begin trapping queens this spring, with a focus on Whatcom, Skagit, San Juan, and Island counties. Hunting the hornets is no job for ordinary people. “Don’t try to take them out yourself if you see them,” Looney said. “If you get into them, run away, then call us!″
[A]: ‘Murder Hornets,’ with sting that can kill, land in US.


[Q]: There is no discussion of the cost of chemotherapy and no mention of potential cost savings for women who might not benefit as much from treatment; however, this is not very relevant to this story, as there is a suggestion that less treatment might be better, with a cost savings implied. Again, Dr. Berry’s subgroup analysis of several large chemotherapy trials, published in The Journal of the American Medical Association, was mentioned but the story didn’t give quantified details. The combined absolute benefit of chemotherapy for disease free survival at 5 years was 22.8% for estrogen-receptor-(ER) negative women compared with 7.0 % for estrogen receptor positive women treated with tamoxifen. The 5-year absolute survival benefit of chemotherapy for women with ER-negative tumors was 16.7 % vs. 4.0% for ER-positive women treated with tamoxifen. Nonetheless, the overall quality of the discussion warrants a satisfactory score. The story does not provide enough information on the potential short-term and long-term harms of chemotherapy. There is only anecdotal evidence from one woman who developed nerve damage. Common short-term side effects of chemotherapy can include nausea and vomiting, hair loss, and fatigue. Younger women may also experience early menopause and infertility as a result of certain chemotherapy regimens. Potential, though more rare, long-term side effects are more serious and may include: bone disorders, heart problems, blood clots and nerve problems. No mention of evidence from Dr. Berry’s analyses, however, the story provides an excellent overview of the changes in the field and the role patients and physicians need to play in evaluating individual risks and benefits of chemotherapy, including determining just how much of a survival benefit a potentially toxic treatment will provide. The story discusses two randomized controlled trials currently enrolling patients. These trials should provide more definitive data on chemotherapy regimens and help physicians and patients make more informed choices about whether chemotherapy might benefit them. No evidence of disease mongering. This story discusses the idea of less treatment – not more – since it may not be as beneficial as once thought. The annual incidence of women who currently undergo chemotherapy for breast cancer is provided, as well as estimates of women who may or may not obtain a life-saving benefit from this treatment. Many sources of information are cited and these are from trusted organizations of cancer research and information (e.g. National Cancer Institute, American Cancer Society). Dr. Berry, the lead author of the main study discussed, receives funding from several pharmaceutical companies, including Eli Lilly, Novartis and Bristol-Myers, however, the study was not funded by these companies. Excellent discussion of chemotherapy treatment decision process, including discussion that no treatment is also an option. Certain chemotherapy treatments may carry serious risks and only small benefit for some women. For other women the benefit is greater, though this must still be weighed against the risks of treatment. The story makes it clear that adjuvant chemotherapy is widely used in breast cancer treatment. Established clinical guidelines based on current evidence suggest that most women with invasive breast cancer and lymph node involvement should not forgo chemotherapy. Physicians are cautious about changes in practice at this time, but some are already presenting the new data to patients and suggesting that chemotherapy may be tailored to a patient’s type of breast cancer. The story describes more tailored (often less) chemotherapy as a newer idea for women who may not benefit as much from more aggressive treatment. This idea is based on recent data regarding the benefit of chemotherapy for tumors fueled by estrogen (ER-positive) and those not fueled by estrogen (ER-negative). No evidence this information is taken solely from a press release. There are several sources cited other than the study authors, and these sources provide perspective on the idea of less chemotherapy for women who may not benefit as much from certain regimens.
[A]:
Shift in Treating Breast Cancer Is Under Debate