instruction:
Generate an explanation for the given claim using the provided supporting material from the paragraph. Please consider the following points while generating an output. 1) The claim will always have supporting proof in the paragraph, and the paragraph will have a clear point of view supporting the claim. 2) There can be instances where direct correlation to the claim is not available. Make use of the sentences in the paragraph to provide a corresponding output supporting the claim. 3) The explanation should be at least one and at most twelve sentences long.
question:
Paragraph: There is also the revival of the humble foam roller, which experts say, like old-time push-ups, squats and planks, has never been more popular. Anita Golden, fitness manager at a Crunch gym in New York City, said she’ll be giving clients a foam roller called the GRID. “We’ve always had foam rollers in the club but now more people are using them as a way to ease post-workout muscles, prevent injuries and exercise the core,” Golden said. When it comes to big-ticket items, Colleen Logan of Icon Health and Fitness, which manufactures a number of fitness brands, said the treadmill remains the most popular gift. “Treadmills continue to lead the industry in terms of home fitness purchases,” said Logan. They account for about 57 percent of fitness purchases, while elliptical trainers and stationary bicycles are a distant second and third place at about 8 percent each. The average home treadmill costs about $700, said Logan, but the technology revolution has transformed even this stalwart at the high end. The ultimate splurge, at $4,000, she said, is the Boston Marathon Treadmill, which allows users to adjust speed in 1/10 of a mile per hour increments without touching the console. It also lets users run a virtual Boston Marathon. For people on a smaller budget, there is the iFit app that lets the iPhone capture a favorite vacation run or bike ride in Hawaii, store it in data centers all over the world which collectively are referred to as the “cloud,” and download it to an iFit-enabled treadmill at home. “You’ll view the exact route and experience the same terrain again,” Logan explained. Devices, gadgets and apps proliferate as tech-savvy fitness becomes more accessible, according to Jessica Matthews of the American Council on Exercise (ACE). “There’s a lot of interest in on-body monitoring devices as ways to motivate and track progress,” she said. “They run the gamut from basic devices to track hours, steps, and caloric expenditure to full-body tracking.”  Nike+ Sportsband has a series of small lights on the wrist band that change from red to green as the runner nears his goal, while the BodyMedia FIT Armband tracks everything from the number of calories burned to the quality and quantity of sleep. ACE also studied fitness DVDs released for the holidays. “We evaluated them for quality of instruction, safety, effectiveness and design of workout,” Matthews said. Among the best were “Amy Dixon’s Breathless Body Vol.2: The Edge.” Matthews called it a challenging cardio workout best suited to those on your list with “an established base of fitness.”  “Jessica Smith’s 10 Pounds Down Better Body Blast” also got a thumbs up for its well-rounded routine and clarity of instruction. For people seeking a mind-body approach, Matthews praised “STOTT Pilates Intense Body Blast: Pilates Interval Training: Level I,” which she said is accessible for someone new to fitness. “They do a great job queuing movements and creating flow,” she said. Richard Cotton of the American College of Sports Medicine suggests giving the fitness novice the gift of a personal trainer. “The best is human assistance,” he said. “Another way is a beginner group exercise class.”  He also suggests a gift certificate for shoes at a running store equipped with a treadmill. “You need shoes that fit your gait,” he said. “People should always get their gait analyzed.”  Golden likes to cite the law of reciprocity to the personal trainers she manages. “I always tell them to get their clients something,” she said. And what does the personal trainer want for Christmas? “I like the roller, or a new jump rope,” she said. “Fitness people aren’t hard to please. Get me a new yoga mat and I’m happy.” Claim: Holiday fitness gifts trend from high-tech to basic.
answer:
Looking for the perfect holiday present for a fitness fan? Gift offerings this year range from apps that can store a run in the country to be viewed later to gadgets so sophisticated they measure quality of sleep as well as calories burned.


question:
Paragraph: Hanan al-Hroub, a Palestinian teacher scheduled to speak at a Clinton Global Initiative Annual Meeting dinner event on 20 September 2016, drew criticism from Republicans because her husband, Omar al-Hroub, is a Palestinian official who served 10 years in an Israeli prison for supplying chemicals used in a deadly bombing attack in Hebron that killed six Israelis in 1980 — especially given the close proximity (in both time and distance) of the speaking engagement to recent bomb attacks in New York and New Jersey. For example, Raj Shah, ​deputy ​communications director of the Republican National Committee, stated that:  In the wake of this weekend’s attacks, granting a platform to the spouse of a terrorist bomb-maker just miles away from where explosives were detonated days ago is an insult to the victims and makes a mockery of the Clinton Foundation. Donald Trump’s campaign similarly issued a press release titled “Statement on Clinton Foundation Honoring Wife of Palestinian Terrorist,” objecting to al-Hroub’s appearance at the Clinton Global Initiative dinner: Today’s report that the Clinton Foundation is feting the wife of a Palestinian man convicted of helping bomb innocent Israeli citizens is deeply disturbing, especially in the wake of this weekend’s attacks. The decision to honor the wife of a terrorist by Hillary Clinton’s foundation shows a complete lack of judgment and a callousness that should disqualify her from holding the presidency. Mrs. al-Hroub has become famous in her own right, independently of her husband, as described in a March 2016 Guardian profile of her achievements that delved into her experiences and her path to worldwide recognition: Hroub only began working as a teacher in 2007. After leaving school, she was forced to abandon her plans for further education when Palestinian universities closed during the first intifada, or uprising, between 1987 and 1993. Instead she got married and had five children. In 2000, when her youngest was established at school, Hroub resumed her education part-time at Al-Quds University. Within months, her husband, Omar, and two of her daughters were shot at by Israeli soldiers at a checkpoint near Bethlehem. Omar was injured in the shoulder and the girls were traumatised. “This incident changed my life. We were in shock. My children were suffering, and the teachers were not trained to deal with trauma. At that point I decided to commit my life to teaching.” She vehemently rejects Israeli claims that Palestinian schools incite children against Israel. “My message to those who say that is that all children should be protected from violence. I had a very hard childhood, and I don’t want these children to experience the same. Once a cycle of violence is created, it’s very hard to break.” Prior to the Clinton Foundation-related controversy, the Associated Press reported on a similar issue surrounding Mrs. al-Hroub’s March 2016 receipt of a global award for excellence in education: The U.K.-based foundation that awarded a Palestinian schoolteacher a $1 million prize for preaching nonviolence is sticking by its choice following revelations that the woman’s husband participated in an attack that killed at least six Israelis three decades ago. The Varkey Foundation awarded Hanan al-Hroub its Global Teacher Prize. In its selection, it cited her slogan “No to Violence” and her efforts in protecting Palestinian schoolchildren from the effects of living in a conflict zone. She had developed a book called “We Play and Learn” focusing on the importance of playing, trust, respect, honesty and literacy. However, her husband, Omar, served time in Israeli prison, convicted as an accomplice in a bombing attack that killed six Israelis as they were walking home from sabbath prayers in the West Bank city of Hebron in 1980. According to an Associated Press account at the time, Omar al-Hroub was a chemist who provided chemicals needed for making the bombs … In a statement, the Varkey Foundation said it does not look into the conduct of candidates’ relatives and that the teacher was committed to nonviolence. “As a point of principle, we only look at the qualities, achievements and conduct of the candidates themselves … As Hanan al-Hroub has said herself, she has spent her whole life dealing with the effects of violence on children at close hand and every day she works toward a world where children, wherever they come from, can grow up peacefully,” it added. “She has spent her entire career teaching the principle of nonviolence. She believes in nonviolence in all its forms and in all circumstances.” Qadura Faris, the director of the Palestinian prisoners’ association, said that after serving a 10-year sentence, Omar al-Hroub accepted the 1993 Oslo interim peace accord with Israel, served as a deputy Cabinet minister in the Palestinian Authority and supports a two-state solution with Israel. He said al-Hroub remains a senior Palestinian official who is close to President Mahmoud Abbas and “believes in his peaceful approach.” Al-Hroub’s biography, as presented among those of the speakers at the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI)’s Annual Meeting from 19 to 21 September 2016, reads: Winner of the 2016 Global Teacher Prize, an initiative of the Varkey Foundation, Hanan Al Hroub grew up in the Palestinian refugee camp, Bethlehem, where she was regularly exposed to acts of violence. She went into primary education after her children were left deeply traumatized by a shooting incident they witnessed on their way home from school. Her experiences in meetings and consultations to discuss her children’s behavior, development and academic performance in the years that followed led Al Hroub to try to help others who, having grown up in similar circumstances, require special handling at school. With so many troubled children in the region, Palestinian classrooms can be tense environments. Al Hroub embraces the slogan “No to Violence” and uses a specialized teaching approach she developed herself. Al Hroub has shared her perspective at conferences, meetings and teacher training seminars. Claim: Hanan al-Hroub, whose husband was jailed for providing chemicals used in making bombs that killed Israelis, was invited to speak at a Clinton Global Initiative dinner.
answer:
Hanan al-Hroub was one of several dozen people invited to speak during the Clinton Global Initiative’s Annual Meeting; she was not singled out to be “honored” or “feted” by that event.


question:
Paragraph: We’ll give the story a minimally passing grade on this criterion as well, because it does note that an earlier version of a test that uses some of the same principles costs several hundred dollars. The story would have been better if it more clearly differentiated between tests used to monitor treatment (where a new test might be compared to biopsies or imaging scans) and tests used to screen healthy people, where even relatively low-cost tests could lead to substantial individual and national expenditures on follow-up testing and treatment. The story does point out that this sort of test for circulating cancer cells is just entering clinical trials. However, the repeated emphasis on the potential benefits obscures the lack of actual evidence. The amount of attention given to possible use to screen healthy people for cancer is out of balance with the more likely scenario that this sort of test will be used initially as a research tool to help track the effects of experimental treatments… and then in conjunction with conventional methods to monitor treatment in people with cancer. The lead sentence promise that this sort of test will be coming to “your doctor’s office” is out of step with the available evidence. This story glosses over the substantial harms that tests can cause. The story could have referred to examples from PSA to mammography to remind readers that detecting cancer does not always improve outcomes and that generally many people are subjected to the harms of invasive follow-up testing and treatment for each one who benefits. As Dr. Susan Love noted on the ABC News website: “Having the cells in the bloodstream does not necessarily mean that the cancer will spread and kill you. Just because you find them does not mean you know what to do with the information….We all have cancer cells in our body that are dormant,” Love said. “We need to be careful not to over react to the presence of cancer cells when the treatment may actually be worse than the cure.” Here again, this story does tell readers that this type of test is just entering clinical trials. But as mentioned before, it tends to minimize the amount of research and investment of time and money that will be required before this sort of test could be considered for use outside of experimental settings. This story does not exaggerate the threat of consequences of cancer. However, readers are likely to get the impression that the detection of circulating cancer cells means the person would benefit from early treatment, when actually researchers don’t yet know whether such a test result actually predicts the future health of an individual. The story quotes an expert who was not involved in the development of this test, though he is going to be involved in upcoming clinical trails. The story makes clear that the developers of the test have struck a deal with Johnson & Johnson to do move toward marketing their invention. The story would have been stronger if it had included comments from experts who have written about the substantial hurdles and obstacles that face developers of this test. We would have liked to see a comment like one included in the article by Martin et al. mentioned above:  “Although fluid-based biomarkers seem promising, their reliability has not been determined. Assay sensitivity and specificity need to be improved, techniques must be standardized and validated, and biomarkers are not yet closely legally regulated. Pressing financial, political, and cultural issues have the potential to derail anticipated benefits.” Or some of the cautious analysis offered by Dr. Len Lichtenfeld of the American Cancer Society, also mentioned above. Finally, we notice that AP profiled the same patient that ABC News profiled. Did the hospital or the company provide their best case scenario? Where is the data on this test to date? The story suggests that this test is inherently superior to existing tests that detect and monitor cancer. While developing a better test is the goal of this line of research, it has a long way to go to reach that goal. As Dr. Len Lichtenfeld wrote on his blog: “…we are seeing many tests that are being touted as important in answering various questions about the future behavior of an individual’s cancer but we are not seeing the type of validation we need to know whether or not such claims are in fact clinically relevant. There are so many markers and genetic tests out there that even the most knowledgeable experts in the clinical treatment of patients with cancer are having a hard time separating the proverbial wheat from the chaff.”  This story sneaks by because it says only that experiments are set to begin and it doesn’t promise that this cancer test will be available within any specific timeframe. However, the overall tone of the story minimizes the difficult challenges ahead. The story started on a confusing note, mixing within the first two sentences phrases that the test is “moving one step closer to being available at your doctor’s office” – yet it’s “experimental” – yet big names are “joining forces to bring it to market.” We think readers heads would be spinning about the state of the research after that lead. The authors of a recent journal article on this concept described the kind of research needed to know if this sort of test really has clinical benefits, ”Determining whether a program is effective could require large (i.e., multithousand patient) clinical trials lasting many years and requiring great expense.” Reference: A Need for Basic Research on Fluid-Based Early Detection Biomarkers Katherine J. Martin, Marcia V. Fournier, G. Prem Veer Reddy, and Arthur B. Pardee. Cancer Research July 1, 2010 70:5203-5206; Published OnlineFirst June 29, 2010; doi:10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-10-0987 http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/70/13/5203.abstract  The story points out that this test builds on an earlier technology that counted circulating tumor cells and it refers to research articles that have appeared in several medical journals. However, the news (as the story points out) is the business deal between John & Johnson and Massachusetts General Hospital; not any specific research revelation. Readers are likely to infer that there is some scientific advance being announced, when actually all of the facts about the test mentioned in the story were announced over the course of several years. The work was summarized in a Massachusetts General Hospital newsletter article last summer: “Advancers at the Mass General Cancer Center”, Summer 2010.  http://www.mgh.harvard.edu/cancer/assets/pdfs/FINAL_Advances at the MGCancer Center.pdf The story does not appear to rely on a news release. Claim: J&J joins development of blood test that can spot 1 cancer cell in a billion healthy ones
answer:

This story about a business deal to support development of a test that can detect extremely low levels of cancer cells circulating in a person’s blood stream hits most of the points we want to see, yet our reviewers felt that readers are left with an overly positive and uncritical portrayal of the present state of this technology. We wish readers had been shown some excerpts from the hard-nosed evaluations of this approach that have been published in medical journals in recent months. Or even more of the cautious analysis given by the American Cancer Society’s Dr. Len Lichtenfeld on his blog. Excerpt:  “…this is an announcement of a research deal. Nothing more, nothing less. It is not a new breakthrough. It is not something that has been proven effective in improving cancer detection and treatment. Not that it is anything less than stunning to develop and demonstrate that this technology works – but as with all research it is a giant step to go successfully from the laboratory phase of development to the clinical phase of making a real difference in patients’ lives. So that in essence is what the fuss is all about: the researchers have signed a contract with a company to further develop this research and determine whether in fact it can be applied successfully to large numbers of patients in a more efficient and less expensive manner.”  Cancer is a leading cause of death. No disease incites greater fear. There is great demand for tests that could improve cancer outcomes. Stories about potential advances in this area should be careful not to stoke desperate hopes.