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: Hussle, who was killed Sunday in Los Angeles, was reportedly working on a documentary about Dr. Sebi, who in 1985 beat New York allegations of practicing medicine without a license after his healing center ran newspaper advertisements claiming his diet of low alkaline foods cured patients with AIDS. Sebi, born Alfredo Bowman, died in a Honduran jail cell in 2016 after his arrest for carrying large sums of cash into his native country. He was 82. The official cause was pneumonia. Some think Hussle’s death is connected to the Sebi documentary because of a belief that there were forces trying to silence Sebi’s health message, though there is no direct evidence of that. Nick Cannon posted on Instagram that he’d like to carry on Hussle’s work, not directly referencing the film. He has since posted photos and videos of Sebi along with mentions of Hussle. A Cannon representative said Tuesday that Cannon had not yet reached out to Hussle’s loved ones about the film project, wanting to give them time to grieve. Police have said they believe the man suspected of shooting Hussle outside his clothing store had a personal dispute with the rapper. As for Sebi, one Twitter user, Chanda Prescod-Weinstein, summed it up this way: “The real tragedy about Dr Sebi is that white scientists, including medical doctors, have experimented so much on Black people that a lot of Black people don’t trust medicine or any other science. So be judgmental ... but judge how we got here: whiteness.”
Example Output: Social media sleuths take on mysterious herbalist Dr. Sebi.

Example Input: Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital plans to open a second proton therapy center in 2020, and Mercy Hospital St. Louis expects to open its own proton center two years later, The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported . Proton therapy zap cancerous cells with precise beams of radiation while sparing surrounding tissue. Unlike traditional X-rays, the proton beams stop at the tumor instead of traveling through the body. The new $32 million proton system planned at Barnes-Jewish Hospital will provide “pencil-beam” precision to target tumors, said Dr. Jeffrey Bradley, director of Siteman’s S. Lee Kling Proton Therapy Center. It will be built next to a $20 million machine, which opened in late 2013, that uses magnets to scatter proton beams across a tumor. Siteman has treated about 800 patients with the proton therapy, close to its projections of 200 patients a year. The first proton centers built in the 1990s were known for their football-field size and up to $200 million price tag. To offset the costs, the centers marketed heavily to men with prostate cancer, despite a lack of evidence that patients have better outcomes or fewer side effects compared to cheaper treatment alternatives. In 2013, Washington University was the first to open a smaller, less-expensive proton system with one treatment room. “That’s very different from other centers that went all in, borrowed money, and put in four-room centers,” Bradley said. “The one room at a time idea is a very viable idea.” Bradley and other radiation oncologists say a major hurdle is insurance companies’ reluctance to cover proton therapy. That can cost 50 percent to 75 percent more than traditional radiation, according to industry groups. “Where the insurers like to say that proton therapy is not beneficial is often because they do not perform an adequate review of the evidence,” said Scott Warwick, executive director of the National Association for Proton Therapy. “We have notified the payers that they have often either misinterpreted data, reviewed older evidence or omitted key evidence in development of their coverage policies.” ___ Information from: St. Louis Post-Dispatch, http://www.stltoday.com
Example Output: St. Louis medical organizations plan more proton therapy.

Example Input: The story doesn’t mention costs but since these over-the-counter medications have been widely available for a long time it doesn’t seem like an important omission. Because aspirin has been available the longest and is manufactured by literally hundreds of companies, it is by far the cheaper of the three. The article takes a close look at the drawbacks and benefits of each drug. For example, while the experts said acetaminophen is less effective than ibuprofen in treating pain (and carries more risks than the others), it is beneficial in treating fever, especially in children age three and up. Ibuprofen is deemed less toxic for pain relief but it carries the risk of bleeding in the gastrointestinal tract and kidney damage. There’s also a reasonable amount of quantification provided by an expert source, Dr. Andrew Moore, who says: “If you’re talking about aspirin in doses of 500 to 1,000 mg or two tablets, 30 percent of people get relief from acute pain. For acetaminophen at doses of 500 to 1,000 mg, about 40 percent have a success. For ibuprofen, in its normal formulation at something around 400 mg or two tablets, about 50 percent have success.” The story would have been even stronger had it provided links or additional details regarding where this expert obtained his estimates. The story comprehensively describes the harms from each drug based on different uses and patient populations. We especially liked this quote: “Don’t believe that just because something is over-the-counter, it’s safe.” The story cites and links to reliable evidence sources, including a systematic review of randomized controlled trials on back pain published in the BMJ. There are no examples of disease mongering in the story. Sourcing is a very strong component of the article. The story quotes three pain experts from three different institutions as sources. No conflicts of interest were apparent. The main premise of the story was comparing which pain medication was the best for different types of pain. The comparisons are covered in depth with perspectives from three sources. It’s obvious from the story that all of the medications profiled have been widely available without a prescription for many decades. Aspirin, a modified version of salicyclic acid, was created by a Bayer chemist in 1897; acetaminophen followed in 1956; and ibuprofen in 1962. The story establishes that it’s responding to a reader question about three well-known and widely used medications. It also notes the gap between public perception about these drugs and what pain researchers think of them. Since this article was prompted by a reader question and includes comments from three expert sources, we are confident it isn’t based on a news release.
Example Output:
Should you take Tylenol, Advil, or aspirin for pain? Here's what the evidence says.