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:
In its latest Strategy Update, the U.N. agency said that the world stands at a “pivotal juncture” in the pandemic and that “speed, scale, and equity must be our guiding principles” when deciding what measures are necessary. Every country should implement comprehensive public health measures to maintain a sustainable steady state of low-level or no transmission and prepare its surge capacity  to react rapidly to control any spread, the WHO said. Some of the countries hardest-hit by the virus are now considering lifting lockdowns and beginning the transition toward a resumption of normal life. The WHO update said any such  steps should be taken gradually, with time to evaluate their impact before new steps are taken. “To reduce the risk of new outbreaks, measures should be lifted in a phased, step-wise manner based on an assessment of the epidemiological risks and socioeconomic benefits  of lifting restrictions on different workplaces, educational institutions, and social activities...,” the WHO said. “Ideally there would be a minimum of 2 weeks (corresponding to the incubation period of COVID-19) between each phase of the transition, to allow sufficient time to understand the  risk of new outbreaks and to respond appropriately,” it added. It warned that the “risk of re-introduction and resurgence of the disease will continue”. The Geneva-based global health organisation issued its advice at a time when it has come under criticism from the United States for its initial response to the pandemic. President Donald Trump said on Tuesday Washington, the WHO’s biggest donor, would suspend funding. China has begun lifting some of the toughest restrictions imposed on Hubei province where the disease first emerged at the end of last year. In the United States, which has the largest number of confirmed cases and deaths, Trump has jostled with some state governors over who has the authority to begin reopening U.S. businesses. European countries have begun small-scale steps to reduce severe lockdowns. Some Spanish businesses, including construction and manufacturing, have been allowed to resume, although shops, bars and public spaces are to stay closed until at least April 26. Italy, which has the world’s second-highest death toll at 21,067, maintained some tight restrictions on movement, while Denmark, one of the first European countries to shut down, will reopen daycare centres and schools for children in first to fifth grades on Wednesday.
answer:
Lockdowns should be lifted in two-week stages to stem COVID-19 spread: WHO.


question:
"There’s a new sheriff in charge of the U.S. Senate, and he’s eager to show how he’s shaking up the law of the land. We’re talking, of course, about new Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., who took over the Senate’s top slot after the midterm elections bounced Democrats from power. And in this new world, Republicans are touting an eye-catching factoid as evidence of a functional Senate, one they say runs on fairness and order under GOP control. ""Amazing fact: Senate has already voted on more amendments in 2015 than Reid allowed ALL YEAR last year,"" tweeted Phil Kerpen, opinion-writer and president of conservative 501(c)(4) American Commitment, on Jan. 22, 2015. Kerpen, formerly of Americans for Prosperity, the Club for Growth and the libertarian Cato Institute, told us he heard the statistic from McConnell himself. We wanted to know if it was true that the Senate has already allowed more votes on amendments in less than one month than all of 2014. And why? On Senate stoppage and filled ‘trees’ The simple answer on the number of votes is that Kerpen is correct. But the reason behind it varies depending on your particular political lens. A simple search of Senate roll call votes on amendments in 2014 and 2015 backs up Kerpen’s statement. In 2014, there were 15 roll call votes on amendments. As of Jan. 22, 2015, the date of Kerpen's tweet, there were 16 roll call votes on amendments. There have since been 17 more votes on amendments to the bill to approve the Keystone XL pipeline, which passed a week later but will likely face President Barack Obama’s veto pen. Kerpen came at the tally a different way, counting ""real"" votes on amendments, a distinction that also includes roll call votes on motions to table amendments, which effectively kills them. By his math, there were 16 votes allowed on amendments in 2014 and 26 so far in 2015. By either count, the numbers work. What changed? In 2014, then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., relied on a funny-sounding procedure called ""filling the amendment tree."" Basically, Reid filled the docket allowed for amendments by adding amendments with inconsequential changes that no one else could override. The procedural tactic prevented Republican-sponsored amendments from being heard on the floor. ""He did that more than any of his predecessors,"" Donald Ritchie, Senate historian, told PunditFact. Reid wasn’t doing this just to be a not-so-nice guy. To Democrats, it was to counter Republican tactics. Unlike the House, the Senate does not have strict rules for the substance of amendments that can be attached to bills (i.e., you could add a health care amendment onto a defense spending bill). And that’s exactly what happened in years past. Republicans began introducing off-topic amendments that, for example, cut off U.S. aid to Egypt or, a favorite of Sen. David Vitter, R-La., to eliminate health care subsidies for Senate staffers. No matter what the topic of the bill. Sometimes this was in effort to force difficult votes for Democrats back home. To Republicans, Reid’s style of blocking amendments emulated an uncooperative and off-the-rails leadership style -- one that is tremendously well-documented -- that stymied policymaking. To Democrats, it was necessary to get anything accomplished. Republicans were filibustering votes on the underlying bills and not committing to a vote in exchange for allowing some amendments, said Steven S. Smith, a political science professor at Washington University in St. Louis. ""Reid saw they were filibustering everything, bringing the place to a standstill,"" Smith told us. ""So he wondered why he should give them votes at all."" Reid’s office does not dispute the number of votes on amendments, but they do take issue with what they deem an ""empty talking point"" that neglects Republican responsibility for the gridlock. His spokesman argues that Republicans blocked their own share of amendments by not compromising on potential amendments to be heard on the floor and refusing to come to an agreement about when a bill should come to a vote. ""(Reid) makes no apologies for blocking what we all consider to be extremely pointless political amendments that were just designed not to improve the bills we were working on but to run 30-second political ads against Democratic senators,"" said spokesman Adam Jentleson. ""Republicans are entirely culpable in that number being what it is."" Reid’s style of blocking amendments irritated Republicans, sure, but it also flared up during the 2014 midterms with Republicans using it to attack Democrats. The GOP pounced on Alaska Democratic incumbent Sen. Mark Begich, for instance, for his lack of roll-call votes on his amendments. McConnell, conversely, said he would allow open amendments on the Keystone XL bill, hence the GOP celebrating its ""new management"" style. As political experts told us to expect, there have already been clashes with McConnell’s methods a few days after the initial celebration. During the Keystone debate, Democrats objected to McConnell tabling Democratic amendments and not letting Democrats debate their amendments for a minute. Reid, perhaps ironically, tweeted, ""I've never seen debate shut down as aggressively as when Sen. McConnell refused to allow Dems to debate their own amendments for just 1 min. ... and that’s saying something."" What the experts tell us Bottom line, experts said, voters shouldn’t take the new tactics as evidence that McConnell’s ""return to normal order"" will give the Democrats an easy path to voting on the amendments of their choice. ""It’s not going to happen,"" said Roy Meyers, University of Maryland, Baltimore County affiliate professor of public policy. University of Kansas political science professor Burdett Loomis agreed, saying, ""The overall idea isn’t trivial (‘regular order’), but the exact number isn’t very significant, especially if McConnell, as expected, runs the Senate almost completely to the (Republicans’) advantage."" It’s too early to know whether we have a ""sea change"" of order on our hands in the Senate, said Sarah Binder, George Washington University political science professor. ""In other words, the intense partisanship of the Senate that led Sen. Reid to all-but shut down the amendment process last year has not dissipated,"" Binder said. ""I think the question going forward is whether McConnell can find a way to conduct the Senate such that senators from both parties believe their legislative needs are being met."" Our ruling Kerpen, among others, tweeted, ""Amazing fact: Senate has already voted on more amendments in 2015 than (Harry) Reid allowed ALL YEAR last year."" On the numbers, that is right. But experts cautioned us that the claim falls more in the interesting factoid category than a sign of a different or more cooperative Senate leadership. The statement is accurate but needs clarification and additional information. That meets our definition of . Correction: An earlier version of this fact-check incorrectly described Sen. David Vitter's amendment."
answer:
Amazing fact: Senate has already voted on more amendments in 2015 than Reid allowed ALL YEAR last year.


question:
A study conducted by the University of California, Irvine,  also found that the drug combination was much less toxic than  chemotherapy. “I think we are on track to develop a medical means to  prevent colon cancer,” in people at high risk of developing the  disease, said Dr. Frank Meyskens, director of the university’s  cancer center. He said earlier efforts to develop a preventive  treatment were thwarted by the fact that available therapies  caused too much toxicity. Meyskens lead a study in which 375 patients with at least  one previous colorectal polyp, also known as adenomas, were  treated with either a combination of one-time cancer drug DFMO  (difluoromethylornithine) and sulindac, a non-steroidal  anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), or placebo. The results, presented at a meeting of the American  Association for Cancer Research in San Diego, were so  encouraging that the study was stopped early. After three years, the overall risk of recurrent adenoma  was 12.3 percent in treated patients, compared with 41.1  percent for patients in the placebo group, or a 70 percent risk  reduction. For patients with more than one previous polyp, 0.7 percent  of treated patients had a recurrence, compared with 13.2  percent of placebo patients — a 95 percent reduction. The researchers said an analysis of side effects and  toxicity found no difference between the treatment and placebo  groups. There also was no difference in side effects requiring  overnight hospitalization, gastrointestinal side effects or  cardiovascular side effects between the two groups. DFMO is the basis of the drug eflornithine, which was  initially developed as a cancer medication, but is now used to  treat African sleeping sickness. A cream formulation of  eflornithine is marketed as a hair removal agent under the  brand name Vaniqa. Sulindac is sold by Merck & Co Ltd under the brand name  Clinoril as a treatment for arthritis and other inflammatory  conditions. Meyskens said larger trials will be needed to assess the  risk of cardiovascular and other adverse side effects, as well  as to determine whether the incidence of actual colorectal  cancer can be reduced in either patients with low stage prior  colorectal cancers or in very high risk individuals. Chronic use of other NSAIDs, such as Merck’s Vioxx, has  been linked to an increased risk of heart attack and stroke. Sulindac is associated with liver toxicity. A separate large study presented at the conference showed  that Pfizer Inc’s Cox-2 inhibitor Celebrex, or celecoxib,  significantly reduced the risk of colon polyps during a trial  that was cut short after too many patients developed  cardiovascular problems. “For patients without major cardiovascular risk factors,  celecoxib at low doses protects against high-risk lesions that  can lead to colon cancer,” said Dr. Monica Bertagnolli,  associate professor of surgery at the Brigham and Women’s  Hospital, and the lead researcher on the Celebrex study. Meyskens said the combination therapy was likely to  eventually be used in people at high risk of colon cancer,  including those discovered to have advanced adenomas, as well  as patients diagnosed with low-stage colon cancer who have had  their disease cured. “About 30 to 35 percent of those patients will develop  another colon cancer,” he said. According to the American Cancer Society, colon cancer will  kill 52,000 people this year in the United States alone.
answer:

Drug combination reduces colon cancer risk.