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.

Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: There was no mention of the potential costs of screening women for vitamin D levels (as encouraged in the release in a statement from the principal investigator) or the cost of supplementation. The release does a good job of comparing data and providing explanations for the measurements used. We’ll award a Satisfactory for that precision, but as noted below under “Evidence,” there was no explicit caution regarding the fact that measurements of interleukin-6 (IL-6) are only surrogates for the effects of weight loss and vitamin D on clinical outcomes related to inflammation (e.g. cancer diagnoses). IL-6 levels dropped in both the placebo and vitamin D arms, and it’s not clear whether the statistically significant additional decline in IL-6 observed in the vitamin D group is clinically important. Because some of the participants were vitamin D-deficient and the dose of vitamin D provided was modest (2000 IU/d), this was a tough call. But supplementation is often so misunderstood, overhyped and oversold that some statement cautioning readers to pay attention to the specifics of this study and not apply its recommendations to everyone seems prudent. For the most part, the release provides a cautious and accurate description of what appears to be a well-conducted clinical trial in a well-defined population. For example, it notes that weight loss and vitamin D lowered inflammation LINKED to cancer — not that these things reduced cancer risk itself (something this study couldn’t establish). But as noted above, we would have appreciated an explicit acknowledgment that IL-6 is a surrogate marker for the clinical outcomes that people care about. And more importantly, we’re concerned about the closing comment that women should talk to their doctors about measuring their vitamin D levels to determine the most appropriate dose. The problem is there is no evidence supporting screening or treating to a level — and certainly not from this study. The US Preventive Services Task Force has concluded that evidence is insufficient to recommend routine vitamin D screening and the IOM has said that while there are data supporting the benefits of vitamin D supplementation with bone health and fall prevention, there is no evidence supporting benefits for cancer. While testing may be warranted in those with signs or symptoms of clinical deficiency, the statement made here implies that everyone should be tested so that an appropriate dose of vitamin D can be selected. That goes beyond the available evidence. It’s hard to argue that overweight, vitamin deficiency, chronic inflammation and cancer are not real threats, so no mongering apparent here. Funding sources are well documented. The study didn’t discuss alternative preventive measures or genetic causes of increased cancer risks. But this is such a broad and expansive topic that we don’t think the release should have been expected to address those myriad issues. We’ll rate this Not Applicable. Primary care physicians and other health providers are well positioned to monitor blood levels of vitamin D, along with dietary and exercise regimens. The news release makes that clear, albeit indirectly. As noted above, we think the release goes too far in suggesting that people ask their doctors about having their vitamin D levels checked. But we’ve already docked points for that, so we’ll award a Satisfactory rating here. The release makes a case for this being the first clinical trial of its kind; although it’s always difficult to make that statement absolutely, the writer of the release attributes the statement to the study author. As a general rule, it’s probably best to say “believed to be the first.”  While the release meets our standard here, we also wish it had delved a bit into the background of previous vitamin D research and the conflicting and confusing messages that research has generated. Without that context, the typical reader might wrongly jump to the conclusion, based on the wording of the lede and other parts of the release, that this study of vitamin D supplementation — because it was a controlled clinical trial — has somehow settled the important questions about the role of vitamin D and inflammation in cancer risk. The debate remains alive and well. None detected. Claim: Weight loss plus vitamin D reduces inflammation linked to cancer, chronic disease

Output: This news release describes a randomized, controlled clinical trial designed to learn whether adding vitamin D supplements to substantial weight loss regimens would have a synergistic effect in reducing inflammatory chemicals in the bodies of overweight, older women with levels of vitamin D considered too low. The study, published in Cancer Prevention Research, has potential relevance for cancer prevention because inflammatory cytokines have been implicated in the genesis and progression of some cancers, as well as heart disease and other disorders. The release offers substantial details about the design, metrics and outcomes of the clinical trial and does a pretty good job of defining the possible reasons for the effects of chronic inflammation and weight loss on cancer development. It goes to some lengths to narrowly define the results and avoid overstatement. That said, the release ends on a sour note by encouraging readers to talk to their doctors about vitamin D testing — a recommendation not consistent with U.S. Preventive Services Task Force guidelines and which is not supported by this research. Readers might also have been better informed if the release had offered more context regarding the many conflicting and sometimes confusing studies that have previously looked for links among vitamin D, inflammatory responses, diet, overweight, sun exposure and cancer. News releases that include the words “diet,” “overweight,” “vitamin,” and “cancer” are almost narrative nuclear events, often guaranteeing an explosion of coverage, souped up vitamin sales pitches, and lots of negative fallout whose half-life seems forever. Cancer remains the second biggest killer disease overall of Americans, and some experts believe that it will soon push heart disease and stroke out of first place. Thus cancer prevention is a deservedly hot topic, and it is no surprise that Americans are eager for information about ways to limit their risk. News releases that describe research on these topics have enormous power to inform and misinform.


Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: In January 2020, readers asked us about the accuracy of a story that claimed the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had approved a new cocaine nasal spray for use as a local anesthetic. On Jan. 13, the cannabis and drug industry website Merry Jane published an article with the headline “A Cocaine Nasal Spray Just Received FDA Approval.” That article reported that: Medicinal cocaine has always been a thing, but now there’s an FDA-approved nasal spray aptly made with totally legal, pharmaceutical-grade white. On Monday, the pharmaceutical outfit Lannett Company announced that its new cocaine hydrochloride nasal spray product, dubbed Numbrino, cleared two Phase III, randomized, double-blind clinical trials. “The FDA’s approval of our cocaine HCl product, the first NDA approval to include full clinical trials in the company’s history, marks a major milestone in Lannett’s 70+ years of operations,” said Tim Crew, Lannett Company’s CEO, in a press release. “We believe the product has the potential to be an excellent option for the labeled indication. We expect to launch the product shortly …” The pharmaceutical company’s press release, also published on Jan. 13, read as follows: “Lannett Company, Inc. today announced that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved the New Drug Application (NDA), submitted under the 505(b)(2) regulatory pathway, for Cocaine Hydrochloride (HCl) Nasal Solution 4% (40 mg/mL), the company’s branded local anesthetic product … NUMBRINO® (cocaine hydrochloride) nasal solution is an ester local anesthetic indicated for the introduction of local anesthesia of the mucous membranes for diagnostic procedures and surgeries on or through the nasal cavities of adults.” Claim: In January 2020, the Food and Drug Administration approved a nasal spray containing cocaine. 

Output: The press release, and Merry Jane’s article, were accurate. In a Jan. 10 letter addressed to Cody Laboratories, a subsidiary of the Philadelphia-headquartered Lannett, the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research wrote:


Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: Proudly gay and living with HIV, the 41-year-old activist says the rainbow flag will not be his only cause. He intends to begin his congressional career with three main agenda points: Fighting endemic corruption, ensuring Guatemalans’ right to health care and defending human rights, with a focus on the LGBTQ community. “I’m happy, with a lot of mixed feelings,” Dávila said in an interview with The Associated Press. “The worry is I’m putting myself in a snake pit. But at the same time I’m no slouch, and I’m ready and able to fight when it needs to be done.” While it hasn’t been officially confirmed by electoral authorities, experts say Dávila’s left-wing Winaq party won four congressional seats in Sunday’s general election, and he is set to represent a Guatemala City district. “People have to see me as just another citizen, since I was elected democratically,” Dávila said. Guatemala has taken baby steps toward guaranteeing LGBTQ rights, such as adopting measures to identify hate crimes against members of the community and allowing people to change their legal names and choose how they appear in photos on official IDs, which let transgender people better express their identity. It remains a socially conservative society, however, with the Roman Catholic Church and Protestant faiths dominant. Prejudice and fears over HIV are deeply rooted, and LGTBQ people have historically been the targets of discrimination and sometimes assault, although such treatment is slowly becoming less socially acceptable. Neither Dávila’s name nor photo was on the ballot — only the name of his party — and he didn’t emphasize his sexuality during the campaign. So Gabriela Tuch, a lawyer and former human rights prosecutor focusing on the LGBTQ community, said his election can’t be attributed to any significant shift in attitudes. “It’s not that society has said, ‘A gay man, affirmative action, let’s vote for him,’” Tuch said. “He was favored by the votes and the position he was in. Now the challenge begins.” One of the congressman-elect’s first battles will be opposing a bill proposed by the conservative party that would criminalize abortion and codify into law that same-sex couples are barred from marrying or adopting children. He also intends to propose a new commission that would report and investigate all kinds of discrimination. “You cannot be a spectator when your country is falling apart,” Dávila said. “You have to take a leading role.” That’s why Dávila was motivated to accept an offer to run for the party, founded in 2009 by Nobel Peace Prize-winner Rigoberta Menchú. Dávila lives in Guatemala City with his partner of 19 years and their gray Schnauzer, Valentino. Dávila said both inspire his activism and political participation. He said he considers himself lucky because he has the love and support of family members who were always open and accepting of his sexuality. His mother went with him to the country’s first Pride march in 2000. Until recently Dávila was the director of Positive People, an organization supporting those living with HIV. He said that people have often come to him with complaints about discrimination, and that he himself was once dismissed from a job. “Look, here are my diplomas and my trophies,” Dávila said. “But they fired me because they found out that I’m gay, and that’s how things are here.” Dávila said that when he was 22 he suffered from meningitis, which ultimately led him to discover that he had HIV. Today he is in good health, but he knows some may not understand how the virus is transmitted and may be afraid. “It’s very hard, of course, that they’re not even going to want to sit next to me,” he said. “In this country people should no longer be dying of AIDS,” Dávila continued. “It’s the stigma and the discrimination that kill you, and the lack of medicine.” José Arriaza, a 24-year-old who identifies as queer, said Dávila’s election gives him hope because he now sees himself being represented. Guatemalans will have to learn to accept diversity, he added. He “isn’t your typical privileged white man, like a majority of the congressmen nowadays,” Arriaza said. “For me he’s an example to follow, because he is someone empowered with ideals that help the community.” Carlos Valenzuela, a 36-year-old openly gay business administrator, agreed. “It’s fantastic because what we most want is to feel represented,” Valenzuela said. “All minorities should be represented.” Dávila said his path was paved by Sandra Morán, the first Guatemalan lawmaker who openly identified as lesbian. “She is a courageous woman who inspired me,” he said. But she didn’t have it easy, and was even insulted on occasion by some of her colleagues over her sexual orientation. Dávila, who said he’s been subjected to verbal abuse since he was young, is prepared to possibly go through the same thing. “A worker at congress called me and congratulated me and told me to prepare myself,” Dávila said. “But I will try to not respond to the attacks.” “With all the homophobia there is,” he added, “they could even boot me from my seat.” Dávila criticized those who have pushed legislation limiting sexual diversity rights and said he does not believe Guatemalan society will change its views in the short term. “We have to do a lot of work on educating, in demanding that the state be secular and for the church to stop intervening in things that don’t concern it,” he said. “We need to rule with the Constitution and not the Bible.” Claim: Aldo Dávila set to be Guatemala’s 1st openly gay congressman.


Output: Aldo Iván Dávila Morales is poised to take up a seat in Guatemala’s congress in January, making history as the first openly gay man elected to the country’s legislature.