In this task, you're given a paragraph and title from the research paper. Your task is to classify whether the given title is suitable or not for the research paper based on the given paragraph. Return "True" if title is proper according to paragraph else "False".

Ex Input:
Paragraph: The development of intestinal lesions after inoculation with Brachyspira hyodysenteriae was followed by repeated endoscopy and biopsy sampling through a caecal cannula. Seven eight-week-old pigs were cannulated and inoculated, two were cannulated but not inoculated, and two pigs were inoculated but not cannulated. Endoscopy, biopsy, and blood sampling to determine SAA (serum amyloid A), haptoglobin, cortisol, and WBC counts were performed at scheduled time-points. At the third day of disease, endoscopy showed a hyperaemic, perturbed mucosa and excessive amount of mucus. Histologically, crypt hyperplasia, depletion of goblet cell mucus, and erosions were noted. Simultaneously, elevated acute phase proteins and circulating monocytes, and decreased number of intraepithelial CD3 + cells were observed. After five days the pigs recovered. Intestinal lesions were demarcated and interspersed among apparently normal mucosa and blood parameters returned to initial values. Endoscopy through an intestinal cannula made it possible to follow the development of intestinal alterations in vivo and describe the sequential events during the course of swine dysentery. The number of animals used in a study could thus be minimised and the precision of the experiment increased. 
 Title: Consecutive pathological and immunological alterations during experimentally induced swine dysentery - A study performed by repeated endoscopy and biopsy samplings through an intestinal cannula

Ex Output:
True


Ex Input:
Paragraph: Experimental studies were conducted to evaluate two species of cotton rats, Sigmodon hispidus and Sigmodon fulviventer, as a model for severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). Blood and turbinate wash samples, and lung tissue were collected from each animal at different time points after SARS coronavirus (CoV) infection for determining the growth curve of virus, if any, by the standard infectivity assay in Vero E6 cells. In addition, sections of the lung, liver, spleen, and kidney were taken and used for histology analysis. All animals were observed daily for signs of illness, and in some experiments, animals were weighed on the day when they were sacrificed. The results indicated that the cotton rat species, S. hispidus and S. fulviventer, were not a useful model for either SARS-CoV infection or disease. This observation was supported by the absence of any signs of illness, the failure to consistently demonstrate virus in the blood and tissues, and the absent of any notable histopathology. However, infected animals were capable of producing neuralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV, suggesting the seroconversion did occur. Further studies are warranted to consider other animal species in efforts to find better animal models for the evaluation of SARS-CoV vaccines and antiviral drugs. Key Words: Cotton rats-SARS-Model animal. 
 Title: Evaluation of Cotton Rats as a Model for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome

Ex Output:
True


Ex Input:
Paragraph: Background: The first cases of influenza A/H1N1 (swine flu) were confirmed in the UK on 27th April 2009, after a novel virus first identified in Mexico rapidly evolved into a pandemic. The swine flu outbreak was the first pandemic in more than 40 years and for many, their first encounter with a major influenza outbreak. This study examines public understandings of the pandemic, exploring how people deciphered the threat and perceived they could control the risks. Methods: Purposive sampling was used to recruit seventy three people (61 women and 12 men) to take part in 14 focus group discussions around the time of the second wave in swine flu cases. Results: These discussions showed that there was little evidence of the public over-reacting, that people believed the threat of contracting swine flu was inevitable, and that they assessed their own self-efficacy for protecting against it to be low. Respondents assessed a greater risk to their health from the vaccine than from the disease. Such findings could have led to apathy about following the UK Governments recommended health protective behaviours, and a sub-optimal level of vaccine uptake. More generally, people were confused about the difference between seasonal influenza and swine flu and their vaccines. Conclusions: This research suggests a gap in public understandings which could hinder attempts to communicate about novel flu viruses in the future. There was general support for the government's handling of the pandemic, although its public awareness campaign was deemed ineffectual as few people changed their current hand hygiene practices. There was less support for the media who were deemed to have over-reported the swine flu pandemic. 
 Title: Public views of the uk media and government reaction to the 2009 swine flu pandemic

Ex Output:

True