TASK DEFINITION: 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.
PROBLEM: Alexis Shapiro suffered damage to her pituitary gland, which helps regulate weight, as a result of the brain disease. She has gained about 140 pounds (63.5 kgs) in less than two years because of the problem, her mother said. Her extreme excess of body fat is clinically defined as morbid obesity. “It has been heartbreaking for her and for us. She cannot do the things she used to love,” Jennifer Shapiro, her mother, said on the fundraising site GoFundMe. The mother said she is seeking about $50,000 for life-saving surgery to reduce the size of her daughter’s stomach because the family’s insurance company will not pay for the procedure unless the patient is at least 18 or has achieved full bone growth. Dr. Thomas Inge, a specialist in pediatric obesity at the Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, told NBC News that Alexis could receive the surgery at the hospital where he works within six weeks now that the funding appears to be in place. “Alexis will be seen this week in Cincinnati, and the preparations for surgery will be made at that time,” Inge told Reuters by email.

SOLUTION: Donors pitch in to pay for surgery for extremely obese Texas girl.

PROBLEM: Under the agreement, Emergent BioSolutions will no longer enforce a contract that had allowed it to be the only company to develop a nasal spray version of the drug nalmefene for use as an antidote in a nasal spray. The attorney general’s office said the new agreement came after it found that Adapt Pharma, which has since been bought by Rockville, Maryland-based Emergent, had the exclusive rights to sell the drug using Aptar Pharma’s nasal spray technology. The drug is still in the pipeline and is not on the market, though. “Given the tragic, devastating effects of the opioid crisis, and the urgent need for additional drugs for the emergency treatment of opioid overdoses, my office will do whatever possible to ensure that there are no unnecessary impediments to the development of additional life-saving opioid overdose reversal drugs,” Attorney General Letitia James said in a written statement. The agreement with James’s office does not affect Narcan, a spray version of the drug naloxone now sold by Emergent. That from is popular for police, firefighters and others to use to try to revive people who are overdosing. It is not subject to an exclusivity agreement on the spray technology. Narcan retails for about $140 for two doses, but the company sells that amount to first responders for $75. More than 400,000 deaths in the U.S. since 2000 have been linked to opioids, a class of drugs that includes heroin, fentanyl, and prescription painkillers such as Vicodin and OxyContin. Companies would still need Food and Drug Administration approval before their products could be on the market. There is at least one effort to introduce a generic version of a naloxone nasal spray. Purdue Pharma, the maker of OxyContin, announced a grant in 2018 for a nonprofit drug company to develop one. ___ This story has been updated to correct that the drug at the center of the agreement is a spray version of nalmefene that is under development, not naloxone. It also clarifies that Narcan is sold to first responders for a lower-than-retail price.

SOLUTION: Deal will let more companies make an overdose antidote spray.

PROBLEM: "We’ll give the story a satisfactory score on this criterion because it acknowledged that the ThinPrep is ""more expensive."" But we wish it had provided the actual cost comparison. The story delivered the key line from one ob-gyn observer, that the study ""should serve as a cautionary tale that just because something is new doesn’t mean it’s better. "" But the story also included the lead author’s reminder that ThinPrep samples could be used to test for human papillomavirus, which causes nearly all cervical cancers. And the rate at which tests needed to be done again was one-third lower with the ThinPrep than with conventional Pap smears. The story nicely summarized that the authors of the study in JAMA noted that that ""because of a lack of well-designed comparative studies, convincing evidence to determine the superiority of either method"" didn’t exist. And that it was based on a raondomized trial of 90,000 Dutch women screened with either ThinPrep or a conventional Pap smear. There was no disease mongering in the story. The story included multiple expert perspectives. In a very concise article, the story did a good job comparing the ThinPrep and convention pap smear tests. The story leads with the fact that the ThinPrep test dominates the market. The story was about efficacy of cervical cancer screening tests, so this criterion is not really applicable in this case. It is clear that the story did not rely on a news release."

SOLUTION:
Regular Pap smear is as effective as ThinPrep