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.

Ex Input:
"State lawmakers have left Albany for the year without taking up a bill that would extend the statute of limitations for child sex abuse victims. Current law allows those victims to bring criminal charges against their alleged abuser until the age of 23. The Child Victims Act would extend the age to 28 and create a one-year revival period for past cases regardless of when they happened. Victims could also bring civil cases until age 50. The bill passed in the State Assembly with the support of Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, but was blocked by Republicans in the State Senate. Comedian Samantha Bee took aim at the Senate on her weekly late-night talk show last week. ""I don't want you to think the New York Senate is anti-child,"" Bee said. ""This session they passed legislation allowing minors to race snowmobiles, get their own hunting licenses, and not be employed gathering or picking rags, cigar stumps, or collecting bones."" Anyone who does not follow New York state politics closely may be surprised by the claim. Those inside what’s known as the ‘Albany bubble’ were most likely not. But Bee is known for comedy. Some may have seen her claim as satirical. Were those bills a joke, or was Bee talking about legislation that actually passed the Senate? Snowmobile racing The Senate passed a bill in March that would allow people under the age of 18 to compete in organized snowmobile racing events without a safety certificate from the state. Current law requires anyone under the age of 18 to take a state-approved safety course before they ride a snowmobile. Anyone under 14 has to also be supervised by an adult when riding. The regulations do not apply if the minor rides on land owned by their parent or guardian. The bill would throw out those rules as long as the minor is participating in a snowmobile racing event. The bill, sponsored by Republican Sen. Betty Little of the North Country, passed the 63-member Senate with 49 votes. The Assembly did not take up the bill. Looser hunting restrictions Another bill, passed by the Senate in June, would allow 12-year-olds to get a universal hunting license by lowering the age for some hunting activities. You can start hunting when you are 12 in New York, but certain restrictions remain until the hunter is 14. The bill would drop the age from 14 to 12 for someone to participate in muzzle-loading season, obtain muzzle-loading privileges, hunt with a crossbow, and hunt big game. The child would have to be supervised by a parent or youth mentor. The sponsor, Republican Joseph Griffo, says in the bill’s memo it’s intended to give parents the opportunity to teach children about hunting at a younger age. The bill passed the Senate with 53 votes. The Assembly did not take it up. Begging for money The third bill targets people who use children to panhandle on the street. It’s already illegal for someone to use a child to beg for money but the crime is under the state’s arts and cultural affairs law instead of the penal law. This bill, sponsored by Democratic Sen. Jeffrey Klein of the Bronx, would transfer the crime to the penal law and strengthen the penalty for repeat offenders. The bill says someone cannot ask or allow a child under 16 to beg for money or receive payment for ""picking rags, or collecting cigar stumps, or collecting bones."" That provision has actually been in state law since 1971. It’s part of a broader law that bans children from doing several things for money. Among the more interesting: children cannot be employed as tightrope walkers and cannot receive money for displaying a physical deformity. The Klein bill to move the crime to the penal law passed the Senate in June with 55 votes. The bill was not taken up in the Assembly. Our ruling Comedian Samantha Bee said the New York State Senate ""passed legislation allowing minors to race snowmobiles, get their own hunting licenses, and not be employed gathering or picking rags, cigar stumps, or collecting bones."" Each of the bills is real and passed the Senate this year. Her claim is ."

Ex Output:
"The New York State Senate ""passed legislation allowing minors to race snowmobiles, get their own hunting licenses, and not be employed gathering or picking rags, cigar stumps, or collecting bones."


Ex Input:
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.

Ex Output:
Lockdowns should be lifted in two-week stages to stem COVID-19 spread: WHO.


Ex Input:
The story does not talk about costs, which was disappointing. The costs of intensive medical therapy can easily be identified. Using an online pharmacy we calculated the costs to be about $1,500 to $2,000 annually for medical therapy, using generic drugs. Using the Health Care Blue Book, we found the average cost of coronary artery bypass sugery and hospitalization to be about $62,000. We think that this is important information for readers that should have been included. The quantification here was presented in such a way to make it clear to readers that there was no significant benefit found to surgical intervention, which is a fair conclusion to draw from the study. The story says, “In the Stich study, 41% of patients assigned to treatment with drugs alone died during the follow-up period, which averaged five years. That compared with a mortality rate of 36% among patients who received bypass surgery plus medication. Although the relative reduction in risk of death was 14%, the result didn’t meet tests for statistical significance, meaning it could have resulted from chance alone.” That’s a great way to describe the lack of statistical significance. It would have been even more powerful to show readers the actual number of patients who died in each group. The story provides great information about the study itself and about the overall state of the evidence supporting heart surgery. “How best to treat these patients has been fraught with uncertainty,” is one of the more notable phrases from the story. It also says, “Many patients aren’t evaluated for heart surgery to treat diseased arteries because they don’t suffer classic chest pain or because doctors worry that hearts weakened by heart failure won’t benefit from the procedure. Other doctors recommend immediate bypass surgery despite a lack of vigorous studies to support that strategy.” The story does not engage in disease-mongering and takes a very careful approach to describing the types of patients who would be affected by this study’s results. We also like the way they provided snapshots of patients who were in both arms of the study — surgery and non-surgery — at the end of the story, making it clear, as the study did, that both routes can be equally successful. The story brings in some strong independent voices who help make sense of this complicated study: James Fang, a cardiologist at University Hospitals Case Medical Center in Cleveland, who wrote an editorial accompanying the study, Raymond Gibbons, a cardiologist at the Mayo Clinic, and Clyde Yancy, chief of cardiology at Northwestern University’s Feinberg School of Medicine. Rarely do you see a story that spends as much time with independent experts as it does with the authors of the study. The story does a great job showing how the standard interventions for heart disease stacked up against each other in this study. We wish that some mention had been made of diet and exercise and that at least a sentence had been included about whether there might be differences in outcomes seen as a result of different medication patterns. The story doesn’t make it clear what exactly the patients were taking. The story makes it clear that the range of treatments studied by the authors are widely available. The story makes it clear that there is a great need for more evidence in this field and that this study will be surprising to many clinicians because of a long-held assumption that surgery is the superior option. tudies published in the early 1990s supported the view that bypass surgery provided a better long term outcome. The story does not rely on a news release.

Ex Output:

More Options Before Bypass Surgery, Study Finds