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.

[Q]: They said the same goes for products like egg salad that contain hard-boiled eggs. Seven people in five states have been reported ill so far, including someone who died in Texas, officials said. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said peeled, hard-boiled eggs sold in bulk by Almark Foods are the outbreak’s likely source. The eggs were sold to retailers and food service operators in plastic pails and could be used in products like salads. The CDC said retailers and food service operators should wash and sanitize any surfaces that may have come in contact with the eggs or packaging, since listeria can spread easily. The warning does not apply to Almark’s hard-boiled eggs sold directly to consumers. Nor does it apply to eggs hard-boiled at home or in restaurants and stores. The CDC also said people at higher risk for listeria should confirm whether a store or restaurant is using Almark’s eggs before buying or ordering products with hard-boiled eggs. If the store or restaurant does not know, officials say not to buy the product. Pregnant women and people with cancer are 10 times more likely than others to get a listeria infection, while people on dialysis are 50 times more likely, the agency said. People who are 65 and older are four times more likely. A person who answered the phone at Almark Foods in Gainesville, Georgia, said the company did not have any comment. The company has four manufacturing facilities and delivers nationwide, according to its website. In a letter  to the FDA in August, Almark said it had taken corrective actions after two swabs taken by the agency in February at its facility tested positive for listeria.
[A]: Food poisoning linked to hard-boiled eggs in food service.


[Q]: The settlements with the patient assistance charities Good Days and Patient Access Network Foundation were the first with foundations linked to an industry-wide probe that has resulted in $840 million in settlements with drugmakers. Both foundations provide assistance to patients seeking to pay out-of-pocket costs for medications. Good Days agreed to pay $2 million while PAN Foundation agreed to pay $4 million. Neither admitted wrongdoing. Good Days in a statement said the settlement will allow it to concentrate on providing help to people in need of life-saving medications. PAN said the settlement involved “legacy matters” rather than its current operations. Drug companies are prohibited from subsidizing co-payments for patients enrolled in the government’s Medicare healthcare program for those aged 65 and older. Companies may donate to non-profits providing co-pay assistance as long as they are independent. But the government has alleged that various drugmakers have used charities like Good Days and PAN as means to improperly pay the co-pay obligations of Medicare patients using their drugs, in violation of the Anti-Kickback Statute. The department said Good Days, previously known as the Chronic Disease Fund, from 2010 to 2014 conspired with companies including Novartis AG, Astellas and Questcor, now owned by Mallinckrodt Plc, to pay kickbacks to Medicare patients using their drugs. Those drugs included H.P. Acthar Gel, an expensive treatment for a rare infant seizure disorder and multiple sclerosis that is subject of a related lawsuit by the government against Mallinckrodt over Questcor’s donations to the charity. The Justice Department said Questcor from 2010 to 2014 used the charity as a conduit to improperly subsidize patients’ copays, allowing it to keep raising prices for Acthar, whose price increased from $50 per vial in 2001 to $32,200 in 2014. Mallinckrodt declined to comment. It has said it believed its actions were lawful. PAN similarly permitted Bayer AG, Astellas, Dendreon Pharmaceuticals and Amgen Inc to use it as a conduit to pay patients kickbacks, according to the government’s allegations. Astellas and Amgen in April agreed to pay $100 million and $24.75 million, respectively, to resolve related claims. Dendreon said it takes compliance seriously. Novartis declined to comment. The other companies’ representatives did not respond to requests for comment.
[A]: Two charities to pay $6 million to resolve U.S. pharma kickback probe.


[Q]: "Jon Ossoff, the Democratic candidate making a strong run in a historically Republican House district, recently aired an ad in which he sought to burnish his credentials as an opponent of unnecessary government spending. Speaking directly to the camera, Ossoff, a former congressional aide, said in part, ""Both parties in Washington waste too much of your money. When I worked there I helped  expose waste and abuse by government contractors. We need stricter oversight and tougher penalties. They need to be held accountable. And there’s $16 billion in duplicate programs. That can be cut."" We wondered where that $16 billion figure came from, so we did some due diligence. When we contacted the Ossoff campaign, they sent us to a report published every year since 2011 by the Government Accountability Office, the respected, nonpartisan, investigative arm of Congress. The report, which is mandated by law, is designed to point out programs, offices and practices in government that could be eliminated or changed because they duplicate other government functions or fail to provide value for the taxpayer. Ossoff’s campaign said the $16 billion figure came from several line items in the GAO report that the candidate has reviewed and believes can be eliminated in short order and without significant harm. Here’s a list. (For readers who want the full, in-the-weeds description of these programs, you can refer to the GAO report.) • Consolidate federal data centers: Save $5.4 billion. • Use ""strategic sourcing"" at the Defense Department: Save $4 billion. • Expand joint basing at the Defense Department: Save $2.3 billion. • Improve ""demonstrative spending"" at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services: Save at least $2 billion. • Improve management of oil and gas resources on federal lands: Save $1.7 billion. • Consolidate mobile communications: Save $388 million. • Improve oversight of state spending under the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services: Save at least $200 million. These seven items add up to almost exactly $16 billion. That said, it’s worth noting that only some, not all, are duplicative in the strictest sense; with some of these recommendations, the GAO is calling for improved oversight or management. Also, the $16 billion figure doesn’t include all recommendations in the GAO report -- or even all of those that stem specifically from programs or efforts that GAO deemed duplicative. We found at least two recommendations from the report that suggested savings from duplicative programs: • Prevent individuals from collecting both full disability insurance benefits and unemployment insurance benefits that cover the same period: Save $1.9 billion from 2016 to 2025. • Terminate the U.S. Family Health Plan and have other DOD health care contractors take over its duties: Save $189 million over fiscal years 2017 to 2022. Meanwhile, the report includes a wide range of other recommendations that Ossoff has not explicitly said he supports. (We excluded recommendations where GAO was unable to provide a specific dollar figure.) They include: • Conduct timely children’s disability reviews to ensure that only eligible children receive Supplemental Security Income benefits: Save $3.1 billion over five years • Obtain better data to better enforce offsets and ensure benefit fairness in Social Security. Save $2.4 billion to $7.9 billion over 10 years. • Limit the subsidy for crop insurance premiums for individual farmers: Save $2 billion annually • Permanently rescind the U.S. Enrichment Corp. Fund: Save $1.6 billion • Market the Energy Department’s excess uranium: Secure $1 billion in additional revenue. • Modify how Medicare pays certain cancer hospitals: Save $500 million annually. • Broaden the Internal Revenue Service’s authority to correct simple tax return errors in order to avoid audits: Secure $274 million in additional revenue over fiscal years 2018 to 2026. • Achieve greater cost efficiencies with checked baggage inspection: Save $234 million in 2015 to 2027. • Adjust the air passenger immigration inspection user fee to fully recover the cost of inspection activities: Save almost $175 million. So when Ossoff says ""there’s $16 billion in duplicate programs"" that can be cut, he’s actually undercounting. GAO found at least $13 billion in additional specified savings that Ossoff did not allude to in the ad, plus even more when savings of unspecified amounts are included. (The campaign told PolitiFact that there ""a lot of additional areas for cutting wasteful government spending that he thinks are worth examining as well."") A final note: $16 billion is real money, but it’s still a fairly small fraction of overall federal spending. Total federal spending is about $4 trillion for fiscal year 2017, and even if you exclude mandatory spending on such programs as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and interest on the accumulated debt, the government still spends more than $1 trillion a year on ""discretionary"" programs. Our ruling Ossoff said that in the federal government, ""there’s $16 billion in duplicate programs"" that can be cut. There are indeed $16 billion in cuts recommended by a credible study published by a nonpartisan arm of Congress, though not all are examples of duplication. The actual universe of cuts offered by GAO is even higher -- somewhere north of an additional $13 billion. The statement is accurate but needs clarification, so"
[A]:
"In the federal government, ""there’s $16 billion in duplicate programs"" that can be cut."