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.

Example Input: Since 2011, Pugh received $500,000 selling her illustrated books to the University of Maryland Medical System, a $4 billion hospital network that’s one of the largest private employers in the state. Since the arrangement was exposed by The Baltimore Sun earlier this month, she’s stepped down from the volunteer board and returned her most recent payment of $100,000 for the hard-to-find books. She also defended her actions and portrayed press inquiries as a “witch hunt.” A Democrat who became mayor in 2016 and represented some of Baltimore’s poorest areas in the state’s Senate before that, Pugh is the public face of the still-unfolding debacle. But the Baltimore mayor — who served on the UMMS board since 2001 and once sat on a state Senate committee that funded the major health network — is hardly the only influential Marylander connected to the board or the medical system facing questions. One-third of the UMMS board members received compensation through the medical system’s arrangements with their businesses, a revelation that Gov. Larry Hogan has called “appalling.” Two other members of the board also resigned, and four others went on voluntary leave while the system reviews governance practices. The president and CEO of the University of Maryland Medical System has recently been sent on a temporary leave of absence. Maryland Comptroller Peter Franchot said Tuesday that an independent audit is urgent to understand how many “self-dealing” arrangements there have been over the years. In Pugh’s case, there needs to be a thorough examination of whether a product was actually delivered, he said. “I describe it as juvenile, this arrangement where she was providing or not providing books — no receipts, no contracts, no procurement. It was simply a $500,000 gift to her from the University of Maryland Medical System,” Franchot asserted in a phone interview. The slim “Healthy Holly” books, sharing tips on nutrition and exercise, were meant to be distributed to schools and daycares. However, the Sun has reported that 50,000 copies are unaccounted for, leading to widespread speculation that a good chunk were never printed in the first place. In recent days, fewer than 9,000 copies were tracked down collecting dust in a warehouse of Baltimore’s school district, which has described Pugh’s children’s books as “unsolicited” donations. The city library system, daycare programs and booksellers can’t find copies. “Healthy Holly: Exercising is Fun” is unavailable on Amazon, where the only reviews for the book are entries of people savaging Pugh’s ties with UMMS. In a written statement, Pugh has defended her lucrative book deal with UMMS, saying it started as a passion project. “I recall passing the time by thumbing through the first book before an UMMS meeting. One my colleagues loved it and thought it would help advance children’s health,” she said in a recent statement. Pugh has since cancelled all public appearances and her spokespeople say she was hospitalized over the weekend with pneumonia. They say she will address the matter more once her health improves. Criticism of UMMS and of Pugh — who faces a 2020 Democratic primary for re-election in a city dominated by a single party’s political machine — has been intense. The Washington Post’s editorial board asserted the UMMS had a “get-rich-quick program” for many of its board members, with Pugh’s involvement painted as an egregious case of “political sleaze.” Meanwhile, UMMS and Pugh have not provided clarity on the whereabouts of the 100,000 copies of the “Healthy Holly” series books or definitive proof they were published and distributed. A spokeswoman for the university-based health network says their communications team was “working hard on all of the inquiries.” The medical system had classified the “Healthy Holly” purchases as grants in federal filings. Some critics say the various statements made by Pugh and others regarding the arrangements with UMMS board members are absurd on so many levels that it’s hard to know where to begin. “Whatever Pugh does, she is going to be operating under a very, very big cloud for a long time,” said Donald Norris, professor emeritus of public policy at the University of Maryland Baltimore County. “This is an unethical lapse of humongous proportions — $500,000 worth.” ___ Follow McFadden on Twitter: https://twitter.com/dmcfadd
Example Output: Baltimore mayor’s $500K book deal draws intense criticism.

Example Input: Not applicable. The story presented the outcome of 472 obese individuals and examined in more detail those who were able, on average, to loss 14 pounds over a period of 26 weeks. The story did not provide any insight as to whether this amount of weight loss resulted in any health improvement in the obese individuals who were studied. So the true benefit – the true significance of the potential benefit – was not explained. Further – while the study found that those who got an adequate amount of sleep were among the cohort of individuals who were found to lose the most weight, the story did not explicitly point out that the study does not inform us about whether enforced hours of sleep would impact weight loss and weight loss management. So, again, the headline, the story’s first sentence, and the call to action by the researcher were not balanced. The story was reporting on the impact of getting adequate amounts of sleep on weight loss. While there was no overt discussion of the harm of obtaining adequate amounts of sleep, there doesn’t appear to be any harm involved in adequate sleep. Similar to the LA Times story we reviewed on the same study, this story did not challenge researchers’ comments that went too far in promoting a call to action based on one observational study – a study that can’t prove cause and effect. Its opening sentence is an example of that flaw:  “If you’re looking to lose those extra pounds, you should probably add reducing stress and getting the right amount of sleep to the list…” Later, it didn’t challenge a researcher when he said, “If you want to lose weight, things that will help you include reducing stress and getting the right amount of sleep.”  That’s pushing the limits of what one can conclude based on one observational study and the story should have explained that limitation. Toward the end, in describing another study, it started in a good direction by explaining that conclusions “should be considered preliminary until published in a peer-reviewed journal.”  Actually, they should be considered preliminary because they were based on analysis of just 26 people. They should be considered to have evaded full scrutiny by expert colleagues until published in a peer-reviewed journal. Just because work has not been peer-reviewed does not make it preliminary. The intent, we think, was correct. But the explanation – the limitation – was not defined appropriately. The story did not engage in overt disease mongering. This story included expert quotes and also some insight from the results of a recently presented study. One of the strengths of this story in comparison with its shorter LA Times competition is the context it provided, much of it from an independent expert who said: “People who are healthy and vital tend to be healthy and vital not because of any one factor, but because of many. And the factors that promote health — eating well, being active, not smoking, sleeping enough, controlling stress, to name a few –promote all aspects of health. …The important message is that weight loss should not be looked at with tunnel vision. … This study encourages weight loss in a more holistic context.” Not applicable. The story was framed as taking a broader perspective when contemplating weight loss and including other lifestyle factors which can affect food intake and exercise. Better than its LA Times competition, at least this story nodded in the direction of one other recent study on sleep and weight, thereby conveying that the newer study is not the only research on this topic. It’s clear that the story did not rely solely on a news release.
Example Output: Less Stress, Better Sleep May Help You Lose Weight

Example Input: Ahold Delhaize says its U.S. subsidiaries will work with suppliers to meet standards higher than what is required by law and collaborate to address causes of contaminants. The company operates Food Lion, Giant Food, Giant/Martin’s, Hannaford, Peapod and Stop & Shop. The “chemicals of concern” outlined in the policy include per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), bisphenol A (BPA) and phthalates. The Portland Press Herald reports these chemicals are still allowed under U.S. Food and Drug Administration rules; environmental health experts say there’s evidence the chemicals can contribute to chronic health issues.
Example Output:
Supermarket chain restricts “chemicals of concern”.