instruction:
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.
question:
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.
answer:
Less Stress, Better Sleep May Help You Lose Weight


question:
"U.S. President Donald Trump’s approach to the COVID-19 pandemic was under heavy scrutiny on Sept. 9, 2020, as excerpts from reporter Bob Woodward’s book “Rage” started to circulate on social media. One of the most arresting passages in that book was highlighted by CNN reporter Daniel Dale, who wrote that Trump continued to downplay the seriousness of the pandemic in public by likening it to the flu even though Trump had acknowledged to Woodward on Feb. 7, 2020, that COVID-19 was deadlier than even the most strenuous strains of influenza:  These are both genuine quotes. The first quote comes from Woodward’s new book “Rage.” Woodward, one of the reporters who broke the “Watergate” scandal story during U.S. President Richard Nixon’s administration, conducted 18 on-the-record interviews with Trump between December 2019 and July 2020. In addition to Woodward’s reporting, there are also audio recordings of these conversations. During the Feb. 7 interview, Trump acknowledged that the virus was airborne and that COVID-19 was deadlier than even the most strenuous strains of the flu. In new tapes, President Trump admits to Bob Woodward he concealed critical details he knew about the coronavirus. ""I wanted to always play it down."" https://t.co/eICaAx70mY pic.twitter.com/zXNOZtIBx7 — CNN Newsroom (@CNNnewsroom) September 9, 2020  Despite acknowledging that COVID-19 was deadlier than the flu in early February 2020, Trump continued to downplay the seriousness of the pandemic in public by repeatedly likening COVID-19 to the flu. As Dale noted, Trump said that COVID-19 was “like the flu” during a Feb. 27 press conference. The official White House transcript shows that Trump was explaining how COVID-19 was different than Ebola when he made this comment. Here’s the full quote: They listened to a lot. Well, because this is a much different problem than Ebola. Ebola, you disintegrated, especially at the beginning. They’ve made a lot of progress now on Ebola. But with Ebola — we were talking about it before — you disintegrated. If you got Ebola, that was it. This one is different. Much different. This is a flu. This is like a flu. And this is a much different situation than Ebola."
answer:
"U.S. President Trump acknowledged that COVID-19 is deadlier than the flu in early February 2020, but continued to downplay the pandemic as ""like the flu"" in public. "


question:
"The rise of Donald Trump is striking not merely because it has come so quickly, but because there’s much in his resumé that clashes with Republican orthodoxy. Conservative columnist Erick Erickson ran down the list in a recent post on RedState.com. Trump has given money to Democrats, including Hillary Clinton. He has supported abortion rights. And ""he has supported a Canadian-style universal health care system,"" Erickson wrote. We decided to look into Trump’s track record on health care. The billionaire’s 2000 book The America We Deserve makes a strong pitch for universal health care. ""I’m a conservative on most issues but a liberal on this one,"" Trump wrote. ""We should not hear so many stories of families ruined by health care expenses. We must not allow citizens with medical problems to go untreated because of financial problems or red tape."" When he turned to how the country might achieve universal coverage, Trump focused like a laser beam on a Canadian-style, single-payer plan. He said it would eliminate many billions of dollars of overhead. ""The Canadian plan also helps Canadians live longer and healthier than America,"" he wrote. ""We need, as a nation, to reexamine the single-payer plan, as many individual states are doing."" Ever the pragmatist, Trump noted change would not happen overnight. ""While we work out details of a new single-payer plan, there are a number of ways to make the health care system now in place work more efficiently,"" Trump wrote. So, it’s fair to say that in 2000, Trump supported a Canadian-style health care plan. By 2011, his views had changed. As he contemplated a presidential bid, he told the audience at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, D.C., that ""I will fight to end Obamacare and replace it with something that makes sense for people in business and not bankrupt the country."" In an interview with the New York Times, Trump backed away from a single-payer plan, as well as another of his proposals from a decade earlier, a surtax on the wealthiest Americans. ''We had a much different country when I proposed those two things,'' he said, according to the New York Times reporter. We searched the Nexis database of news reports for any other views Trump might have voiced on universal health care between 2000 and 2011 and found none. In a recent radio interview, Trump did not so much reject his previous support for a Canadian-style plan as describe, in a roundabout fashion, a totally different approach. He gave few details but said, ""we're going to have great (private) plans,"" and that government should help people ""at the lower levels."" ""You can’t have a guy that has no money, that’s sick, and he can’t go see a doctor, he can’t go see a hospital,"" Trump said. ""I mean, because I’m actually a conservative with a heart."" Our ruling Erickson said that Trump has supported a Canadian-style universal health care system. Trump’s own book from 2000 affirms that. By about 10 years later, he had changed his position. Erickson got it right."
answer:

"Erick Erickson Says Donald Trump ""has supported a Canadian-style universal health care system."