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:
"Liquid chocolate is prepared in the workshop of the ""Felicitas"" chocolate shop in Hornow, south of Berlin, December 2, 2009. REUTERS/Fabrizio Bensch The study, which combined the results of 42 smaller studies and was published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, also found that participants had small improvements in blood vessel function and a dip in their insulin levels. A number of past studies have found that chocolate lovers seem to have lower rates of certain heart risks, such as high blood pressure. “My take-away message would be that if people like dark chocolate, then eating a little in place of other ‘treat’ foods is fine, and may be beneficial,” said study leader Lee Hooper, at Norwich Medical School in the UK. “However, the evidence is not yet good enough to suggest that we should all be doing this.”   She cautioned that the studies involved were neither large enough nor long enough to show whether eating chocolate has any effect on a person’s risk of having a heart attack or stroke. In contrast to past studies, which were largely observational and couldn’t prove cause-and-effect — that chocolate itself caused the changes — the current study focused on clinical trials, where researchers assigned people to eat chocolate or not and then watched for changes in blood pressure, cholesterol and other heart risk factors. Hooper and her team pooled data from 42 small clinical trials involving about 1,300 people and found that chocolate eaters had a few points knocked off their blood pressure readings, along with lower insulin levels and other benefits. Though it’s not clear why chocolate has this affect, it’s believed to be due to compounds known as flavonoids, which are also present in foods such as nuts, soy, tea and wine. But researchers acknowledged shortcomings in their study, including differences in the people involved in the trials — some healthy, some with chronic health problems — and different ways of testing chocolate’s effects. Some studies used cocoa drinks, some solid chocolate and some cocoa supplements. They also varied in how long people were “treated,” though most trials lasted less than six weeks. The biggest question may be whether any benefits would be worth the downside of chocolate. Based on the studies they used, Hooper’s team writes, it could take several hundred calories’ worth of chocolate to see effects on insulin and blood vessel function — and that could mean trouble for your waistline. “From a practical perspective it is premature to advise individuals to consume chocolate or cocoa to decrease their risk of cardiovascular disease,” said Alice Lichtenstein, director of the cardiovascular nutrition lab at Tufts University in Boston, who was not part of the study. For now, she added, if you enjoy a little chocolate in your life, you can probably keep doing so. Just don’t add it in the hopes of helping your heart."

Ex Output:
Chocolate may be good for your heart: study.


Ex Input:
The country went into a 21-day lockdown on Wednesday, and experts have said it faces a tidal wave of infections if rigorous steps are not taken to keep the virus in check. India’s public health care infrastructure is poor and it suffers from an acute shortage of medical staff, who will generally see many patients over a short period. Some doctors in temporary residences had been forcefully evicted by their landlords over infection fears, the Resident Doctor’s Association of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) in New Delhi said. “(They) are now stranded on the roads with all their luggage, nowhere to go, across the country,” the association - which represents 2,500 doctors - said in a letter to the federal home minister on Tuesday, urging the government to intervene. Late on Tuesday India’s Health Minister Harsh Vardhan, himself a doctor, said on Twitter he was “deeply anguished” to see reports of doctors being ostracized in residential complexes, adding that precautions were being taken to ensure health care workers were not carriers of the infection. A home ministry spokeswoman said the Delhi state administration had issued orders saying penal action would be taken against those evicting doctors. She did not comment on the situation in other states. India, a country of 1.3 billion, has recorded 539 confirmed cases of COVID-19 and nine deaths. It has just one doctor for every 1,404 people, the government said in February, significantly below the World Health Organization’s norm of one per 1,000. The AIIMS association’s president, Adarsh Pratap Singh, said three doctors in New Delhi and around 15 in the southern city of Hyderabad had already faced issues with their accommodation. He did not have estimates of how many have been impacted overall. “People are not accepting them... The morale of doctors is down because of this, a stigma is being created due to lack of awareness of coronavirus,” he told Reuters on Wednesday. Airline staff have faced similar problems, with state-run carrier Air India and private airline IndiGo saying there had been instances of employees being ostracized from their communities.

Ex Output:
Indian doctors evicted over coronavirus transmission fears: medical body.


Ex Input:
At no point in the release was cost mentioned. Psychotherapy and counseling can be costly, especially for the elderly on fixed incomes. Readers would be well-served with some estimate of the costs of the services provided through this trial. Also, a mention of a comparison between the costs of office visits for such therapy versus that delivered via telephone would be useful to give readers a fuller picture of the practical potential for this approach. Medicare requires in person contact for payment. That’s why the cost issue is important in this case. We think news releases can and should address these matters. The release fails to give readers any indication of the degree of differences between the two approaches tested, and falls back on simply saying that X “was superior to” Y and “resulted in a greater reduction of symptoms.”  Without any numerical values being offered, readers can’t gauge for themselves the value of one approach over the other. It’s difficult to gauge the clinical effectiveness versus the statistical differences. It would have been helpful to compare the degree of reduction of symptoms with office-based therapy, and drug treatment. Journal news releases can help educate journalists and all readers by quantifying potential benefits – and by reinforcing the expectation in readers that such information should be provided The release mentioned no possible harms from this approach, although in fairness, supportive telephone conversations are unlikely to carry much risk. However, we wonder about situations where the telephone therapy sessions may not detect some problems that might surface during a face-to-face consultation. The study itself used accepted psychological assays to gauge participants’ degree of GAD, and relied on self-reports by participants to determine any improvements following therapies. All of these are subjective by nature, rather than empirical and some reference to that would have been useful. Rather than saying, “there was greater decline in worry severity,” the release more accurately could have said “participants reported” a greater decline to remind reads of the caveats to the findings. The authors of the journal article also made the point that their results could be regression to the mean. Nonetheless, we’ll rate this satisfactory because of the details that were provided. The release does not demonstrate disease mongering. An end note points out that this study was funded by the National Institute of Mental Health. There was no indication of any conflicts of interest. The release points out that the study focuses on older adults living in rural settings where psychotherapy may be unavailable. It also points out that older adults may prefer psychotherapy over medications. We wonder about other approaches to address loneliness in the elderly, especially in rural areas, that could improve a person’s quality of life. Since the telephone is ubiquitous in modern life, one assumes that such a program as explained in this clinical trial could be available in short notice, assuming financial support for the project. Telephone-based support programs are not new and the release makes no claims that the approach is necessarily novel. It specifically says that it “is one way to overcome some barriers to mental health treatment.” The release does not appear to use any unjustifiable language. But, on a side note about language, the release never defined “non directive supportive therapy,” which is what the comparison group received. Many journalists – and general public readers – might not know what that means and would benefit from a one line definition.

Ex Output:

Telephone-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Anxiety in Rural Older Adults