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]: Scientists said on Wednesday many Tibetans possess a rare variant of a gene involved in carrying oxygen in the blood that they likely inherited from an enigmatic group of extinct humans who interbred with our species tens of thousands of years ago. It enables Tibetans to function well in low oxygen levels at elevations upwards of 15,000 feet (4,500 meters) like the vast high plateau of southwestern China. People without this variant would be apt to develop thick blood, leading to high blood pressure, heart attacks, strokes, low-birth-weight babies and higher infant mortality. This version of the EPAS1 gene is nearly identical to one found in Denisovans, a lineage related to Neanderthals - but is very different from other people today. Denisovans are known from a single finger bone and two teeth found in a Siberian cave. DNA testing on the 41,000-year-old bone indicated Denisovans were distinct from our species and Neanderthals. “Our finding may suggest that the exchange of genes through mating with extinct species may be more important in human evolution than previously thought,” said Rasmus Nielsen, a computational biology professor at the University of California, Berkeley and the University of Copenhagen, whose study appears in the journal Nature. Our genome contains residual genetic fragments from other organisms like viruses as well as species like Neanderthals with which early modern humans interbred. The researchers called their study the first to show that a gene from an archaic human species has helped modern humans adjust to different living conditions. “Such exchange of genes with other species may in fact have helped humans adapt to new environments encountered as they spread out of Africa and into the rest of the world,” said  Nielsen. Asan Ciren, a researcher with China’s BGI genomics center, added, “The genetic relationship or blood relationship between modern humans and archaic hominins is a hot topic of the current paleoanthropology.”  The researchers said early modern humans trekking out of Africa interbred with Denisovans in Eurasia en route to China. Their descendants harbor a tiny percentage of Denisovan DNA. Genetic studies show nearly 90 percent of Tibetans have the high-altitude gene variant, along with a small percentage of Han Chinese, who share a common ancestor with Tibetans. It is seen in no other people. The researchers conducted genetic studies on 40 Tibetans and 40 Han Chinese and performed a statistical analysis showing that the gene variant almost certainly was inherited from the Denisovans. The gene regulates production of hemoglobin, a protein in red blood cells that carries oxygen. It is turned on when blood oxygen levels drop, stimulating more hemoglobin production. At elevations above 13,000 feet (4,000 meters), the common form of the gene boosts hemoglobin and red blood cell production, causing dangerous side effects. The Tibetans’ variant increases hemoglobin and red blood cell levels only modestly, sparing them these effects.
[A]: Gene from extinct human species fortifies high-altitude Tibetans.


[Q]: Even before the new figures, the official British death toll was the fifth-highest globally and a senior scientific adviser to the government has said the country risks becoming the worst-hit in Europe. The Office for National Statistics (ONS) said 5,979 people in England had died by April 3 with COVID-19, the respiratory disease caused by the virus, mentioned on their death certificates - 15% more than numbers published by the health service. “I am not remotely surprised there would be an undercounting,” Bill Hanage, associate professor of epidemiology at Harvard’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health, told Reuters. “The UK hospital death toll that you are seeing - the one on the news each night - is a composite of things that have been trickling in over a period of time. It is not an exact number and does not include the numbers dying in places such as nursing homes.”   The new numbers, which reflect both deaths caused primarily by COVID-19 and where it is mentioned as a factor, show how limited official data has been so far. Daily figures published by the health ministry record only COVID-19 deaths in hospitals. Public Health England Medical Director Yvonne Doyle said the government was working with the ONS to speed up the information. “We just need to be absolutely clear that the cause of death that is attributed is correct and that is what takes time on the death certificate to get right,” she said, adding the government hoped to produce more rapid data, preferably on a daily basis. Compared with the ONS figures, the daily hospital counts had understated the true death toll for England and Wales by 52% as of April 3, although this had narrowed from 70% a week earlier. Still, it raises the likelihood that the latest death toll for the UK as a whole - 12,107 as of April 13 - is in reality thousands higher when deaths outside hospitals are included. “These new figures ... clearly show the impact of COVID-19 for the first time,” said Martin Hibberd, professor of emerging infectious disease at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. London was hit particularly hard in the week to April 3, when the ONS said nearly half (46.6%) of deaths in the capital involved COVID-19. Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who is now recuperating from COVID-19 complications that almost cost him his life, initially refrained from imposing the same stringent controls as other European leaders to counter the outbreak. But as projections showed 250,000 Britons could be lost to the virus, Johnson moved to shutter the world’s fifth-largest economy and told people to stay at home. “The UK response was fractured and it was too late, and allowed a large number of people to become infected who didn’t need to become infected,” said Hanage at Harvard. “This is the start of the pandemic, not the end, and people need to understand that.”  Hanage suggested a focus on testing, using new digital technologies to give targeted advice to the population, or even detecting the virus in sewage. Government scientists have said the United Kingdom will do well if it manages to keep the coronavirus death toll below 20,000. Italy has reported a death toll of more than 20,000. Including Wales, some 6,235 people had died by April 3, the ONS said. Separate data from Scotland last week showed 354 deaths involved COVID-19 as of April 5. In Northern Ireland, the toll stood at 79 as of April 3. Across England and Wales, deaths mentioning COVID-19 accounted for 21.2% of all deaths, compared with 4.8% in the previous week. The broader reading of total deaths showed that 16,387 people died in the week ending April 3 — the highest total since weekly death data started to be compiled in 2005.
[A]: UK coronavirus death toll could be far higher than previously shown.


[Q]: The article comments that Benlysta will be far more expensive than current treatments but doesn’t give an order of magnitude. Nonetheless, we’ll give it the benefit of the doubt. The story provided quantitative information about meaningful improvement of symptoms, comparing two doses of the drug with placebo. However – the story gave no insight about what symptoms it was measuring and whether the difference between the two doses significantly differed from one another. It should have provided more detail about the nature of the improvements observed. The story did not include any insight about potential harms or side effects that have been seen to date with the use of this drug. The story was clear that the information about this drug comes from a phase 3 clinical trial and that the results have not yet been published or examined by outside experts. It would have been better for readers if the story had included some insight about the type of symptoms that were monitored and measured as well as the particular subset of patients that were included in the study. No overt disease mongering. The story included quotes from a company spokesperson, a clinician who is a consultant for the company, and a clinician with expertise in lupus who does not appear to have overt ties with the company. The story would have been more informative to readers had several clinicians with expertise in treating people with lupus been interviewed as part of this story. The comments of those involved with drug development or promotion have limited credibility. The story discusses that the medication reported on is used in addition to the typical treatments used for treating lupus. It did not, however, provide any insight about which segment of the lupus patient population might benefit. As such, it did not provide readers with sufficient information about when additional treatment with Benlysta might be considered. The story was clear that the drug Benlysta is currently being studied in clinical trials and is not available for use. The pipeline for effective lupus drugs has indeed been dry for quite a while. The article indicates that this is a novel product of genomic technology. Does not appear to rely exclusively on a press release.
[A]:
Trial for New Lupus Treatment Is Called Promising