Given a paragraph and a claim, classify it this way: If the claim contradicts the evidence present in the paragraph, classify the claim as '0'. If the claim has multiple supporting *AND* contradicting evidences, classify the claim as '1'. If the claim has supporting evidence and the paragraph is in overall favor of the claim, then classify the claim as '2'.

Q: Paragraph: On April 28 2020, amid ongoing coverage of astroturfed anti-lockdown protests, a Facebook post claimed that quarantine was intended to “restrict the movement of sick people” (archived here):White text against a red and blue background read:QUARANTINE IS WHEN YOU RESTRICT THE MOVEMENT OF SICK PEOPLETYRANNY IS WHEN YOU RESTRICT THE MOVEMENT OF HEALTHY PEOPLEA single word was added to the post, “Hmmm,” implying that its content was something to ponder in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic. In fact, this meme simply plays to larger public ignorance about both the meaning and purpose of a “quarantine,” as well as broad lack of understanding regarding the aim of social distancing measures.Quarantine DefinitionHere are some definitions of the word “quarantine” from various sources:Cambridge:a period of time during which an animal or person that might have a disease is kept away from other people or animals so that the disease cannot spread[. ]Merriam-Webster (a bit more expansive):1: a period of 40 days 2a: a term during which a ship arriving in port and suspected of carrying contagious disease is held in isolation from the shore b: a regulation placing a ship in quarantine c: a place where a ship is detained during quarantine 3a: a restraint upon the activities or communication of persons or the transport of goods designed to prevent the spread of disease or pestsMacmillan Dictionary:a situation in which a person or animal that might have a disease is kept separate from other people or animals so that they do not catch the disease in quarantine: Animals can be kept in quarantine for up to three months.Dictionary.com:noun a strict isolation imposed to prevent the spread of disease. a period, originally 40 days, of detention or isolation imposed upon ships, persons, animals, or plants on arrival at a port or place, when suspected of carrying some infectious or contagious disease. a system of measures maintained by governmental authority at ports, frontiers, etc., for preventing the spread of disease. the branch of the governmental service concerned with such measures.verb (used with object), quar·an·tined, quar·an·tin·ing. to put in or subject to quarantine. to exclude, detain, or isolate for political, social, or hygienic reasons.You could also just Google it, and find this at the very top of the page:a state, period, or place of isolation in which people or animals that have arrived from elsewhere or been exposed to infectious or contagious disease are placed.Universally, “quarantine” is described as a condition placed upon people (or animals) who do or may have disease; a common trait in definitions for specific reasons.Quarantines in Recent HistoryHistorical quarantine signs from past epidemics are available for perusal through various web outlets, such as one from the 1918-1919 Spanish Flu pandemic:As we explained in a separate April 2020 fact check, an influenza pandemic in 1918 and 1919 killed millions of people and spread in a deadlier second wave in late 1918:Did the Second Wave of the 1918 Spanish Flu Kill 20 to 30 Million, While the First Wave Killed 3 to 5 Million?Although the sign embedded above is not easy to read, it’s clear that “movie houses,” “churches,” and “chapels” were among places closed to the ill and healthy alike during that pandemic.The Larger History of QuarantineQuarantine as we know it likely dated back to the Black Plague in the Middle Ages. According to the Centers for Diseases Control and Prevention (CDC), the word’s etymological roots come from the Italian phrase for “forty days”:The practice of quarantine, as we know it, began during the 14th century in an effort to protect coastal cities from plague epidemics. Ships arriving in Venice from infected ports were required to sit at anchor for 40 days before landing. This practice, called quarantine, was derived from the Italian words quaranta giorni which mean 40 days. […]State and local governments made sporadic attempts to impose quarantine requirements. Continued outbreaks of yellow fever finally prompted Congress to pass federal quarantine legislation in 1878. This legislation, while not conflicting with states’ rights, paved the way for federal involvement in quarantine activities.As the CDC explained, the 1948 Public Health Service Act (PHSA) influenced modern pandemic management. That legislation “gave the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) responsibility for preventing the introduction, transmission, and spread of communicable diseases from foreign countries into the United States.”Once again, the goal of quarantine was to prevent transmission — not only from the sick, but also from those who had not yet fallen ill from those who were asymptomatic. Further, preventing “the spread of communicable disease” also involved the movements of healthy people who might contract the disease and themselves become vectors.On a separate page in its series of quarantine-related resources for public education (“Legal Authorities for Isolation and Quarantine”), the CDC outlined the purposes of “quarantine” and “isolation”:Isolation and quarantine help protect the public by preventing exposure to people who have or may have a contagious disease.• Isolation separates sick people with a quarantinable communicable disease from people who are not sick. • Quarantine separates and restricts the movement of people who were exposed to a contagious disease to see if they become sick.To reiterate, “isolation” referred to known infected and ill people, and separating them from the general public. “Quarantine” specifically referred to the “movement of people … exposed to a contagious disease” to see if they fall ill. Quarantine when contrasted with isolation was, again, for people who had not yet become sick, to prevent the spread of sickness by people infected but not ill.The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) provided a nearly identical resource defining “quarantine” and “isolation” for the purposes of public health, adding:• Isolation separates sick people with a contagious disease from people who are not sick. • Quarantine separates and restricts the movement of people who were exposed to a contagious disease to see if they become sick. These people may have been exposed to a disease and do not know it, or they may have the disease but do not show symptoms.As of April 27 2020, that descriptor could easily be applied to Americans under “stay at home” or “shelter in place” orders. Those people “may have been exposed” and “not know it,” or they “may have the disease” and not show symptoms.Asymptomatic Novel Coronavirus Carriers and the Necessity of QuarantineAs of April 3 2020, reports indicated a full 25 percent of SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) were fully asymptomatic — a big deal number. And those people likely never become ill to begin with:According to Robert Redfield, the director of the [CDC], 25 percent of people infected with the new coronavirus don’t present any symptoms or fall ill but can still transmit the illness to others.And you may have heard the term “novel coronavirus,” which alludes to the fact this strain of coronavirus is completely new (which has led to its own genre of disinformation and misinformation); researchers are constantly learning new and important things about how it infects and spreads. That is why less than a month later on April 24 2020, the estimate of asymptomatic carriers rose to as many as fifty percent.If we view that information through the lens of the history of quarantine, it’s important to bear in mind it started due to an inability to test for or treat carriers of previous illnesses during pandemics or epidemics.It is also true that some protested against those historical measures, too — either a result of not understanding or refusing to understand why quarantine was important:In some countries, the suspension of personal liberty provided the opportunity—using special laws—to stop political opposition. However, the cultural and social context differed from that in previous centuries. For example, the increasing use of quarantine and isolation conflicted with the affirmation of citizens’ rights and growing sentiments of personal freedom fostered by the French Revolution of 1789. In England, liberal reformers contested both quarantine and compulsory vaccination against smallpox. Social and political tensions created an explosive mixture, culminating in popular rebellions and uprisings, a phenomenon that affected numerous European countries. In the Italian states, in which revolutionary groups had taken the cause of unification and republicanism, cholera epidemics provided a justification (i.e., the enforcement of sanitary measures) for increasing police power.A lack of testing and ability to treat the ill were a driving force behind prior quarantine orders.Only One Percent of Americans Have Been Tested for Novel CoronavirusAlthough statistics changed daily, as of April 22 2020, only one percent of Americans had been tested for the virus which caused COVID-19:At least 4,163,464 people in the U.S. have been tested, as of [April 22 2020]. This amounts to around 1.2 percent of the country’s population of nearly 332,639,000.The Math on ThatWe are not mathematicians. But we don’t need to be to point out that if just over one percent of Americans had been tested for novel coronavirus as of late April 2020, and 25 to 50 percent of the infected would never be sickened, the need to quarantine or restrict the movement of the possibly infected perhaps becomes apparent.TL;DRA Facebook meme asserted “QUARANTINE IS WHEN YOU RESTRICT THE MOVEMENT OF SICK PEOPLE, TYRANNY IS WHEN YOU RESTRICT THE MOVEMENT OF HEALTHY PEOPLE,” and it demonstrated lack of knowledge about the pandemic on myriad levels.Historically and through 2020, quarantine was never designed to apply to “sick people”; the word for that is isolation. Quarantine, by contrast, was for people who might have been exposed to an infectious disease, for the duration of the time that they might pass the disease on to others. Finally, 25 to 50 percent of coronavirus carriers never get sick, and just over one percent of Americans had been tested as of April 2020. The meme was not only ignorant, but dangerously so — in fact, it ought to be quarantined until it can no longer do harm.Comments Claim: Quarantine is when you restrict the movement of sick people.

A: 0
****
Q: Paragraph: A price range of $200,000 to $250,000 for the device was included in the story. However, there was no mention of physician fees or hospital stay costs. The longest a patient has lived with device was included in the story, but no range was given for the length of time patients survived with the device for reference. While putting a premium on the “one more Christmas, one more birthday” concept, there was no discussion about the differences in quality of life experienced by the patients receiving the device. Only the results from the longest living recipient of the device were included in the article. For balance, it would have been useful to include the average amount of time that people survived with the device as well as some mention of consequences of the treatment that may affect quality of life. Further, it is hard to predict who will live “less than a month.” It is possible that some recipients may have their life shortened (death in surgery or immediately thereafter). The article mentions that the evidence about the device comes from only 14 patients to date who have had it implanted. No overt disease-mongering, although the story contained no information on the prevelance of heart failure or the percentage of individuals with heart failure for whom this treatment might be considered. The article contained quotes from physicians directly involved in the clinical trial leading to the humanitarian device exemption, family members of patients who had, on balance, positive experiences with the device and the director of the FDA division responsible for the decision. The article would have been improved had it contained the views of some individuals slightly more removed from the device itself to help provide a framework in which to consider the ramifications of this treatment. While mentioning that this device is only for patients with advanced heart failure who have no other options and would otherwise die, the story just three sentences later quotes a surgeon stating that the device’s approval “gives tons of hope to people with end-stage heart failure”. This paints a somewhat unrealistic picture about the limited group of patients for whom the device is an option. In addition to only being intended for those who are not eligible for a heart transplant and who would likely live less than a month without the device, it is only for patients whose chest is large enough to hold the device. Although the story didn’t explain that the device was only approved by the FDA using the “Humanitarian Device Exemption,” it did say that sales of only up to 4,000/yr would be allowed and that it is much more likely that far fewer will be sold. The story also explained that the device will be available at only 5 institutions in the U.S. It is valuable for readers to understand the limited availability of this device for appropriate expectations. The story was clear that only 14 people have received this medical device. The article does not appear to rely exclusively on a press release. However, the quotes attributed to Dr. Daniel Schultz, director of the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health came from the FDA news release on the device, found at http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/NEWS/2006/NEW01443.html. Claim: FDA approves AbioCor heart

A: 1
****
Q: Paragraph: “It’s because my body has been suppressed for so long, it can’t fight it (cancer),” the Wisconsin resident said. Patty, who has worked at her father’s restaurant for 27 years, now struggles to handle full-time duties. “I’m trying to get disability, but I’ve been denied once already. I don’t plan on quitting working. I just need help. I need help because I can’t do a full-time job,” Patty said. In March 2017, a friend who lives in New Mexico, where medical marijuana is legal, mailed her Buddha Tears, a cannabis oil product containing cannabidiol (CBD), and THC, the psychotropic component of cannabis. After consuming a tiny amount of the oil each day — as well as smoking marijuana — Patty said she saw a massive improvement in her condition. “Unfortunately, I have to smoke everyday, because if I don’t, I will be in the bathroom all the time,” said Patty, who asked that her last name not be published because she is using an illegal substance. But these days, Patty is again struggling with the symptoms. “My connection (for CBD and marijuana) got cut off,” she said. “I’m very angry.” While Patty and others have found success treating their medical ailments with cannabis, the drug remains illegal in Wisconsin. And because of its status as a Schedule I drug — the most restrictive classification — there has been limited research in the United States about its effectiveness as medicine. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has authorized one component of cannabis to treat serious and rare seizure disorders, as well as three drugs with synthetic cannabis substances; no other uses have been approved. ___ The nonprofit news outlet Wisconsin Watch provided this article to The Associated Press through a collaboration with Institute for Nonprofit News. ___ Although it remains illegal federally, 33 states and the District of Columbia have authorized medical use of cannabis. A bipartisan group of lawmakers has proposed legalizing it for medical use in Wisconsin, and another group of Democratic lawmakers introduced a bill in October to decriminalize possession of less than 28 grams. But Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald, R-Juneau, remains opposed. An April poll conducted by the Marquette Law School Poll showed that 83% of registered voters polled support the use of marijuana for medical purposes with a doctor’s prescription. “When issues receive more than 70% support from registered voters in Wisconsin, the Legislature needs to listen and act,” said Rep. David Bowen, D-Milwaukee. According to Dr. Angela Janis, director of psychiatry for University of Wisconsin-Madison’s University Health Services, Schedule I drugs, including marijuana, are considered to have no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse, whereas for Schedule II drugs, there is less potential for abuse, and there is some therapeutic benefit. Janis is intimately familiar with this distinction. In addition to her university job, Janis is chief medical officer at LeafLine Labs, a Minnesota-based medical marijuana company. “To put this in perspective: methamphetamine is Schedule II because it’s approved for obesity. Cocaine is Schedule II because it’s approved for nasal surgery since it can constrict your blood vessels as they do surgery in your nose. So that’s the bar for what ‘medical benefit’ means,” Janis said. According to Janis, cannabis has less abuse potential than any of those substances. “Cannabis is not appropriately scheduled. And that’s one of the barriers, but not the only barrier, to research,” Janis said. Janis recommends rescheduling the drug so researchers can further study its properties. Even Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM), which opposes marijuana legalization, is “fully supportive” of drugs containing cannabis that have been approved by the FDA, said Colton Grace, a spokesman for the group. According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse, cannabinoids are substances within the cannabis plant that act on specific receptors in the human brain and body. They are the main active ingredients in the medical products derived from cannabis. These receptors affect many essential functions, including one’s memory, thinking, concentration and coordination. Interfering with it can have profound effects — both positive and negative. Two of the most extensively studied cannabinoids are delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and CBD. However, there are dozens of cannabinoids that may also have medical uses. “Many strains of the cannabis plant can have 60, 70, 80 cannabinoids in them that all interact in different ways,” Janis said. The National Institutes of Health reported spending $191 million on researching cannabinoids for medicinal use in 2017-18. Some effects are already known. For example, THC can affect the central nervous system, producing benefits such as decreased vomiting and nausea, increased appetite, reduced pain and anti-inflammatory effects. CBD also acts as an anti-inflammatory, increasing immune function, reducing pain and keeping certain cells from proliferating. Cannabinoid receptors are not in areas that control breathing, which is why there are no fatal overdoses with marijuana, Janis said. CBD actually blocks the psychotropic effects of THC, Janis said. In addition to all those cannabinoids, the cannabis sativa plant has a lot of other chemicals. For instance, terpenes, which give each strain its particular smell, such as lemon or pine, “are thought to have a lot of effects, but we just don’t know what they actually do in the body,” Janis said. In 2017, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine came out with one of the most comprehensive reviews of scientific research on what is known about the health effects of cannabis and cannabis-derived products. The committee considered more than 10,000 scientific abstracts. It reached nearly 100 conclusions, finding substantial evidence for just a few indications — the biggest one being pain. The report found there is substantial evidence that cannabis is an effective treatment for chronic pain in adults, specifically nerve pain, Janis said. The group also found conclusive evidence for cannabis treating chemotherapy-associated nausea and vomiting and MS-associated muscle spasms. The report also showed moderate evidence that cannabis or cannabinoids are effective for improving sleep in individuals with sleep apnea, fibromyalgia, chronic pain and multiple sclerosis. It also found limited evidence for cannabis as effective for increasing appetite and decreasing weight loss associated with HIV/AIDS, relaxing muscle tightness and pain from MS, symptoms of Tourette syndrome, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Anecdotal evidence has also proven the effectiveness of cannabinoids for treating Rett syndrome. Norah Lowe, 10, started feeling relief from the rare neurological disorder one year ago when she began using CBD to treat her symptoms. Rett syndrome impacts nearly every part of a child’s life, including the ability to speak, walk, eat and breathe. A distinct feature of the condition is repetitive, almost constant hand movements. At a news conference arranged by state Rep. Melissa Sargent, D-Madison, to introduce her latest bill to legalize medical and recreational marijuana, Norah’s father, Josh Lowe, said he is frustrated that state law prohibits her from trying medical marijuana, which has helped others with her condition. Norah, who uses a wheelchair, has experienced “increased flexibility, decreased pain and muscle cramping, increased communication, cognitive ability, reduction in seizures, better mood control, and the list goes on and on,” Lowe said. A 2017 study published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews analyzed several studies, concluding that cannabis-based medicines were better than placebos for pain relief — and that these medications also improved sleep and psychological distress — it concluded that any potential benefits might be outweighed by their potential harms. According to the Marijuana Policy Project, the most common conditions accepted by states that allow medicinal cannabis relate to the relief of the symptoms of cancer, glaucoma, HIV/AIDS and MS. Some other common indicators include Alzheimer’s disease, inflammatory bowel disease, Crohn’s, Parkinson’s disease and PTSD, according to the group, which advocates for marijuana legalization. Additionally, the University of Michigan published a study in the February issue of Health Affairs to understand the reasons why people are using cannabis for medical purposes, and whether those purposes are evidence-based. The authors found that 85.5% t of uses of medical cannabis were for conditions for which there was substantial or conclusive evidence of their therapeutic effectiveness. Even more, they found that chronic pain is currently the most common qualifying condition reported by medical cannabis patients, used by 64.9% of such patients in 2016. “That’s a good sign,” Janis said. “Even though a physician can write it (a cannabis prescription) for a variety of things, it seems to be being used for what it’s intended for.” Since cannabis is a Schedule I drug, it is “very difficult to study at any institutional level” because, in order to do so, researchers need sign-offs from the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency, which has “historically been unwilling to provide them,” said David Abernathy, vice president of data and government affairs for the Arcview Group, a firm that advises investors in the cannabis industry. Because of this, “Things like double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trials weren’t happening in the U.S.,” Abernathy said. But there has been a lot of research in the past decade in other countries including Israel, Canada, China and Italy, and “now we’re starting to see more research in the U.S.,” he said. The 2017 National Academies review of cannabis research agreed that the drug’s status as a Schedule I substance made it hard to study. “Researchers also often find it difficult to gain access to the quantity, quality, and type of cannabis product necessary to address specific research questions,” the review found. Patty, the Crohn’s patient, believes that her cannabis treatment not only alleviated her Crohn’s symptoms, but she credits it with keeping her aggressive skin cancer at bay. According to a 2018 article published in Biochemical Pharmacology, studies have shown the potential of cannabinoids to reduce of skin cancer progression. However, there is a significant lack of clinical studies promising enough to make any conclusive statements at this time. “I haven’t had the cannabis oil since March of 2018, and once I couldn’t get it anymore, I mean I just finished my 12th surgery (for cancer),” Patty said. “So, you tell me, what do you think?” Claim: Wisconsin residents using medical cannabis amid restrictions.

A:
2
****