TASK DEFINITION: In this task, you're given a paragraph and title from the research paper. Your task is to classify whether the given title is suitable or not for the research paper based on the given paragraph. Return "True" if title is proper according to paragraph else "False".
PROBLEM: Paragraph: Respiratory infectious diseases are mainly caused by viruses or bacteria that often interact with one another. Although their presence is a prerequisite for subsequent infections, viruses and bacteria may be present in the nasopharynx without causing any respiratory symptoms. The upper respiratory tract hosts a vast range of commensals and potential pathogenic bacteria, which form a complex microbial community. This community is assumed to be constantly subject to synergistic and competitive interspecies interactions. Disturbances in the equilibrium, for instance due to the acquisition of new bacteria or viruses, may lead to overgrowth and invasion. A better understanding of the dynamics between commensals and pathogens in the upper respiratory tract may provide better insight into the pathogenesis of respiratory diseases. Here we review the current knowledge regarding specific bacterial-bacterial and viral-bacterial interactions that occur in the upper respiratory niche, and discuss mechanisms by which these interactions might be mediated. Finally, we propose a theoretical model to summarize and illustrate these mechanisms. 
 Title: Viral and Bacterial Interactions in the Upper Respiratory Tract

SOLUTION: False

PROBLEM: Paragraph: With concerns about the potential for the aerosol and airborne transmission of infectious agents, particularly influenza, more attention is being focused on the effectiveness of infection control procedures to prevent hospital-acquired infections by this route. More recently a number of different techniques have been applied to examine the temporalespatial information about the airflow patterns and the movement of related, suspended material within this air in a hospital setting. Closer collaboration with engineers has allowed clinical microbiologists, virologists and infection control teams to assess the effectiveness of hospital isolation and ventilation facilities. The characteristics of human respiratory activities have also been investigated using some familiar engineering techniques. Such studies aim to enhance the effectiveness of such preventive measures and have included experiments with humanlike mannequins using various tracer gas/particle techniques, real human volunteers with realtime non-invasive Schlieren imaging, numerical modelling using computational fluid dynamics, and small scale physical analogues with water. This article outlines each of these techniques in a non-technical manner, suitable for a clinical readership without specialist airflow or engineering knowledge. 
 Title: Observing and quantifying airflows in the infection control of aerosol-and airborne-transmitted diseases: an overview of approaches

SOLUTION: True

PROBLEM: Paragraph: Background: Concerns have been raised regarding the safety of Angiotensin Converting Enzyme Inhibitors (ACEIs) and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers (ARBs) in patients with COVID-19, based on the hypothesis that such medications may raise expression of ACE2, the receptor for SARS-CoV-2. We conducted a literature review of studies (n=12) in experimental animals and human subjects (n=11) and evaluated the evidence regarding the impact of administration of ACEIs and ARBs on ACE2 expression. We prioritized studies that assessed ACE2 protein expression data, measured directly or inferred from ACE2 activity assays. The findings in animals are inconsistent with respect to an increase in ACE2 expression in response to treatment with ACEIs or ARBs. Control/sham animals show little to no effect in the plurality of studies. Those studies that report increases in ACE2 expression tend to involve acute injury models and/or higher doses than typically administered to patients. Data from human studies overwhelmingly imply that administration of ACEIs/ARBs does not increase ACE2 expression. Conclusion: Available evidence, in particular, data from human studies, does not support the hypothesis that ACEI/ARB use increases ACE2 expression and the risk of complications from COVID-19. We conclude that patients being treated with ACEIs and ARBs should continue their use for approved indications. 
 Title: Dangers of ACE inhibitor and ARB usage in COVID-19: evaluating the evidence

SOLUTION:
True