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 on Monday described evidence of this bitter chapter of South American history preserved deep in an ice cap in the Peruvian Andes in the form of residue from the relentless clouds of metallic dust spewed from the mines starting in the 16th century. The mountaintop mines of Potosí in Bolivia were the world’s richest silver source. While the Incas had long extracted silver, a new processing method introduced by the Spanish in 1572 greatly increased production even as it belched lead dust and other pollutants into the atmosphere. The pollution blew over the entire region, including the Quelccaya Ice Cap some 500 miles (800 km) northwest in southern Peru. The Spanish refining process involved pulverizing silver ore, containing both lead and silver, into powder, which sent metallic dust into the atmosphere. The powder was mixed with mercury. The silver was separated by heating the mixture to allow the mercury to evaporate. Writing in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the scientists said they drilled into the glacier at an altitude of about 18,000 feet (5,600 meters) to learn about past air pollution. The age of the ice was determined with precision because it was laid down in discernible layers caused by the annual alternation between wet and dusty dry seasons. The pollutants spawned by the Spanish colonial-era silver operations from the 16th century through the 18th century consisted mostly of lead but also arsenic and others. The researchers called it the earliest evidence of large-scale, human-produced air pollution in South America, beginning more than two centuries before the industrial revolution. The pollutants were reminders of “the sad conditions and fate of tens of thousands locals exploited in the silver mining operations during the colonial period,” Ohio State University environmental scientist Paolo Gabrielli said. “Their work conditions must have been truly terrible. Many died because of the strenuous physical efforts but it was also not infrequent that underground mine galleries collapsed, burying and killing hundreds of people,” Gabrielli said. Ohio State earth sciences professor Lonnie Thompson called the Quelccaya ice a “Rosetta Stone” for studying climate history, saying the samples also can reveal past temperatures, aridity and perhaps even the evolution of bacteria and viruses.

A: Peruvian ice cap harbors evidence of conquistadors' avarice.
****
Q: "Quoting the study lead, the cost of ginger dietary supplements ranges from $6 to $30 for 50 to 100 capsules; however, as noted by the researchers, it is not apparent if dietary supplements would be as effective as the formulation developed specifically for the study. The study lead is quoted as saying the use of ginger resulted in a 40% improvement in patients’ nausea. In the placebo group, the study lead indicated that ""hardly any difference"" was noted. But we’re not given any context on important questions such as how much change in the nausea scale is actually clinical perceptible to patients. This is what’s really needed to understand any potential benefit. While there were no reported adverse effects associated with the use of ginger in this study, the story points out that ginger supplements can interfere with blood clotting, which can be particularly harmful to cancer patients undergoing treatment or surgery. The story suggests that people should talk with their doctors before using it. The story does not make it fully apparent that this research has not yet been published in a medical journal and only the abstract has been released. Unlike published articles, this study has not gone through a review process to check for errors in the methodology. While the story points out that 2/3 of the study participants were being treated for breast cancer, it would also be important to clearly state that the majority (90%) were women, which suggests that the results may not be applicable to the general population. Furthermore, it is not clear from the story or the abstract if patients received different types of chemotherapy or why the researchers included patients with various types of cancer. The story does not appear to exaggerate the prevalence of nausea as a side effect of chemotherapy treatment. In addition to interviewing the research lead, this story also includes quotes from a director at the American Cancer Society, as well as the president of the American Society of Clinical Oncology; however, the president of the oncology society did not comment directly on the research. The story mentions that the study was funded by the National Cancer Institute and researches did not have any ties with the capsule maker who supplied the ginger formulation for this study. The story briefly mentioned anti-emetics, which reduce vomiting, but more detail could have been supplied regarding the efficacy of other medications for chemotherapy-related nausea. Ginger capsules sold as dietary supplements and products containing ginger flavoring, such as ginger teas or ginger spice, are widely available; however, the story notes that they may not provide the same benefits as the formulation used in the study. According to the story, the company that developed the capsule used in this study is seeking approval from the FDA to market the ginger formulation as an anti-nausea drug. Up front, the story points out that ginger has long been used to quell nausea; however, it also mentions that this is the first large-scale study evaluating its efficacy in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. Other studies, as this story indicates, have had conflicting results. This story does not appear to rely on a press release."

A: Study: Ginger capsules ease chemotherapy nausea
****
Q: No discussion of costs – not of PSA testing nor of subsequent biopsies. These are big cost issues that warranted at least a line. The story states the 1 in 20 needing biopsy for total PSA vs. the 1 in 7 needing biopsy for PSA velocity. What the article doesn’t quantify is whether there would be fewer false positive findings if PSA velocity was ignored. Better job than its HealthDay competition in actually quantifying the impact on reducing unnecessary biopsies. The story didn’t do as good a a job as its HealthDay competition, which spelled out how men in the study were all from the placebo arm of a drug trial and which provided a bit more detail on the quality of the evidence. Neither story indicated that study subjects were highly selected– normal prostate exam and PSA < 3 as entry criteria. This is important information that may influence how generalizable the findings may be. No disease mongering here. The story included quotes from two independent sources. The HealthDay competition addressed in a much more explcit manner the option of not having the PSA test at all, when it reported: “Current American Cancer Society prostate screening cancer guidelines recommend that men make an informed decision with their doctor about whether to be tested for prostate cancer. “Research has not yet proven that the potential benefits of testing outweigh the harms of testing and treatment,” according to the ACS.” The story stated that most men over 50 get PSA blood tests. The story made it clear that the study was to examine the value in a common practice of doing a biopsy in men with a normal PSA level but in whom an increase in PSA has been detected. Did not appear to rely on a sole news release.

A:
Study: PSA rise not good prostate cancer predictor
****