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".

Q: Paragraph: a summary of the evolution of infectiousness over time. When who-infects-whom is observed, the Nelson-Aalen estimator produces an unbiased estimate of the cumulative hazard function of the contact interval distribution. When who-infects-whom is not observed, we use an EM algorithm to average the Nelson-Aalen estimates from all possible combinations of who-infected-whom consistent with the observed data. This converges to a nonparametric maximum likelihood estimate of the cumulative hazard function that we call the marginal Nelson-Aalen estimate. We study the behavior of these methods in simulations and use them to analyze household surveillance data from the 2009 influenza A(H1N1) pandemic. 
 Title: Nonparametric survival analysis of infectious disease data Summary

A: True
****
Q: Paragraph: • The M2 protein of influenza A is a proton-gated proton channel that is required for viral replication • Current influenza strains are resistant to licensed M2 antivirals, so new therapies that target M2 are needed • The structure and function of M2, rise of drug resistance mutations, and current antiviral strategies are discussed The ongoing threat of seasonal and pandemic influenza to human health requires antivirals that can effectively supplement existing vaccination strategies. The M2 protein of influenza A virus (IAV) is a proton-gated, proton-selective ion channel that is required for virus replication and is an established antiviral target. While licensed adamantane-based M2 antivirals have been historically used, M2 mutations that confer major adamantane resistance are now so prevalent in circulating virus strains that these drugs are no longer recommended. Here we review the current understanding of IAV M2 structure and function, mechanisms of inhibition, the rise of drug resistance mutations, and ongoing efforts to develop new antivirals that target resistant forms of M2. 
 Title: Journal Pre-proof Put a cork in it: Plugging the M2 viral ion channel to sink influenza Put a cork in it: Plugging the M2 viral ion channel to sink influenza

A: False
****
Q: Paragraph: Although conventional antimicrobial drugs have been viewed as miraculous cure-alls for the past 80 years, increasing antimicrobial drug resistance requires a major and rapid intervention. However, the development of novel but still conventional systemic antimicrobial agents, having only a single mode or site of action, will not alleviate the situation because it is probably only a matter of time until any such agents will also become ineffective. To continue to produce new agents based on this notion is unacceptable, and there is an increasing need for alternative approaches to the problem. By contrast, light-activated molecules called photoantimicrobials act locally via the in-situ production of highly reactive oxygen species, which simultaneously attack various biomolecular sites in the pathogenic target and therefore offer both multiple and variable sites of action. This non-specificity at the target circumvents conventional mechanisms of resistance and inhibits the development of resistance to the agents themselves. Photoantimicrobial therapy is safe and easy to implement and, unlike conventional agents, the activity spectrum of photoantimicrobials covers bacteria, fungi, viruses, and protozoa. However, clinical trials of these new, truly broad-spectrum, and minimally toxic agents have been few, and the funding for research and development is almost non-existent. Photoantimicrobials constitute one of the few ways forward through the morass of drug-resistant infectious disease and should be fully explored. In this Personal View, we raise awareness of the novel photoantimicrobial technologies that offer a viable alternative to conventional drugs in many relevant application fields, and could thus slow the pace of resistance development. The original report 11 concerning a photoantimicrobial effect was published in 1900, when Raab showed the inactivation of Paramecium caudatum when exposed to the dyes acridine or eosin and then illuminated with sunlight. Raab's supervisors, von Tappeiner and Jesionek, applied this approach to tumour cells and reported their results in 1905. 12 Thus, both the antimicrobial and anticancer approaches of photodynamic therapy have been known for more than a century. Anticancer photodynamic therapy is now a clinical reality in hospitals and dermatology clinics worldwide, including for the treatment of actinic keratosis and basal Wainwright et al.  
 Title: Photoantimicrobials-are we afraid of the light? HHS Public Access

A:
True
****