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.

Ex Input:
They said a device that stimulates the vagus nerve in the neck while simultaneously playing different sounds for several weeks helped eliminate the condition in a group of rats. A trial of the treatment in humans is set to start in Europe this year, said Dr. Navzer Engineer of MicroTransponder, a medical device company affiliated with The University of Texas at Dallas, whose study appears in the journal Nature. Tinnitus is sometimes brought on by hearing loss. It occurs as cells in the inner ear are damaged, often from a loud noise. Current drugs help mask tinnitus, but the condition is incurable. Engineer’s team thinks tinnitus may be caused when too many brain cells become tuned to a specific tone in the brain. So his team set out to train the brain to ignore the nerve signals that cause the ringing sound. To do this, they paired a device that sends electrical impulses to the vagus nerve in the neck with different sounds. Stimulating this nerve releases chemicals such as acetylcholine and norepinephrine that trigger changes in the brain. The University of Texas at Dallas team tested this approach in a series of experiments with rats, using an indirect but accepted method of testing hearing in animals. In one, they stimulated the vagus nerve while playing different sounds 300 times a day for 20 days to a group of eight rats with a form of tinnitus. The tones were close to the frequency of the ringing sound, and the hope was to trick some of the nerve cells into listening to the new tones rather than the ringing tone. When the team checked the nerve responses to different tones, the tinnitus had disappeared in rats exposed to the tones and nerve stimulation, but it persisted in a group of control animals. “Unlike previous treatments, we’re not masking the tinnitus. We are eliminating the source of the tinnitus,” Michael Kilgard of the University of Texas-Dallas, who worked on the study, said in a statement. MicroTransponder is developing a wireless medical device to stimulate the vagus nerve and hopes to test it in people later this year. Cyberonics Inc already sells vagus nerve stimulation devices for people with epilepsy and depression. The National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, part of the National Institutes of Health, funded a large part of the research.

Ex Output:
Device treatment may silence ringing in the ears.


Ex Input:
As the 2016 school year and the election primary cycles wound to a close in California, they inevitably congealed into political brouhahas that entangled even young students. One such controversy involved the case of third-grader Logan Autry and his “Make America Great Again” hat: Third-grader Logan Autry, 9, said officials at Powers-Ginsburg Elementary School in Fresno told him to remove his “Make America Great Again” hat because it could stir “negative emotions” in other children. The red baseball cap with the phrase printed in white capital letters has become almost synonymous with the campaign of presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump. “The principal told me to take it off, and I still didn’t take it off,” Autry [said]. “And she said it was against the dress code to wear the hat, but I looked in the dress code and it was not against it.” The Fresno Unified School District’s dress codes for the 2015-2016 school year are fairly easy to track down online, and they haven’t changed much (if at all) from those of previous years: Any apparel, hair style, cosmetic or jewelry, even if not specifically mentioned below, which creates a safety concern, draws undue attention to the wearer, or tends to distract from the educational process is prohibited unless addressed elsewhere in this regulation. Additionally, the following items are specifically prohibited: What many stories didn’t mention was that Logan Autry wore the hat for several days before the school, seeing it as a potential distraction, intervened and told him to remove it: Our job as educators is to facilitate a safe learning environment where we encourage robust conversations of diverse and thoughts. We are proud that in this case, our school achieved that goal by allowing the student to wear his hat for several days. However, it is also our responsibility to take precautions when the discourse begins to impact our school climate and interrupt school operations. Logan told reporters that wearing the hat at school is his First Amendment right. However, the right to free speech is interpreted (by courts and others) somewhat differently in public schools than outside them. The National Coalition Against Censorship has a rundown of how the First Amendment is interpreted within the classroom: Recent Supreme Court decisions have made it clear that the right to free speech and expression can sometimes be subordinated to achieve legitimate educational goals. (See discussions of Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, Bethel School District v. Fraser.) A school is not comparable to a public park where anyone can stand on a soapbox, or a bulletin board on which anyone can post a notice. While students and teachers do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate” (Tinker v. Des Moines), speech is not quite as free inside educational institutions as outside. This does not mean that students and teachers have no First Amendment rights at school. Quite the contrary. But within the educational setting, the right to free speech is implemented in ways that do not interfere with schools’ educational mission. Students cannot claim, for instance, that they have the right to have incorrect answers to an algebra quiz accepted as correct, nor can teachers claim a right to teach anything they choose. Other quotes from Logan present a fuller picture of the third-grader’s political views: He already has the shirt and tie down, and practices speeches about Trump on the playground. “I’ve told them his policies on illegal immigration, and our second amendment, and our first amendment and all of our amendments that need to be protected which are not going to be an amendment at all if Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders gets elected,” said Autry.

Ex Output:
An elementary school in Fresno, California, forced a third-grader to remove a cap bearing Donald Trump's campaign slogan.


Ex Input:
The story mentioned that it was expected that the drug reported on would cost $8/day as compared with <$1/day for warfarin. One aspect of costs that were not considered in this story is the difference in monitoring, which would be less with patients using Eliquis. The competing HealthDay story did a better job on this latter point. The story provided only relative risk reduction figures – “prevented 21 percent more strokes…31 percent fewer incidents of major bleeding…reduced total deaths by 11 percent” – but neglected to present the absolute decrease in adverse events. 21% of what? 31% of what? 11% of what? The story mentioned some of the disadvantages associated with this use of the medication reported on. It did not specifically detail whether there were any harms associated with this medication or how well people in the study were able to stick with the dosing schedule. On this issue, this story was not as complete as its HealthDay competition, which reported: “The new trial comes on the heels of another study on apixaban that was stopped early due to safety concerns. In that trial, published in July in the New England Journal of Medicine, apixaban’s use was associated with raised odds for bleeding — without providing patients with any reduction in heart attack risk.However, “in that case, apixaban was given to patients with coronary artery disease who were also taking two other blood thinners,” Ansell noted. “The three of them together showed that the risk of bleeding was just too high and there was no real benefit in that population. But, that’s an entirely different problem, compared with atrial fibrillation,” he said.” The story included a lot of information about the study it reported on – where the results were presented and published, its design, the number of clinical sites, countries involved, the number of people studied and the length of time they were studied.. No overt disease mongering. The story mentioned that the study reported on had been funded by the drug maker. It included comments from a clinician who had no ties to the study reported on. The story compared the study drug with the long time treatment, warfarin, as well as mentioning a newly approved medication and another medication in the approval process. The story opened by indicating that Eliquis (apixabane) was experimental and closed by indicating the expectation of submission to the FDA for approval. The story was clear that this was a new medication, though there are two other medications (warfarin and Pradax) that are currently available. Did not appear to rely solely on a news release.

Ex Output:

Trial Shows Blockbuster Potential for Blood Clot Pill