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.

Example Input: "Republican Party of Virginia Chairman Pat Mullins kicked off the New Year attacking recent side effects of health care overhaul on Flexible Spending Accounts, which allow workers to pay medical expenses with pre-tax dollars. In an e-letter titled ""FSA at Work? Jim Webb Just Made It a Lot Less Useful,"" Mullins staples Virginia’s senior Senator to new provisions of the health care law that took effect Jan. 1. ""Desperate for tax dollars to pay for their $1 trillion health care takeover, Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama, and Jim Webb decided to pick the pockets of consumers who opted to take responsibility for their own health care costs and remove the ability of consumers to use FSA and HSA plans to pay for things like aspirin and other non-prescription health needs,"" Mullins wrote. He later reiterates the point, writing: ""Until this week, consumers could use their accounts to set aside pre-tax money for medical expenses. But thanks to Webb and other tax happy Democrats, over-the-counter drug purchases are now off limits to FSA and HSA accounts."" There’s plenty of confusion about health care reform, so we checked to see if his claim about over-the-counter drugs is correct. As a source, Mullins cited a news report from KSAT 12 out of San Antonio, Texas. The report says, ""Over-the-counter medications will no longer be reimbursable through a health care flexible spending account, or FSA, even if the account has a grace period. So, Dec. 31 is the last day to stock up on pain relievers, allergy tablets, antacids and more for people who want to use them to exhaust their use-it-or-lose-it FSA."" Not convinced San Antonio’s KSAT 12 is an end-all source for health care reform, we dug deeper. According to the Internal Revenue Service guidance on flexible spending accounts, a new provision ""as added by the Affordable Care Act, provides that...beginning after December 31, 2010, expenses incurred for a medicine or a drug shall be treated as a reimbursement for medical expenses only if such medicine or drug is a prescribed drug (determined without regard to whether such drug is available without a prescription) or is insulin."" In other words, you will no longer be able to use FSAs to pay for your aspirin, antacids and other over-the-counter drugs if they’re not prescribed by a physician. What about HSAs -- tax-advantaged health savings accounts? Pretty much the same. The IRS says that ""a distribution from an HSA...for a medicine or drug is a tax-free qualified medical expense only if (1) the medicine or drug requires a prescription, (2) is an over-the-counter medicine or drug and the individual obtains a prescription, or (3) is insulin."" Otherwise, those ""non-qualified expenses"" will be taxed at 20 percent rather than the current 10 percent for HSA plan participants. So, while the recently enacted portion of the health care law will not stop consumers from being able to buy over-the-counter drugs through their plans, it will require a prescription to do so. On that count, Mullins stays relatively safe by employing the phrase ""non-prescription health needs"" at the end of his claim. , those items like aspirin can still qualify for reimbursement with a prescription, but then they would not longer be ""non-prescription."" But the same phrase also presents a problem for Mullins because other ""non-prescription"" items such as medical supplies and first-aid items remain eligible for reimbursement without a prescription. ""Over-the-counter medications are treated differently than over-the-counter medical items like Band-Aids, which are covered without a prescription,"" said Michael Waxman of Save Flexible Spending Plans. If you’re wondering why these changes are taking place, the answer is likely money. ""I think [federal officials] were just looking for revenue raisers,"" Mike Thompson, a human resource services principal with the PwC recently told the Washington Post. As that story notes, employee contributions to FSAs are made on a pretax basis, reducing earnings and thus the amount workers pay in income tax. According to the Joint Committee on Taxation, tightening up the tax break on over-the-counter purchases will generate an estimated $5 billion in federal revenues through 2019. And one last note: Webb, as Mullins said, did vote for the massive health care reform bill that limits the use of flexible spending accounts. Let’s look back. Mullins says health care law provisions that took effect Jan. 1 will ""remove the ability of consumers to use FSA and HSA plans to pay for things like aspirin and other non-prescription health needs."" It’s  that as of Jan. 1, FSA and HSA plans no longer offered reimbursements for over-the-counter drugs without a prescription. However, those same items could be covered with a prescription. Mullins misses a caveat by not noting that non-prescription items like crutches, bandages, and health supplies like diagnostic devices and blood sugar test kits remain covered. But his comments seem directed at drugs. We find his claim ."
Example Output: New provisions of the health care law bar the use of flexible spending accounts and health savings accounts to pay for aspirin and other non-prescription health needs.

Example Input: Alexis Shapiro suffered damage to her pituitary gland, which helps regulate weight, as a result of the brain disease. She has gained about 140 pounds (63.5 kgs) in less than two years because of the problem, her mother said. Her extreme excess of body fat is clinically defined as morbid obesity. “It has been heartbreaking for her and for us. She cannot do the things she used to love,” Jennifer Shapiro, her mother, said on the fundraising site GoFundMe. The mother said she is seeking about $50,000 for life-saving surgery to reduce the size of her daughter’s stomach because the family’s insurance company will not pay for the procedure unless the patient is at least 18 or has achieved full bone growth. Dr. Thomas Inge, a specialist in pediatric obesity at the Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, told NBC News that Alexis could receive the surgery at the hospital where he works within six weeks now that the funding appears to be in place. “Alexis will be seen this week in Cincinnati, and the preparations for surgery will be made at that time,” Inge told Reuters by email.
Example Output: Donors pitch in to pay for surgery for extremely obese Texas girl.

Example Input: "“Now it has flipped,” said Bill Colone, CEO of San Clemente-based Spinal Singularity, which hopes to launch a ‘smart’ catheter for men with spinal injuries or disease early next year after squeezing in its application under the old European rules. Colone is part of a chorus of industry voices warning that a switch to stricter European rules governing medical devices, due to come into force a year from now, will slow or even halt the release of products in Europe that could transform patients’ lives. Defenders of the regulations say they will not significantly complicate the process and are vital to prevent problems like rupturing silicone breast implants and debris from all-metal hip implants damaging tissue and bones. Many patient advocates say the new rules do not go far enough to reform a European system in which a top U.S. official suggested in 2011 patients may be ""guinea pigs"" here The comment drew a sharp response from the European Union, which still firmly rejects that characterization. That transatlantic spat, and the subsequent evolution of medical device certification around the world, are part of a wider global struggle by governments to attract businesses seeking light-touch regulation without scaring off their voters. The new medical devices rules agreed by the European Union in 2017 will tighten control of devices before they come to market, improve transparency and strengthen surveillance by national authorities, a European Commission spokesperson said. The new system changes less than some proposals - which envisaged regulation by a public body, along U.S. lines, replacing the existing practice of certification by profit-making private firms. But players in medical technology - which ranges from surgical implants to scans - say it is too burdensome and is being built too slowly, risking not only hampering innovation but also harming patients by interrupting supplies. “Immediate action is needed now to avoid severe disruption of product supply to patients and hospitals,” seven European Associations said in a joint statement last week. All 55,000 devices certified under the old directives have to be re-certified along with other products such as reusable scalpels, nasal saline sprays and dental imaging software. The industry says there are not enough Notified Bodies - the private firms charged with certifying the safety of devices ranging from bandages to pacemakers, and that manufacturers may have to take products off the market or delay new launches. The situation is further complicated by Brexit, with Britain’s BSI one of just two notified bodies to have got the go-ahead to certify devices under the new Medical Devices Regulation (MDR). If Britain leaves the EU in October without a deal, certificates issued by British bodies would be invalid. Germany, home to Europe’s biggest medtech sector, is pressing the European Commission to smooth the transition, suggesting three solutions to overcome any Brexit-related supply problems in a March 27 letter to the Commission seen by Reuters. These include giving firms 12 more months to sell products in the EU in the case of a disorderly Brexit, as long as they plan how to regain compliance, the letter from German Health Minister Jens Spahn said. Trade groups have suggested delaying implementation of the rules beyond May 2020 or faster designation of notified bodies. The European Commission rejects the need for contingency plans and said it was focusing on a timely implementation of the regulation, which includes requirements for manufacturers to monitor product safety once devices are on the market. More than 20 notified bodies could be accredited by the end of the year, it said. This is around a third of the number of firms currently certified to assess medical products. “That is a massive reduction in capacity when adding a considerable volume of work,” said Gary Slack, senior vice president for global medical devices at the notified body BSI. To hedge against any Brexit risk, BSI has set up a subsidiary in Amsterdam and has transferred most of its clients’ certificates there, but is still waiting for its Dutch body to be certified under the MDR. For Medtech conglomerates with thousands of devices, the bill to meet the new regulations could stretch into the millions of dollars - especially for those that make riskier devices. Smith and Nephew, which manufacturers hip and knee implants, put its MDR compliance costs at $15-$20 million for 2018 and around $60 million this year. As a result of the regulation, more than 55 percent of those surveyed by Germany industry association ZVEI said they would reduce the number of products on offer. The Commission said many products are eligible for a so-called ‘grace period’ which means they can be sold under the old rules until May 2024 at the latest if certificates are reissued, something BSI said many firms are rushing to do. But the other certified body, Germany’s Tuev-Sued, said many manufacturers had yet to catch on to the regulatory changes. “We are definitely expecting chaotic years,” said Bassil Akra, Tuev-Sued’s vice president in charge of medtech. The medical technology industry is worth $129 billion and employs 675,000 people in Europe, according to MedTech Europe. Experts agree that many new devices are invaluable to patients, but the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists said in November that faulty ones were linked to 1.7 million injuries and nearly 83,000 deaths over the past decade. A key part of the new regulation is how much access doctors and patients will have to the pan-European Eudamed database, to strengthen surveillance and prevent repeated adverse incidents. A Commission spokesperson said discussions were ongoing with authorities, patient groups and other stakeholders. While medtech giants like Siemens Healthineers and Germany’s Fresenius have the regulatory staff to navigate the new rules, most firms are much smaller and will struggle, said MedTech Europe CEO Serge Bernasconi. Spinal Singularity said it had managed to apply under the old system by hiring contractors to help it submit all the paperwork to a notified body by May 27 - two months before it had planned. It is hoping for certification by the end of the year, but is dreading renewing it in four years’ time because of what he said were many “incredibly burdensome” new requirements. German surgical instrument maker Asanus said it plans to take around five highly-innovative surgical products off the market and will discontinue several hundred minimally-invasive devices, as well as stop new development in this area. “If the paperwork costs for the product are five times the amount you can achieve in sales, you simply won’t do it anymore,” said Chief Executive Armin Schorer, who expects many smaller makers of lower risk devices to shut up shop. Bernasconi and Colone said start-ups are now looking to launch their products in other markets, like the United States or China first, denying European patients access to innovations. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the federal body that approves medical devices, is toughening up its own approval process after faulty medical devices harmed patients there too. But Colone noted that was only for some products. His firm plans to file for U.S. approval this autumn. “Because of the pending new EU MDR, overall the FDA process may even be slightly easier,” he said. Kurt Racke, a medical ethics expert at Bonn University, said he did not think Europe’s new regulations would make it harder to win approvals than in the United States. “I think Europe has the most lax market for medical devices,” he said. “I don’t think so much will change there in principle.”  The European Commission rejects suggestions its rules are not tough enough. “The Commission takes patient safety very seriously,” a spokesperson said, “and has led various regulatory reforms to ensure the highest possible quality, safety and reliability of medical devices on the EU market.”"
Example Output:
Will Europe's clampdown on faulty medical devices hurt patients?.