instruction:
Generate an explanation for the given claim using the provided supporting material from the paragraph. Please consider the following points while generating an output. 1) The claim will always have supporting proof in the paragraph, and the paragraph will have a clear point of view supporting the claim. 2) There can be instances where direct correlation to the claim is not available. Make use of the sentences in the paragraph to provide a corresponding output supporting the claim. 3) The explanation should be at least one and at most twelve sentences long.
question:
Paragraph: Serge Haroche of France and American David Wineland, both 68, found ways to manipulate the very smallest particles of matter and light to observe strange behavior that previously could only be imagined in equations and thought experiments. Wineland once described his own work as a “parlor trick” that performed the seemingly magical feat of putting an object in two places at once. Other scientists praised the achievements as bringing to life the wildest dreams of science fiction. “The Nobel laureates have opened the door to a new era of experimentation with quantum physics by demonstrating the direct observation of individual quantum particles without destroying them,” said the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, which awarded them the 8 million crown ($1.2 million) prize. “Perhaps the quantum computer will change our everyday lives in this century in the same radical way as the classical computer did in the last century.”  Haroche said he was walking in the street with his wife when he recognized the Swedish country code on the incoming call to inform him of the award. “I saw the area code 46, then I sat down,” he told reporters in Sweden by telephone. “First I called my children, then I called my closest colleagues, without whom I would never have won this prize,” he said. Asked how he would celebrate, he said: “I will have champagne, of course.”  He told Reuters he hoped the prize would give him a platform “that will allow me to communicate ideas, not just in this field of research but for research in general, fundamental research”. Wineland was asleep at home in Boulder, Colorado, when the phone call from Stockholm arrived before dawn on Tuesday morning, he said at a press conference. (His wife answered.) Physics is the second of this year’s crop of awards; scientists from Britain and Japan shared the first prize on Monday, in medicine, for adult stem cell research. The prizes, which reward achievements in science, literature and peace, were first awarded in 1901 in accordance with the will of Swedish dynamite millionaire Alfred Nobel. “This year’s Nobel Prize recognizes some of the most incredible experimental tests of the weirder aspects of quantum mechanics,” said Jim Al-Khalili, professor of physics at the University of Surrey in Britain. “Until the last decade or two, some of these results were nothing more than ideas in science fiction or, at best, the wilder imaginations of quantum physicists. Wineland and Haroche and their teams have shown just how strange the quantum world really is and opened up the potential for new technologies undreamt of not so long ago.”  Quantum physics studies the behavior of the fundamental building blocks of the universe at a scale smaller than atoms, when tiny particles act in strange ways that can only be described with advanced mathematics. Researchers have long dreamt of building “quantum computers” that would operate using that mathematics - able to conduct far more complicated calculations and hold vastly more data than classical computers. But they could only be built if the behavior of individual particles could be observed. “Single particles are not easily isolated from their surrounding environment, and they lose their mysterious quantum properties as soon as they interact with the outside world,” the Nobel committee explained. “Through their ingenious laboratory methods Haroche and Wineland, together with their research groups, have managed to measure and control very fragile quantum states, which were previously thought inaccessible for direct observation. The new methods allow them to examine, control and count the particles.”  Both scientists work in the field of quantum optics, studying the fundamental interactions between light and matter. The Nobel committee said they used opposite approaches to the same problem: Wineland uses light particles - or photons - to measure and control particles of matter - electrons - while Haroche uses electrons to control and measure photons. In one of the strange properties of quantum mechanics, tiny particles act as if they are simultaneously in two locations, based on the likelihood that they would be found at either, known as a “superposition.”  It was long thought that it would be impossible to demonstrate this in a lab. But Wineland’s “parlor trick” was to hit an atom with laser light, which according to quantum theory had a 50 percent chance of moving it, and observe the atom at two different locations, 80 billionths of a meter apart. In a normal computer, a switch must either be on or off. A quantum computer would work with switches that, like the particles in Wineland’s experiment, behaved as if they were in more than one position at the same time. An example is a computer trying to work out the shortest route around town for a travelling salesman. A traditional computer might try every possible route and then choose the shortest. A quantum computer could do the calculation in one step, as if the salesman travelled each route simultaneously. Wineland is a dedicated experimentalist, not bothered by the bizarre philosophical implications of quantum mechanics, such as the notion that reality does not exist until an observer measures it. “You can find debate on this, but I’m not sure we’re so special in the universe” as to have the power to bring reality into being, he told Reuters. His realism extends to applications of his work. “I wouldn’t recommend anybody buy stock in a quantum computing company,” Wineland told reporters, but he said he was optimistic that it might be possible to build one eventually. He plans to be part of the quest. Asked if his science career was nearing an end, he said he had no plans to retire “until they drag me out of here for being too old”. ($1 = 6.6125 Swedish crowns) Claim: "Nobel for quantum ""parlor trick"" that could make super computers."
answer:
A French and an American scientist won the Nobel Prize in physics on Tuesday for finding ways to measure quantum particles without destroying them, which could make it possible to build a new kind of computer far more powerful than any seen before.


question:
Paragraph: This release makes no mention of the costs of the drugs compared in this study, even though the drugs have been in use for years and are widely available. Since the study is a comparison of various treatments for this form of cancer, it seems relevant to offer a cost comparison as well as a comparison of efficacy. It appears that the high dose methotrexate is given over a 24-hour period, presumably in the hospital, while the standard methotrexate is given as a single dose. Also, the high dose methotrexate is followed by leucovorin administration while the standard dose is not. According to the site GoodRx, the cost for methotrexate in low-dose (2.5 mg) pill form averages out to about $50 for a month’s supply. Newer, injectable variations of the drug cost upwards of $500 a month for the 25 mg dose. The release states that patients receiving high doses of the drug methotrexate “had a significantly better outcome, by 5 to 6 percent” than did patients receiving the current standard of care, which is gradually escalating doses of the drug. The release also explains that patients nine years old or younger who were also treated with a steroid called decadron (dexamethasone) for half as long as normal (14 versus 28 days) benefited from the treatment while patients 10 and older did not. We’re not sure of the meaning behind these results as portrayed in the release. Which outcome was better by 5 or 6 percent? The study has several. Does that mean the relapse rate was reduced or is it the event free survival that was better? It would be more meaningful to readers if the release had included the actual relapse and event free survival rates for each group analyzed in terms most people can understand. For example: “relapse rates were 5 percent lower in Group X compared to Group Y.” We’ll give this category a satisfactory rating largely due to the release including information that patients 10 and older receiving dexamethasone “were at much higher risk for a debilitating bone condition called osteonecrosis,” although we would have been happier if that greater risk would have been quantified. However, the published study explains that there were toxicity problems beyond that of dexamethasone and the release would have been stronger including that information as well. The release stated the study was randomized and controlled, and provides a broad overview of the study design, for which we give the release a borderline satisfactory under this criteria. However, these are the superficial results. On deeper delving into the study methodology, the statistical significances of the results were very close to not statistically significant. This is due to their planned interim stopping of the treatment and the fact that they were looking at multiple outcomes in multiple groups. This release doesn’t demonstrate disease-mongering. While the release does say that this clinical trial was run by the Children’s Oncology Group, which is funded by the National Cancer Institute and the National Institutes of Health, it makes no mention of possible conflicts of interest. Compounding that is the fact that the published study says, “Disclosures provided by the authors are available with this article at www.jco.org,” but that information is behind the journal’s paywall for most readers, so it’s unknown if there is, or is not, a conflict. It appears as though five of the authors (out of a total of about 20) have some conflicts of interest, mostly from several types of drug company payments. The release is comparing the efficacy of treatment regimens using different drugs so alternative treatments for B-acute lymphoblastic leukemia are noted. The release makes clear at the end that the treatment of this disease is improving thanks to refinement of the use of existing drug treatments, meaning that they are readily available for patient use. The release suggests the study findings could change the way childhood leukemia is treated. Modifying existing treatments to enhance a patient’s survival is certainly novel enough to warrant a release. There is no use of unjustifiable language in this release. However, the tone may be a bit overly optimistic given the study findings. Claim: Relapses of childhood leukemia improve with high doses of common chemo drug
answer:
This release reports the findings of a large clinical trial testing whether alternative dosing regimens of standard chemotherapeutic drugs can improve the treatment of B-acute lymphoblastic leukemia. The study showed that using high doses of the drug methotrexate, rather than the standard regimen of gradually increasing doses, improved the outcomes for patients with the disease. The study also showed that using the steroid dexamethasone increased a debilitating bone condition in patients 10 and older but not in patients nine or younger. While the study results are promising, they are by no means clear-cut in the release. The release needed some qualifiers in order to give a clear picture of the benefits. The release also neglected to discuss costs and potential conflicts of interest among the investigators. This form of cancer — B-acute lymphoblastic leukemia — is the most common cancer in children and a major cause of cancer death in patients under 40 years old. And while the majority of patients survive with appropriate treatment, anywhere from one-fifth to one-quarter of patients do not. This study showed that refining the dosing of standard cancer drugs may improve the outcome for some high-risk patients.


question:
Paragraph: While Vice President Mike Pence runs the White House coronavirus task force, his wife is leading a parallel effort to help people deal with anxiety and other unsettling emotions brought on by the pandemic. Two months into the crisis, millions of Americans are struggling to cope with the fallout, whether it’s losing loved ones, losing a job or staying at home more than they ever have. “This is something we’re all going through together, and it’s not like anything we’ve ever gone through before,” Karen Pence told The Associated Press in a recent interview. She is lead ambassador for the PREVENTS task force, an acronym for the President’s Roadmap to Empower Veterans and End the National Tragedy of Suicide. It was created in 2019 to focus on veterans’ suicides but recently launched a social media campaign called “More Than Ever Before” to help reach Americans before they get to “the end of their rope,” she said. “We want them to know there’s help out there, and there are things that we can do to prevent some of the effects that this is having on our mental health as a nation,” Mrs. Pence said. She joined the PREVENTS effort early this year, before the extent of the coronavirus threat in the U.S. became clear. A majority of Americans say they have felt at least one negative emotional reaction in the last seven days, according to a new poll  conducted by NORC at the University of Chicago for the Data Foundation. At least a third of Americans reported feeling nervous, depressed, lonely or hopeless at least one day in the past week. But taken together, 61% of Americans say they have felt at least one of those emotions at one point throughout the week. Nine percent also reported having a physical reaction, such as sweating, nausea or hyperventilating, when thinking about their experience with the pandemic on one or more days. The new poll, conducted last week, is the second wave of the COVID-19 Household Impact Survey. Thirty-eight percent of Americans say they felt lonely at least one of the last seven days. Sixteen percent said they felt that way on three or more days. And 38% said they felt hopeless about the future at least once, with 14% saying they felt that way on three or more days. Those patterns are similar for feelings of anxiety and depression. Mrs. Pence says there are four basic things people can do to help them cope with the situation, beginning with a daily “check in” with themselves to gauge how they’re feeling and then reach out to a friend or other individual if they need someone to hear them out. They should also figure out what puts them at ease, whether it’s reading, cooking or another activity, and schedule time for it. Mrs. Pence, a watercolor artist, said she’s been working on a painting of a friend’s house and is designing her family’s Christmas card. People should also talk about their struggles and successes and include children in those conversations. And if they’re concerned about themselves or someone else, they should feel comfortable calling the national suicide prevention lifeline at 1-800-273-TALK. “It’s OK to not be OK,” said Mrs. Pence. She posts tips and information about available resources on her Twitter page. Among those grappling with the new dynamics is Jody Garrison, who works from her Milwaukee home, turning old books into journals and selling them online. It’s the rare trip to the grocery store — or to the auto mechanic shop later this week to pick up her car after a repair — that brings on the anxiety. “You worry about, ‘Am I going to catch something from touching something?’ so I truly don’t go out in public much at all,” she said by telephone. Being retired helps, as Garrison had long settled into a routine. The 68-year-old plays with her grandchildren online and meets friends there, and is exercising and reading more, too. “I think what’s kept my sanity is that I’ve tried really hard to stay focused on things that kept me happy in the past to sustain the thought of being alone,” she said. “I’m trying to stay focused on the positive, and when you do that, it doesn’t seem quite so bad.” Anxious to see the U.S. economy humming again, President Donald Trump has pushed back against those who warn that coronavirus cases will spike after state lockdowns are lifted. He says more people will die from suicide and substance abuse the longer schools, businesses and workplaces remain closed and people stay at home. Experts say rates of suicide and substance abuse were rising before the pandemic, but it’s too soon to know how much they may have increased during the outbreak. Suicide prevention and mental health advocates said they welcome the PREVENTS effort but would like to see more spending on a more coordinated effort to reduce deaths caused by despair. “You don’t have to be a mental health expert to know we’re in deep trouble,” said former Rep. Patrick Kennedy, D-R.I., co-chair of a new public-private effort to respond to mental health and suicide prevention needs both during and after the coronavirus. Suicide is the 10th leading cause of death in the U.S., with 48,000 deaths reported in 2018, said Jerry Reed, who serves with Kennedy on the executive committee of the National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention, which is separate from the virus-related initiative. Reed, a longtime suicide prevention advocate, said he’d like to see the same amount of effort that went into combating the coronavirus put into responding to mental health needs. “I like the fact that we all came together to flatten the physical curve of the virus,” Reed said. “I would suggest we all come together to flatten the mental health curve.” ___ Associated Press writers Tammy Webber in Chicago and Hannah Fingerhut in Washington contributed to this report. ___ Follow Darlene Superville on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/dsupervilleap ___ This story has been corrected to show that Kennedy represented Rhode Island, not Massachusetts. Claim: Karen Pence: ‘It’s OK to not be OK’ during pandemic.
answer:

Karen Pence says it’s OK to not be OK during the coronavirus pandemic.