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.

Input: Consider Input: But following a nationwide lockdown to curb the spread of the coronavirus, the 42-year-old vendor has turned to making plastic face shields for frontline medical workers instead. “I was once a patient myself and I feel like my family owes doctors a lot”, said Linh, who received hospital treatment a few years ago for a blood-related illness. “I want to make these shields to keep them healthy. If they are healthy, then they can protect us”. Last week, Vietnam began a 15-day social distancing campaign to slow the spread of the virus that has seen most non-essential businesses shut, including Linh’s stall. There have been 241 reported cases of the coronavirus in Vietnam and no reported deaths, according to the health ministry. Aggressive contact tracing and a mass quarantine programme have helped keep that tally low. When the lockdown began, Linh assembled a group of family members, friends and fellow vendors to start making the face shields. They can be worn in addition to face masks to better protect medical workers from the tiny virus-carrying droplets released by infected patients. In just a few days, Linh and her gang of volunteers made almost 1,000 face shields, she said, and distributed them to at least three nearby hospitals. Linh said she had drawn on her experience as a hat vendor to line the shields with comfortable padding. She watched media reports of doctors in the United States and consulted a friend who works as a nurse there to perfect the design, she said. The finishing touch? A sticker, with an important message to Vietnam’s medical workers: “Fight Covid-19 disease”. “Keep believing, because we are always with you”. (This story is refiled to correct dateline)

Output: Vietnamese hat seller turns to homemade face shields in virus fight.


Input: Consider Input: "There’s a new sheriff in charge of the U.S. Senate, and he’s eager to show how he’s shaking up the law of the land. We’re talking, of course, about new Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., who took over the Senate’s top slot after the midterm elections bounced Democrats from power. And in this new world, Republicans are touting an eye-catching factoid as evidence of a functional Senate, one they say runs on fairness and order under GOP control. ""Amazing fact: Senate has already voted on more amendments in 2015 than Reid allowed ALL YEAR last year,"" tweeted Phil Kerpen, opinion-writer and president of conservative 501(c)(4) American Commitment, on Jan. 22, 2015. Kerpen, formerly of Americans for Prosperity, the Club for Growth and the libertarian Cato Institute, told us he heard the statistic from McConnell himself. We wanted to know if it was true that the Senate has already allowed more votes on amendments in less than one month than all of 2014. And why? On Senate stoppage and filled ‘trees’ The simple answer on the number of votes is that Kerpen is correct. But the reason behind it varies depending on your particular political lens. A simple search of Senate roll call votes on amendments in 2014 and 2015 backs up Kerpen’s statement. In 2014, there were 15 roll call votes on amendments. As of Jan. 22, 2015, the date of Kerpen's tweet, there were 16 roll call votes on amendments. There have since been 17 more votes on amendments to the bill to approve the Keystone XL pipeline, which passed a week later but will likely face President Barack Obama’s veto pen. Kerpen came at the tally a different way, counting ""real"" votes on amendments, a distinction that also includes roll call votes on motions to table amendments, which effectively kills them. By his math, there were 16 votes allowed on amendments in 2014 and 26 so far in 2015. By either count, the numbers work. What changed? In 2014, then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., relied on a funny-sounding procedure called ""filling the amendment tree."" Basically, Reid filled the docket allowed for amendments by adding amendments with inconsequential changes that no one else could override. The procedural tactic prevented Republican-sponsored amendments from being heard on the floor. ""He did that more than any of his predecessors,"" Donald Ritchie, Senate historian, told PunditFact. Reid wasn’t doing this just to be a not-so-nice guy. To Democrats, it was to counter Republican tactics. Unlike the House, the Senate does not have strict rules for the substance of amendments that can be attached to bills (i.e., you could add a health care amendment onto a defense spending bill). And that’s exactly what happened in years past. Republicans began introducing off-topic amendments that, for example, cut off U.S. aid to Egypt or, a favorite of Sen. David Vitter, R-La., to eliminate health care subsidies for Senate staffers. No matter what the topic of the bill. Sometimes this was in effort to force difficult votes for Democrats back home. To Republicans, Reid’s style of blocking amendments emulated an uncooperative and off-the-rails leadership style -- one that is tremendously well-documented -- that stymied policymaking. To Democrats, it was necessary to get anything accomplished. Republicans were filibustering votes on the underlying bills and not committing to a vote in exchange for allowing some amendments, said Steven S. Smith, a political science professor at Washington University in St. Louis. ""Reid saw they were filibustering everything, bringing the place to a standstill,"" Smith told us. ""So he wondered why he should give them votes at all."" Reid’s office does not dispute the number of votes on amendments, but they do take issue with what they deem an ""empty talking point"" that neglects Republican responsibility for the gridlock. His spokesman argues that Republicans blocked their own share of amendments by not compromising on potential amendments to be heard on the floor and refusing to come to an agreement about when a bill should come to a vote. ""(Reid) makes no apologies for blocking what we all consider to be extremely pointless political amendments that were just designed not to improve the bills we were working on but to run 30-second political ads against Democratic senators,"" said spokesman Adam Jentleson. ""Republicans are entirely culpable in that number being what it is."" Reid’s style of blocking amendments irritated Republicans, sure, but it also flared up during the 2014 midterms with Republicans using it to attack Democrats. The GOP pounced on Alaska Democratic incumbent Sen. Mark Begich, for instance, for his lack of roll-call votes on his amendments. McConnell, conversely, said he would allow open amendments on the Keystone XL bill, hence the GOP celebrating its ""new management"" style. As political experts told us to expect, there have already been clashes with McConnell’s methods a few days after the initial celebration. During the Keystone debate, Democrats objected to McConnell tabling Democratic amendments and not letting Democrats debate their amendments for a minute. Reid, perhaps ironically, tweeted, ""I've never seen debate shut down as aggressively as when Sen. McConnell refused to allow Dems to debate their own amendments for just 1 min. ... and that’s saying something."" What the experts tell us Bottom line, experts said, voters shouldn’t take the new tactics as evidence that McConnell’s ""return to normal order"" will give the Democrats an easy path to voting on the amendments of their choice. ""It’s not going to happen,"" said Roy Meyers, University of Maryland, Baltimore County affiliate professor of public policy. University of Kansas political science professor Burdett Loomis agreed, saying, ""The overall idea isn’t trivial (‘regular order’), but the exact number isn’t very significant, especially if McConnell, as expected, runs the Senate almost completely to the (Republicans’) advantage."" It’s too early to know whether we have a ""sea change"" of order on our hands in the Senate, said Sarah Binder, George Washington University political science professor. ""In other words, the intense partisanship of the Senate that led Sen. Reid to all-but shut down the amendment process last year has not dissipated,"" Binder said. ""I think the question going forward is whether McConnell can find a way to conduct the Senate such that senators from both parties believe their legislative needs are being met."" Our ruling Kerpen, among others, tweeted, ""Amazing fact: Senate has already voted on more amendments in 2015 than (Harry) Reid allowed ALL YEAR last year."" On the numbers, that is right. But experts cautioned us that the claim falls more in the interesting factoid category than a sign of a different or more cooperative Senate leadership. The statement is accurate but needs clarification and additional information. That meets our definition of . Correction: An earlier version of this fact-check incorrectly described Sen. David Vitter's amendment."

Output: Amazing fact: Senate has already voted on more amendments in 2015 than Reid allowed ALL YEAR last year.


Input: Consider Input: "A claim about Dan Patrick by an organizer for Battleground Texas, the pro-Democratic group, rang a bell. In a June 10, 2014, interview on Bloomberg TV, Jeremy Bird said Patrick, the Houston state senator who dusted incumbent David Dewhurst in the May 2014 primary runoff for the Republican lieutenant governor nomination, has ""called immigration into Texas an invasion"" and ""said immigrants coming into Texas bring ‘third-world diseases.’ "" We looked into whether Patrick made these statements and, if so, whether facts backed them up. Patrick: ‘Stop the invasion’ Patrick, championing his desire to secure the Texas-Mexico border, has often called to stop ""the invasion,"" referring to individuals who cross the border without legal documentation. Spokeswoman Lynda Tran of Battleground Texas noted by email, Patrick has an undated online post in which he asks supporters to donate ""if you agree we must stop the illegal invasion!"" According to a January 2014 news story in the Dallas Morning News, Patrick and another GOP aspirant blasted Dewhurst in a Jan. 27 debate for not doing more to secure the Texas border from illegal immigration. ""The first question is to stop the invasion,"" Patrick said. ""Until you secure the border, you cannot address any other issues."" It wasn’t a new cry. A Feb. 24, 2006, Texas Observer story described Patrick, then waging his first Senate campaign, as blaming illegal immigrants for a rising crime rate, overcrowded schools, an overburdened health-care system and runaway growth in the state budget. ""The number one problem we are facing,"" the Observer quoted Patrick as saying, ""is the silent invasion of the border. We are being overrun. It is imperiling our safety."" More recently, Patrick shelved such language. A June 7, 2014, Texas Tribune news story said Patrick didn’t use the ""invasion"" term at that week’s Republican Party of Texas convention. Instead, the story said, he called on Republicans to reach out to Hispanic voters by telling them ""that we stand with them for the future of their family"" and that only the GOP would work to secure their communities. U.S. Border Patrol figures show its apprehensions of individuals crossing the country’s southern border declined 69 percent from a little over 1 million in the fiscal year running through September 2006 to nearly 328,000 five years later. But such apprehensions bumped up 27 percent, to 414,397,as of  two years later, in fiscal 2013, the agency says. Since 2011, there’s been a surge in people from countries other than Mexico, including many minors from Central America. ‘They are bringing Third World diseases’ The Observer story revealed Patrick’s claims about disease along the border, saying Patrick characterized illegal immigrants as walking pathogens. ""They are bringing Third World diseases with them,"" Patrick said, citing ""tuberculosis, malaria, polio and leprosy."" But the story quoted a physician, identified as Tim Metz, the top epidemiologist at the Texas Department of State Health Services, as saying there wasn’t a known case of polio in the Western Hemisphere when Patrick spoke ""and we haven't seen it in decades."" According to the Observer, Metz said malaria, a tropical disease spread by the anopheline mosquito, is easily treated and remains ""a rare disease in Texas and not a huge problem."" Leprosy, he said, is known today as Hansen's disease and ""we have no more than 50 cases a year that are reported, but it's not on the rise."" As for TB, the physician told the Observer, ""we'll have 1,500 or so cases in Texas this year, which might be a slight increase, but we've got very effective TB-control programs in every local health department in the state."" For our part, we didn’t identify anyone by the name of Tim Metz. When we asked the Texas Department of State Health Services for guidance, spokesman Chris Van Deusen said by email that Tom Betz (not Tim Metz) was at one time the manager of the agency’s Infectious Disease Surveillance and Epidemiology branch. Van Deusen didn’t directly speak to what Patrick reportedly said in 2006, but he indicated immigrants aren’t showing up as bringing most of the diseases listed by Patrick. Polio, Van Deusen said,  has been eradicated from the Western hemisphere and ""we don’t generally see cases in Texas. Van Deusen said about 100 cases of malaria are annually reported in the state. All are imported, he said, and it’s not spread person to person in Texas. ""It’s generally related to travel, either people from here visiting parts of the world where malaria is endemic or people from abroad visiting the U.S., rather than immigration,"" he said. Cases of Hansen’s disease -- or what has been called leprosy -- are reported, Van Deusen said, with one third related to armadillos; one third tied to ""old European families that have a genetic susceptibility;"" and one third ""related to immigration from areas of the world where the disease is more common, irrespective of the type of immigration."" In April 2014, Patrick suggested critics distort what he said in 2006. Patrick bridled after San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro said to him in an immigration debate aired by Univision and posted online by the Texas Tribune: ""You have talked about undocumented immigrants bringing third-world diseases including leprosy and polio to Texas. You have said that we’re seeing an illegal invasion from Mexico."" Patrick shot back that his comment about disease in 2006 was based on information distributed by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control indicating tuberculosis cases were up nationally and in Texas, ""particularly along the Texas-Mexico border--and those cases were coming from Latin America,"" Patrick said. A 2012 CDC tuberculosis fact sheet states the disease had decreased in prevalence nationally. Some 9,945 TB cases (an average of 3.2 cases per 100,000 persons) were reported, the sheet says, and the 2012 count was the lowest since national reporting of TB commenced in 1953. Still, Texas, California and Florida were among a few states with an average number of cases exceeding the national average, according to a map with the fact sheet. Van Deusen said about half the state’s decreasing number of TB cases show up in residents born abroad. ""TB often crops up in immigrant populations because of the nature of the disease where a person can be exposed to the bacteria but not develop active disease for many, many years,"" he wrote. ""In fact, the vast majority of people who get the tuberculosis bacteria in their body will never go on to develop active TB disease because their immune systems will keep the bacteria in check."" In the Univision debate, Patrick said he’d previously mentioned leprosy because the World Health Organization reported that from 2010 to 2012, cases increased in Mexico and the U.S. An online search led us to a WHO chart indicating U.S. cases of leprosy increased from 169 in 2010 to 168 in 2011 to 173 in 2012 with cases in Mexico going from 211 in 2010 up to 216 in 2011 and down to 215 in 2012. We asked Patrick’s campaign about Battleground Texas’s claim and the reports that Patrick described and didn’t hear back. Our ruling The Battleground Texas activist said Patrick has ""called immigration into Texas an invasion"" and Patrick has ""said immigrants coming into Texas bring ‘third-world diseases.’"" This year and earlier, Patrick referred to illegal immigration as an invasion that he wants to stopper. In 2006, he was quoted as saying illegal immigrants bring third-world diseases to the state. Both claims have weaknesses, but we're not judging Patrick's veracity here. The Democratic group's statement is . – The statement is accurate and there’s nothing significant missing."


Output: "Battleground Texas Says Dan Patrick has ""called immigration into Texas an invasion"" and ""said immigrants coming into Texas bring ‘third-world diseases.’"