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 Q]: After complaints about taste and costs, the Trump administration rolled back a rule that required foods like pasta and bread be made with whole grains. The cafeteria directors who lobbied for the change say they just want greater flexibility to serve foods like white bread — which are more processed and have less fiber — when whole grains don’t work. In Vermont, the relaxed rule means white rice will be served with beans again. In Oregon, macaroni and cheese may return. And in South Dakota, students may notice a change with their soup. “The staff asked right away, ‘Oh my God, can we go back to the other saltines?’” said Gay Anderson, a school lunch director and president of the School Nutrition Association, which represents cafeteria operators and suppliers like Domino’s and Kellogg. The rollback addresses rules on grains, milk and salt championed by former first lady Michelle Obama. Since 2014, schools had been required to serve only whole grain versions of food as part of the national school lunch program, a critical source of free and reduced-price meals for millions of children. The idea is that whole grains would be more nourishing and help cultivate healthy habits amid alarming obesity rates . The Center for Science in the Public Interest, which is among the parties suing over the rollback, notes the standards were based on the government’s own dietary guidelines and that most schools were successfully meeting them. But cafeteria operators said costs were higher, cooking was more difficult and students were throwing away more food. The School Nutrition Association said it’s more important that children who rely on the lunches eat something, and that the rule ignored cultural preferences, such as for flour tortillas in the Southwest or for white rice among Asian students. To ease the transition to whole grains, the U.S. Department of Agriculture let schools apply for temporary waivers to serve select dishes that didn’t meet the whole-grain rule. For the last school year, it said about 20 percent of districts asked permission to serve refined grains that are enriched to add back some nutrients. Among the frequently waived foods were pasta , pizza , tortillas and biscuits , which one Georgia lunch official joked affects the ”tests scores of rednecks ,” according to records obtained by The Associated Press from state agencies. Other waived foods included beignets, cinnamon rolls, corn dogs, sugar cookies and Pop Tarts. One district requested a waiver for croissants because it said students don’t like the whole-grain version. “Plus they are 20 cents more per serving,” the district said. Then in December, Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue said the USDA was going back to the old standard: At least half of grain foods must be rich in whole grains. The agency said that does away with the red tape of making schools get waivers, and gives schools more flexibility to offer wholesome meals that also reduce food waste. Whitney Ellersick, a school lunch director in Portland, Oregon, said the change means her district will no longer need a waiver for its lasagna. But she was surprised by the extent of the rollback. “I was a little shocked to see it go to 50 percent,” Ellersick said. The Center for Science in the Public Interest said the USDA’s rollback may be halting progress made by schools, which could be tempted to bring back more refined grains that cost less or are easier to make. Already, the group notes the USDA defines “whole grain rich” as being half whole grain, meaning there’s built-in wiggle room to make bread and pasta students won’t mind. Bettina Elias Siegel of The Lunch Tray website also noted a recent USDA report that found that “plate waste” was comparable before and after the rules were implemented in 2014, undermining arguments they were prompting students to throw away more food. The report also found that students took advantage of lunches more often in schools with healthier lunches. The American Heart Association likewise criticized the decision to relax the rules and called on school districts to stick to the previous standards, which also included stricter rules on salt and milk. Among the districts that plan to do so is Boston, where fifth grader Trinity Wilson likes the brown rice. She said it’s is healthier than white rice. “I know that because my mom told me,” Wilson said. But some school lunch officials say the rollback could help smaller districts that don’t have access to as many products. In Arkansas, students in the Magnet Cove district accepted whole-grain Pop Tarts and other changes, officials say, but still prefer the old noodles, biscuits and rolls. “They’re tastier, softer and fluffier,” said Danny Thomas, the district’s superintendent. In Burlington, Vermont, white rice and beans can return to menus. Doug Davis, the district’s food director and incoming president of the School Nutrition Association, said it’s a healthy dish that students will actually eat. To avoid buying two types of rice, Davis said white rice will likely also be used in stir fries and soups. He plans to stick mostly to whole grains, but he appreciates not having to. Whole-grain pasta isn’t ideal for mac and cheese, Davis noted. “Would we make a change on that? I don’t know,” he said. ____ Follow Candice Choi at www.twitter.com/candicechoi ___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
[EX A]: With Trump rollback, school lunch could get more white bread.

[EX Q]: The release, while loaded with information about the research, fails to mention costs related to this new approach at any point. This is in spite of the fact that the paper provides what’s necessary to fulfill this criterion. The study authors wrote: “The easy access to the tumor site, the absence of the need for surgical removal of the tissue containing the T cells, the numbers of cells obtained with the harvest, and the ability to expand products in all patients with a relatively short process at a reasonable cost contrast sharply with several limitations of TIL ACT” (a current therapeutic approach to the disease). The release does a good job of spelling out the results of this phase 1 trial by providing data showing that MILs can target and kill cancer cells. It shows that in more than half of the study’s patients, their cancers had shrunk by at least half. In 15 of the 22 patients, their cancers did not progress for nearly a year after the MILs therapy. This wasn’t a controlled study, so it’s unclear how these patients would have fared without the MILs treatment, and the release could have attempted to provide some insight on that point. But we’re pleased that the release focuses appropriately on the apparent safety of the approach, rather than trying to make claims about survival benefits that aren’t supportable by this kind of small, uncontrolled study. The release also explains that the research provides information suggesting which patients might benefit best from this approach, and that other research at this cancer center is centered on testing this approach on different forms of cancer. We’ll give this criterion a satisfactory rating since the release specifically spells out, “None of the participants had serious side effects from the MILs therapy.” However, the study is really too small, and the time span too short, to comment substantively on the possible harms that might be seen if and when the treatment is more widely used. The research paper actually makes the point that the new procedure doesn’t require the “surgical removal of tissue,” and the procedure can be done at bedside rather than an operating suite. But the removal of cells from the bone marrow is still an invasive procedure that carries its own risk of infection or other problems. The release would have benefited from at least mentioning this aspect. The release makes a very good effort to objectively describe a technically complicated trial. It defines the trial at least twice as being “small” and calls it a “pilot,” suggesting that caution is appropriate when considering the results. It effectively explains the process involved in the treatments, including what was learned regarding the growth of cells in the lab after harvesting. It also points to the fact that while tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) can only be retrieved from a quarter of the patient candidates for this technique, MILs were obtained from all of the patients in this study, suggesting that they may be a better tool for this therapy. Describing multiple myeloma as “the second most common cancer originating in the blood” doesn’t add much to our understanding of this disease. However, other statistics provide context regarding the scope of the problem in the United States. We’ll give it a pass. The funding sources for this research are listed in an end note in the release. No conflict of interest information is provided in the release, although the research paper discloses no conflicts. The release does mention that other forms of this adoptive T cell therapy use different cells, suggesting that other approaches are possible. The release also notes, “Three days before the injections of expanded MILs, patients received high doses of chemotherapy and a stem cell transplant, standard treatments for multiple myeloma.” The release points out that “several U.S. cancer centers have conducted similar experimental treatments” but adds that Johns Hopkins is the only one using the MIL cells. It also points to several other ongoing clinical trials at Hopkins that build on the findings of this small study. Using the terms “pilot” and “experimental,” the release signals that availability is very limited. We like the fact that the headline itself defines this as a “pilot” clinical trial and that the lede says that it is “what is believed to be the first small clinical trial of its kind.”  Those kinds of qualifiers both declare the specifics of the research and also provide informative caveats, allowing the reader to gauge how much credence to give to the findings. All too many other medical releases fail to provide this measured approach. This release is conservative throughout in its choice of language in describing this research which, based on its findings, might be ripe for exaggeration.
[EX A]: Pilot clinical trial finds injected immune cells safe in multiple myeloma patients

[EX Q]: The Marshalltown Times-Republican reports UnityPoint Health announced Monday it would make the move in response to a 45 percent decrease in the number of births at the obstetrics unit. As Jennifer Friedly, president of UnityPoint Health — Marshalltown put it, “There simply aren’t enough women choosing to deliver locally.” The closures will result in the loss of 32 jobs but UnityPoint says it’s trying to find work for displaced employees elsewhere in the organization. The closure follows the June 2018 loss of the hospital’s catheterization lab and the November 2018 ending of its intensive care unit. ___ Information from: Times-Republican, http://www.timesrepublican.com
[EX A]:
Marshalltown hospital will close obstetrics unit.