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: "Although the story didn't cite the cost of appendectomy emergency or urgent surgery and we wish it had, we nonetheless will give it a satisfactory score because it at least cited what the editorial writer wrote, ""A secondary benefit is the savings to the hospital generated by minimizing staff and anesthesiologist presence late in the evening and during the wee hours of the morning."" As with our harms score above, although the story didn't give absolute numbers, in this case we think it was sufficient for it to report that ""The scientists found no significant difference among the groups in the patients' condition 30 days after surgery or in the length of their operation or hospital stay."" Although the story didn't give absolute numbers, in this case we think it was sufficient for it to report that ""The scientists found no significant difference among the groups in the patients' condition 30 days after surgery or in the length of their operation or hospital stay."" Despite running less than 300 words, this story did an adequate job in explaining the quality of the evidence, including pointing out limitations. No disease-mongering here. The story meets the bare minimum requirement for this criterion in that it at least cited what an editorial stated. The focus of the story was on a study comparing emergency appendectomy with surgery done up to 12 hours later or beyond. This is the whole focus of the story and one we applaud when it begins: ""Appendectomy is the most common emergency surgery in the world, but it doesn't have to be."" There were no claims made about the novelty of this research, and we may have wished for a bit more context on this. Nonetheless, the potential for guiding future care decisions was made clear. Not applicable. Given that the story only pulled excerpts from the journal article and the accompanying editorial, and didn't include any fresh quotes from interviews, we can't be sure of the extent to which it may have been influenced by a news release."
Example solution: Some appendicitis cases may not require 'emergency' surgery
Example explanation: The paragraph mentions that "Appendectomy is the most common emergency surgery in the world, but it doesn't have to be." which is considered evidence for the output. Thus, the output is a valid claim.

Problem: Blurred vision, dry eyes, glare and double-vision have led to depression and in some cases suicide, several patients told a U.S. Food and Drug Administration advisory panel. "Since LASIK, I am visually handicapped," said patient David Shell, adding that he has near constant eye pain and depression. "My eyes never feel comfortable... 10 years have passed and I still suffer from this problem." Millions of Americans have had successfully undergone LASIK, or laser-assisted in-situ keratomileusis, which uses a laser to reshape the eye's cornea, making them less dependent on glasses or contact lenses. Surgeons and other industry representatives told the FDA's outside advisers most LASIK patients are satisfied with their vision. They noted depression is a complex condition and that no studies show a direct link to laser eye surgery. Still, the FDA is taking another look at the surgery after receiving 140 reports of side effects and device malfunctions between 1998 and 2006. The FDA wants its panelists' advice on what information it would add to its website or product labeling to help those considering undergoing LASIK. "Most of the patients who are having these procedures are fairly satisfied and are doing well. Clearly there is a group who are not satisfied and do not get the kind of results they expect," Daniel Schultz, head of the FDA's device center, told reporters on Thursday ahead of the meeting. Several unhappy patients at the advisory meeting faulted their surgeon for not ruling them out as a poor candidates for LASIK, or for failing to stress the severity of possible side effects. The FDA, which has said the surgery is safe and effective regulates LASIK devices but not the surgeons or clinics that offer the procedure. Stock analysts have said the FDA focus on the procedure could further hurt LASIK companies, which have already seen the softening U.S. economy dampen demand for the elective surgery that is usually not covered by health insurance. LASIK device makers include Advanced Medical Optics Inc, Alcon Inc and Bausch & Lomb, among others. TLC Vision Corp and LCA-Vision Inc run LASIK clinics. Eric Donnenfeld, an ophthalmologist at New York University Medical Center, said the surgery aims to improve patients' lives. "The reality is that, following LASIK, the great majority of our patients see as well or better than they ever saw with their glasses or contact lenses with which they were unhappy," he told the advisory panel. Still, some patients said that while their vision had improved, dry-eye and other side effects were overwhelming. The FDA is also planning to begin a study on LASIK patient satisfaction in 2009 along with the National Eye Institute and two industry groups: the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery and the American Academy of Ophthalmology. Patient and consumer advocates at Friday's meeting objected to the groups' involvement with the study, citing conflicts of interest. Industry representatives said it would help them understand why some patients are unhappy with their LASIK results. Advanced Medical Optics shares were off 1.1 percent to $19.84 in noon trading, while Alcon shares were off 0.2 percent to $154.68, both on the New York Stock Exchange. TLC Vision shares were down 2.5 percent at $1.19, while shares of LCA-Vision were off 0.6 percent at $12.03, both on Nasdaq.
Solution: Unhappy LASIK patients urge FDA to take action.