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]: The announcement by the world's largest fast-food chain comes as more companies respond to government and consumer pressure to address the global obesity epidemic. McDonald's, which often bears the brunt of criticism over the restaurant industry's penchant for tempting diners with indulgent and often high-calorie food, said it would offer the option in all of its 20 major global markets by 2020. McDonald's also vowed to promote and market only water, milk and juice as the beverages in its popular Happy Meals for children as part of its announcement at the Clinton Global Initiative annual meeting in New York on Thursday. Waist sizes around the world are increasing, setting off alarms in public health circles. In recent years, the U.S. food industry has begun yielding to pressure from government, parents and consumers seeking to slim down adults and children. Sugary sodas have been yanked from public schools; sugar, sodium and calorie levels have been reduced in products, and calorie counts have been posted on some restaurant menus. The Center for Science in the Public Interest, a nonprofit that has tangled with McDonald's over everything from fattening food to the marketing of Happy Meals, approved of the company's move to add more fruits and vegetables to the menu. Still, it says the company and its rivals have a long way to go in terms of offering healthier options. "McDonald's slow march toward healthier meals made a major advance today, but a long road lies ahead for the company," CSPI said in a statement. McDonald's is seen as something of a trend setter among restaurant chains, but like many of its peers, it has tended to resist external efforts to force change. About one year ago McDonald's said it would begin listing calorie information on menus in some 14,000 U.S. restaurants and drive-throughs ahead of a national rule that would require larger restaurant chains to make such disclosures but months after other chains embraced the idea. In July 2011 it tweaked its popular Happy Meals for children - reducing the french fries portion by more than half and adding apples to every order. The move came after pressure from CSPI, parent groups and others. More than one-third of Americans are obese, and about 10 percent of the nation's healthcare bill is tied to obesity-related illnesses, such as Type 2 diabetes, heart disease and hypertension, according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. McDonald's said its announcement is part of a plan developed with the Alliance for a Healthier Generation, which was founded by the Clinton Foundation and American Heart Association, to increase customers' access to fruit and vegetables and help families and children to make informed eating and lifestyle choices.
[EX A]: Want fruit with your burger? McDonald's expands anti-obesity push.

[EX Q]: According to the story, brand-name aromatase inhibitors cost between $340 and $420 a month, but the story also points out that lower-costing, generic versions are available in the U.S. It would have been useful had the story also provided cost information for the other preventive drug options, tamoxifen and raloxifene. A particular strength of this story is its presentation of data. Dr. Winer, an independent source included in the story, translates a 65% risk reduction to mean that exemestane may reduce a woman's risk of developing breast cancer from 3% to 1%. Not only does the story provide absolute risk, but it also presents the number needed to treat. According to the study authors, 26 women would need to take exemestane for five years to prevent a single case of breast cancer. It should be noted, however, that few women in the study completed five years of therapy. Since this is being used as a preventive measure in healthy women, side effects are very important and data should have been provided. The story indicates that "slightly" more women taking exemastane experienced hot flashes, fatigue, sweating, insomnia, and joint pain, compared to those taking placebo pills. It would have been helpful to note, for example, that 40% in the exemestane group experienced a hot flash versus 32% in the placebo group. Citing older research, the story indicates that that joint pain, muscle aches, problems having sex, and vaginal dryness may be more evident with a longer duration of use. The story makes it clear that the study was a large-scale, placebo-controlled, randomized trial, which enrolled over 4500 women in North America and Europe. The women included had at least one risk factor for breast cancer. It also notes that given the significant risk reduction associated with exemestane, the study was stopped after 3 years to give women in the control arm the option of taking exemestane to prevent possible breast cancers. More information regarding participants' characteristics, including age and race would have been helpful. This story did not engage in disease-mongering. In addition to including experts not affiliated with the exemestane study, the story also notes that the it was funded by the Canadian Cancer Society, the Avon Foundation, and Pfizer. In addition, the writer points out that the study lead and a few other authors have received speaking fees from Pfizer and other pharmaceutical companies that make cancer drugs. This story compares the benefits and harms of exemestane with tamoxifen; however, a mention of how these compare with raloxifene, would have been useful. The availability of aromatase inhibitors is not in question. It's clear from the story that aromatase inhibitors are currently used to prevent breast cancer recurrences. It's also clear that this is the first study evaluating its utility for preventing the first instance of breast cancer in healthy women with a higher risk of developing the disease. The story does not appear to be based on the press release.
[EX A]: Hormone-blocking drug reduces breast cancer risk

[EX Q]: The story doesn't mention costs but since these over-the-counter medications have been widely available for a long time it doesn't seem like an important omission. Because aspirin has been available the longest and is manufactured by literally hundreds of companies, it is by far the cheaper of the three. The article takes a close look at the drawbacks and benefits of each drug. For example, while the experts said acetaminophen is less effective than ibuprofen in treating pain (and carries more risks than the others), it is beneficial intreating fever, especially in children age three and up. Ibuprofen is deemed less toxic for pain relief but it carries the risk ofbleeding in the gastrointestinal tract and kidney damage. There's also a reasonable amount of quantification provided by an expert source, Dr. Andrew Moore, who says:"If you're talking about aspirin in doses of 500 to 1,000 mg or two tablets, 30 percent of people get relief from acute pain. For acetaminophen at doses of 500 to 1,000 mg, about 40 percent have a success. For ibuprofen, in its normal formulation at something around 400 mg or two tablets, about 50 percent have success." The story would have been even stronger had it provided links or additional details regarding where this expert obtained his estimates. The story comprehensively describes the harms from each drug based on different uses and patient populations. We especially liked this quote:"Don't believe that just because something is over-the-counter, it's safe." The story cites and links to reliable evidence sources, including a systematic review of randomized controlled trials on back pain published in the BMJ. There are no examples of disease mongering in the story. Sourcing is a very strong component of the article. The story quotes three pain experts from three different institutions as sources. No conflicts of interest were apparent. The main premise of the story was comparing which pain medication was the best for different types of pain. The comparisons are covered in depth with perspectives from three sources. It's obvious from the story that all of the medications profiled have been widely available without a prescription for many decades. Aspirin, a modified version of salicyclic acid, was created by a Bayer chemist in 1897; acetaminophen followed in 1956; and ibuprofen in 1962. The story establishes that it's responding to a reader question about three well-known and widely used medications. It also notes the gap between public perception about these drugs and what pain researchers think of them. Since this article was prompted by a reader question and includes comments from three expert sources, we are confident it isn't based on a news release.
[EX A]:
Should you take Tylenol, Advil, or aspirin for pain? Here's what the evidence says.