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 Input:
The Arkansas Department of Health issued the public health directive in a Nov. 22 letter that stated students without at least two doses of measles, mumps and rubella vaccine either be vaccinated immediately or be barred from classrooms and school activities for at least 26 days. Brothers Shiloh Isaiah and Benjamin Andrew Bemis asked the Washington County Circuit to issue a temporary injunction, arguing "that the University of Arkansas failed to recognize and uphold our philosophical beliefs as enrolled students -- beliefs which include the choice to abstain from vaccinations." In a one-sentence order, Judge Doug Martin on Tuesday denied their request to be allowed to return to their classes without getting the vaccinations. Martin's order didn't explain the reason for the decision. Shiloh Bemis, 21, told the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette that he's disappointed in the court's order. "On a larger level, we are taking issue with the fact that we don't think we've quite been given a choice that fully takes into account what we believe our rights to be," the third-year architecture student from Fayetteville said. Benjamin Bemis didn't respond to the Democrat-Gazette's request for comment. State law requires vaccinations for students, but it also allows exemptions for medical, religious or philosophical reasons. But the state Health Department said even exempted students must heed the public health directive. "Even if they have an exemption, they still are supposed to be excluded from class and activities, since they are much more susceptible to getting the infection," said Dr. Joel Tumlison, a physician specialist in the health department's outbreak response team. "For any student, whether simply undervaccinated or with an exemption, if they change their mind and get the vaccine, they can then return to class/activities." University spokesman Mark Rushing said the school will continue to follow the health department's instructions. The university has had 26 mumps cases since September, according to health officials. As of last week, 168 students lacked the required vaccinations to attend classes, UA spokesman Zac Brown said.

Ex Output:
Arkansas judge denies students' appeal to vaccination policy.

Ex Input:
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 isfollowed 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) forhalf 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 thesuperficial results. On deeper delving into the study methodology, the statistical significances of the results were very close to notstatistically 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 treatmentsfor 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.

Ex Output:
Relapses of childhood leukemia improve with high doses of common chemo drug

Ex Input:
On July 16, 2020, as the U.S. recorded its single highest number of COVID-19 cases since the coronavirus health crisis began, U.S. President Donald Trump spoke at an event held on the South Lawn of the White House, ostensibly on the subject of "Rolling Back Regulations to Help All Americans." During his talk, according to a meme, Trump allegedly tackled the subject of energy-efficiency standards which have supposedly resulted in home appliances that do not function properly due to requirements aimed at conserving the amount of water and power they consume: This was an accurate reproduction of a portion of Trump's talk, according to a White House transcript of the event: We're bringing back consumer choice in home appliances so that you can buy washers and dryers, showerheads and faucets. So showerheads you take a shower, the water doesn't come out. You want to wash your hands, the water doesn't come out. So what do you do? You just stand there longer or you take a shower longer? Because my hair I don't know about you, but it has to be perfect. Perfect. Dishwashers you didn't have any water, so you the people that do the dishes you press it, and it goes again, and you do it again and again. So you might as well give them the water because you'll end up using less water. So we made it so dishwashers now have a lot more water. And in many places in most places of the country, water is not a problem. They don't know what to do with it. It's called "rain." They don't have a problem. This was far from the first time the president had riffed on poorly functioning appliances. In December 2019, as Trump spoke in the Roosevelt Room of the White House amidst an impeachment inquiry, he digressed into railing about toilets and other bathroom fixtures that allegedly frustrate their users due to the use of low-flow technology. CNN reported: The President claimed Americans are flushing their toilets "10 times, 15 times, as opposed to once" and argued that they are having difficulty with washing their hands in what appeared to be a tangent about low-flow sinks and toilets. "We have a situation where we're looking very strongly at sinks and showers and other elements of bathrooms where you turn the faucet on and in areas where there's tremendous amounts of water, where the water rushes out to sea because you could never handle it, and you don't get any water," the President said during a roundtable with small business leaders about deregulatory actions. "You turn on the faucet and you don't get any water. They take a shower and water comes dripping out. Just dripping out, very quietly dripping out," the President continued, lowering his voice as he spoke about the drips. "People are flushing toilets 10 times, 15 times, as opposed to once." It wasn't entirely clear what he was talking about, but it appeared to have to do with bathroom fixtures with low-flow appliances. He said the Environmental Protection Agency was looking into the issue on his suggestion. "They end up using more water. So (the) EPA is looking at that very strongly at my suggestion," Trump said, though he did not give details on what suggestions, if any, he made. NPR quoted the Pacific Institute, a non-profit research institute with a focus on global and regional freshwater issues, as asserting that Trump's statements did not comport with reality: Peter Gleick with the Pacific Institute in Oakland considers this all to be Trumpian nostalgia for a time when showers were strong, toilets used 4 gallons a flush and lightbulbs burned your hands when you touched them. Gleick said these newer household items are part of an "efficiency revolution," doing the same tasks with less and halting the upward trajectory of water and energy consumption in America. And, yes, a dishwasher cycle takes longer, and incandescent bulbs are cheaper to buy upfront. But in the long run, "They're much more expensive, because they use a huge amount of energy, which we pay for over time and they burn out 20 times faster," Gleick said.

Ex Output:
President Trump gave a talk during the COVID-19 pandemic in which he remonstrated about showers and dishwashers not functioning properly due to low-flow standards.