Given a paragraph and a claim, classify it this way: If the claim contradicts the evidence present in the paragraph, classify the claim as '0'. If the claim has multiple supporting *AND* contradicting evidences, classify the claim as '1'. If the claim has supporting evidence and the paragraph is in overall favor of the claim, then classify the claim as '2'.

Paragraph: As much as we shampoo it, style it, cut it, and fret over it, hair continues to be a mystery to us. We speculate on its nature, especially its propensity for sprouting in our middle years in places we didn't want it to, even as it disappears from locations where we would much rather it had stayed put. We wonder if it continues to grow after we die. (It doesn't.) And we worry that shaving or cutting it will make hair grow back thicker or darker or coarser. Shavers and clippers take heart: in your quest for tonsorial perfection, you are not creating a larger problem for yourself through your efforts. Cutting does not stimulate new growth. (If it did, those going bald would be shaving afflicted areas to encourage regrowth of what they're losing.) This belief probably stems from the perception that short hair seems to be tougher than longer hair. Hair expert Philip Kingsley recommends thinking of a bamboo cane: a long cane flexes easily, but the same cane cut short feels harder and tougher. Another reason for the belief resides with the naturally finer ends of uncut hair: compare the end of a long-lived hair with that of a hair recently cut or shaved, and you'll see the one is thicker than the other. That could lead the less-than-careful to conclude that the whole of the hair's shaft became thicker as a result of the hair's being cut (which it didn't) rather than to realize that shaving or cutting results in a blunt termination, whereas natural outgrowth concludes in a tapering. The part of the hair we style is already dead. The living sections lie below the surface of the scalp. Cutting or shaving the extreme end of the dead section isn't going to have an impact on the parts that are alive. Go forth to shave and trim as much as you like you will not be affecting the intrinsic nature of your hair. Other mistaken hair beliefs include: My hair is gray, but not with years, Nor grew it white In a single night As men's have grown from sudden fears. For most, the greying process is a gradual progression which takes place across a span of years, but for some it can occur at an accelerated rate or at a very early age. Hair loss conditions such as alopecia areata can also cause all of the still-pigmented hairs on a head to fall out, leaving only the grey hairs (which are more resistant), resulting in a dramatic and seemingly "overnight" change. Yet, when a person whose hair would have gone grey quickly anyway is subjected to horrible news, this coincidence is seized upon as evidence that the horrible news caused the early greyness. (Former first lady Barbara Bush is often pointed to as an example of the "grey overnight from shock" group. In 1953, when she was 28, her 3-year-old daughter, Robin, died of leukemia. During the months-long battle to save the child, Mrs. Bush's hair became white.) Claim: Shaving makes your hair grow back in thicker, faster, and fuller.
0

Paragraph: "No discussion of costs a recurring and significant oversight. The claims of ""100% accuracy"" and that ""The investigators found that after just one laser treatment, misfiring ceased in 84 percent of the treated veins, and 90 percent remained inactive three months after treatment"" aren't put into any meaningful context about what difference this made in patient outcomes. Of course, what can you possibly say about outcomes after just three months? Which is exactly the point of raising this issue at all. No discussion of harms. No discussion of the limitations of drawing conclusions from a study of just 27 people. No explanation of whether destroying misfiring cells with ""100% accuracy"" actually makes a difference in people's lives and outcomes. No overt disease mongering. However, to say that ""about 2.2 million Americans currently live with an irregular heartbeat condition, known as atrial fibrillation"" in the same breath as describing a study of just 27 people may imply that this very small study has immediate ramifications for all 2.2 million. And it does not. Barely satisfactory. There's actually no interview only a rehash of what was published in a journal, restated from a news release. No independent source cited. Again, the comparison of the ""new approach"" with existing approaches is superficial and unhelpful. And there was no comparison of performance or outcomes data. Terribly incomplete on this point. It is never made clear whether the device and approach are still experimental or already in clinical use. The word ""new"" was used five times in the short story. Yet the real novelty of this approach is only scantily and insufficiently described especially if the implication is that this has relevance for 2.2 million Americans. The story admits it's based on an American Heart Association news release. There's no sign of any independent reporting or vetting." Claim: Laser Used to Blast Away Cells Causing Irregular Heartbeat
0

Paragraph: "If living through a pandemic doesn't already make you feel like you're walking around in a brave, new world, then conspiratorial social media posts about the global outbreak may push you to the brink. According to a claim we spotted on Instagram and beyond, Bill Gates ""is pushing"" an effort during the current outbreak to track Americans using bracelets and invisible tattoos that would be delivered alongside a vaccine. The theory also insinuates the project came along ""days"" after Gates, co-founder of Microsoft, stepped down from the company's board of directors. The post reads: ""Bill Gates and other globalists, in collaboration with pharmaceutical companies, are reportedly working to push tracking bracelets and 'invisible tattoos' to monitor Americans during an impending lockdown. MIT and Gates have 'created an ink that can be safely embedded in the skin alongside the vaccine itself, and it's only visible using a special smartphone camera app and filter.' This comes days after Gates stepped down from Microsoft's board."" The post was flagged as part of Facebook's efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has helped fund research into increased vaccine tracking, especially in under-resourced communities, but this post makes unsupported assertions and distorts the timeline of that research. Let's take a look. Researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology are seeking to address vaccine tracking challenges in developing countries by creating an invisible ink that could be injected into children along with vaccines. The study began in July 2016, MIT told us, more than three years before the first novel coronavirus cases emerged. It was not inspired by the current outbreak. The idea behind the research is that the dye would be visible under near-infrared light for up to five years and provide a quick, affordable way of helping health providers keep track of a child's vaccinations, even when paperwork gets lost or parents forget whether their child is up to date. The dye wouldn't monitor people's habits or movements, as the Instagram post implies. It would essentially be a marker to see if someone received a vaccine upon inspection by a medical official. Scientists hope an invisible, embeddable medical record that could accompany vaccines could help solve that problem. The Gates Foundation has contributed funds for this research. Some governments such as Hong Kong are using electronic wristbands to track people who have tested positive for the novel coronavirus in order to enforce quarantines and reduce the spread of the virus. But we find no evidence in news archives or other internet searches that Gates specifically stated he is ""pushing"" or advocating for the development of tracking bracelets. The only mention of ""bracelets"" we could find associated with Gates came about in 2012, when the Gates Foundation funded a study into bracelets that would measure student engagement in classrooms. That said, Gates has said he supports the idea of a national tracking system to monitor the virus that causes COVID-19. In a March 18 Ask Me Anything session on Reddit, Gates lauded South Korea's tracking system, which uses a smartphone app to gather information about COVID-19 spread. He said that, although thousands of tests are being offered per day at the University of Washington in Seattle, for example, ""no one is connected to a national tracking system"" and that ""whenever there is a positive test it should be seen to understand where the disease is and whether we need to strengthen the social distancing."" Gates has been interested in vaccinations and vaccination tracking, particularly in low-resource areas, for several years. He stepped down from Microsoft's board of directors on March 13, 2020. And, as we mentioned, MIT's research into a vaccination-related invisible ink program has been going on for several years as well. MIT published a study on its research on Dec. 18, 2019, in the journal Science Translational Medicine. The research was submitted to the journal in July 2019, and an MIT spokesperson told PolitiFact that it began back in 2016 years before the first cases of the virus were reported. The Gates Foundation told PolitiFact that it awarded a grant to MIT to improve the way childhood vaccinations are tracked; it had nothing to do with the 2019 coronavirus outbreak. Additional funding also came from the National Cancer Institute. ""The researchers are exploring storing data in a pattern of dye, invisible to the naked eye, that is delivered under the skin at the same time as the vaccine. The technology is currently in the proof-of-concept phase,"" the foundation told PolitiFact in an email. ""If successful, governments could elect to incorporate this kind of tool in their immunization programs in place of, or in addition to, their current methods of tracking vaccinations."" None of the research is specific to America, as the Instagram post suggests. Nor is it tied specifically to COVID-19. An online post says that Bill Gates is pushing tracking bracelets and invisible tattoos to monitor Americans during the novel coronavirus pandemic. We find no evidence that Gates has supported the concept of ""tracking bracelets."" His foundation awarded a grant to MIT to study invisible dyes that could accompany vaccines to keep track of vaccinations in developing countries. But this research began in 2016, and there is no evidence that it has anything to do with the current coronavirus pandemic, or to ""monitor"" Americans specifically. This post takes a small kernel of truth and frames it in a way that gives a misleading impression." Claim: Instagram posts Says "Bill Gates and other globalists, in collaboration with pharmaceutical companies, are reportedly working to push tracking bracelets and 'invisible tattoos' to monitor Americans during an impending lockdown."
0