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.
One example is below.
Q: "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."
A: Some appendicitis cases may not require 'emergency' surgery
Rationale: 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.
Q: The contaminant, a large complex molecule chemically similar to heparin, was detected in samples from a Chinese and a U.S. plant, both owned by Baxter's supplier, Wisconsin-based Scientific Protein Laboratories LLC (SPL). "At this point we don't know how the heparin-like compound got into the active pharmaceutical ingredient," Food and Drug Administration Deputy Commissioner Janet Woodcock told reporters on a conference call. "We don't yet have a direct causal link between the contaminant and the adverse events." Nineteen deaths have been reported in patients taking a version of heparin that appear related to the drug, though it is unknown if all of those patients were on Baxter's heparin or another product. The other major U.S. heparin supplier, APP Pharmaceuticals Inc, ramped up production to avoid a drug shortage after Baxter recalled most of its heparin products last week. Tests on APP's heparin have not turned up any contamination, Woodcock said. The FDA's foreign inspection process has been criticized for years as inadequate and those complaints were stoked when FDA officials acknowledged recently the agency never inspected the Chinese plant in question because of confusion over the company's Chinese name. FDA has not yet sifted through the 785 total adverse event reports in heparin patients to determine which are drug-related, Woodcock said. She cautioned that increased attention to the problem has led to an influx of side-effect reporting and that may not be related to the drug. Heparin is derived from pig intestines and is used in dialysis and heart procedures, among other surgeries, to avoid blood clots. Last week, the FDA said it found "objectionable conditions" at the plant. Facility owner Scientific Protein Labs in a statement said the contaminant theory is "speculation at this point" and that it is working with the FDA to determine the cause of the problems. FDA officials also don't know whether the contaminant was added intentionally or if it occurred as part of a natural biological process. "We still don't know whether this inadvertently got into the supply or whether it was actually added" deliberately, Woodcock said. Severe reactions such as anaphylaxis and low blood pressure are signs of dangerous allergic reactions related to heparin use. Earlier on Wednesday, Baxter, which has recalled most of its heparin blood thinning products, said it narrowed down possibilities for the root causes. Baxter ruled out its Cherry Hill, New Jersey, facility, where the drug is manufactured in a later step in the process, as a source of the problem.
A:
FDA says contaminant in some Baxter heparin.