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.

[Q]: P&G, with roughly $68 billion in annual revenue, said it has invested millions in creating and testing refills for detergents over the years and is now trying to push in to mainstream beauty and body care refills which are virtually unheard of. It recently began offering some Olay face-cream jars with refill pouches on Olay.com, telling Reuters it has plans to expand the sales of the pouches in Europe early next year. "We're learning on our legs so I don't know that we're in a position to say, 'Hey, here's the magic to selling refills,'" P&G spokesman Damon Jones said. Beauty products retailer The Body Shop, owned by Brazil's Natura Cosmeticos SA NATU3.SA, says it plans to roll out "refill stations" in its stores globally next year, allowing shoppers to buy reusable metal containers to fill with Body Shop shower gels or creams. The company had offered refills at its stores in the early 1990s, but discontinued them in 2003, citing a lack of consumer demand. Unilever, which has set targets for reducing and recycling plastic by 2025, in October announced the planned launch of "refill sticks" of deodorants under its Dove line of personal care products on Loopstore.com. The website, operated by recycling company TerraCycle, offers consumers the chance to buy some household products in ultra-durable packaging with refills delivered to their doors, milkman-style. Across the consumer goods industry, results for refillable products have been mixed so far as many shoppers are far too set in their ways to be easily weaned from living in a throwaway culture. While refills are less expensive to purchase - generally priced at 20% to 30% less per item than the containers they are aimed to replenish, according to Unilever - shoppers have so far, for the most part, failed to snap them up, the companies said. SC Johnson & Son Inc, marketer of Windex and Pledge, said refills and concentrates so far have not played well with either Americans or Europeans over the decade they have been offered, with unit sales of such products pretty much flat. It pulled concentrated refills for Shout stain remover off the shelves because they were not selling very well. In 2010, Unilever put 20-liter tanks to dispense detergents in Walmart Inc's (WMT.N) British supermarket chain Asda, and provided flexible pouches for customers to refill. But with leaky machines, safety and maintenance problems and the high costs of upkeep, Unilever said the tests fell short of expectations. Asda was also unhappy because the tanks occupied a lot of space. "None of them sell very well it is a convenience issue," SC Johnson CEO Fisk Johnson told Reuters. Johnson said some people find it painstaking to wash and refill bottles themselves while others worry that smaller bottles filled with concentrates are less "bang-for-your-buck" than the larger ones they have used for years. Still, the privately held company said it was expanding its refill offerings this year to address concerns surrounding plastic waste and is also testing refill stations for cleaning products with UK retailer Waitrose, owned by Britain's John Lewis [JLPLC.UL]. The Waitrose tests are showing the first signs of progress in refill sales, Johnson said, and the company is now thinking of expanding the project. Even if consumers are comfortable using refills for some household goods, it is more complicated to sell them for products like Pantene shampoo and Olay creams, P&G spokesman Jones said. For instance, with beauty products, the look and feel of packaging is a big factor in creating and maintaining customer loyalty, while delivering an environmental benefit, he said. Some shoppers say they want to buy refillable products, but that the offerings are not available at many stores. Earlier this year, dozens of consumers took to social media to urge The Body Shop to bring back its refill counters. "Refill, refill, refill!" Twitter user @JaiChipperfield said on July 22, joining a thread in which several other shoppers demanded the return of refills. "Seems to me that judging by these comments your customers want to see the return of refills," @JaiChipperfield added. "Me too, it would be brilliant to see that return." The Body Shop eventually responded to those pleas. "Now with the renewed focus on sustainability, we believe it is the right time to return with it," Body Shop spokeswoman Lucy Muircroft told Reuters this week.
[A]: Procter & Gamble, rivals take refills into beauty aisle.

[Q]: The story does not describe the costs of uterine artery embolization or how they compare to costs of surgery. The cost of UAE is quite high and for some women may not be covered by insurance. The story provides adequate quantification of some of the most important things for consumers to know, such as the fact that after a year, there were no differences in the quality of life of the women assigned to uterine artery embolization compared to those assigned to surgery and that 13% of those who underwent UAEhad a repeat hospitalization, mostlyfor surgical intervention because of failure of UAE to achieve the desired results. The story could have provided more quantification of other pieces of information that women would want to know, such as length of hospital stay, time to return to work, or risk of serious adverse events. The story does mention some of the potential harms of uterine artery embolization, such as the need for repeat procedures for treatment of recurrent symptoms and the fact that there are questions aboutsafety of pregnancy after the procedure. The story should have also mentioned the potential for ovarian failure, causing infertility, infection, delayed complications and a small risk of emergency hysterectomy. The story adequately describes the design of the current study. The story accurately describes the prevalence and symptoms of uterine fibroids. The story only uses quotes from the original article and accompanying editorial. It doesn't appear that the authors were even interviewed. The story should have quoted other clinicians/researchers who were not related to the study who could have provided some perspective on what this new information means for clinical practice. The story does mention alternative options such as myomectomy (surgical removal of the fibroids), hysterectomy (surgical removal of the uterus) in addition to uterine artery embolization. The story could have mentioned other treatments such as watchful waiting, pain medications orbirth control pills. The story does not state whether uterine artery embolization (UAE) is available and if so, how widely. And availability is a real issue. It requires expertise in interventional vascular radiology and an interest in the female pelvic anatomy. Facilities offering the procedure would need strong links between gynecologists and radiologists to provide coordinated assessment and care. This is not explained in the piece. The story implies that uterine artery embolization is a new procedure. The story could have mentioned that the procedure has been performed for more than 10 years in Europe and the US, although it has been limited to mostly academic hospitals. There is no way to know if the story relied on a press release as the sole source of information, although it is noteworthy that the story only uses quotes lifted from the published study and from an accompanying editorial. It doesn't appear that these people were actually interviewed.
[A]: Treating fibroids without surgery

[Q]: "Calls to strengthen California's gun laws intensified this week after the nation's deadliest mass shooting in history at an Orlando nightclub. State lawmakers described the tragedy as a call to action to strengthen California's firearm regulations, considered among the toughest in America. In November,voters in the state will likely be asked to make those laws even tougher, by approving the Safety For All Initiative. That measure is led by Democratic Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom and is pending signature verification. On the initiative's website, it claims: ""More than 32,000 Americans lose their lives to gun violence each year."" The statement is followed by the message: ""Gun Violence Is Not Inevitable. The Power To Save Lives Is In Our Hands: Together We Can Keep Our Communities Safe."" We wondered about the eye-popping 32,000 figure and whether any context was missing. A screenshot of SafetyForAll.com's homepage shows the claim about32,000 Americans losing their lives to gun violence each year. Our research Much of the Safety For All Initiative is designed to make it more difficult for individuals to obtain ammunition for assault-style weapons, such as those used in recent mass shootings in San Bernardino and Orlando. Here's what the measure would do, if approved by voters: Require instant background checks for ammunition purchases; strengthen checks for gun purchases and ban the possession of large, detachable military-style magazines; and require the immediate surrender of firearms for people convicted of serious and violent crimes. A spokeswoman for the initiative pointed us to figures from the Centers For Disease Control and Prevention. They show nearly 33,000 gun deaths, on average, from 2010 through 2014 in the United States. Of those, more than 62 percent resulted from suicides by guns -- something not mentioned on the Safety For All website. There's no mention of suicide by guns or suicide prevention efforts in the text of the measure, either. About 34 percent of the gun deaths are from homicides. The remaining four percent resulted from accidents, legal intervention or cases where intent was undetermined. We asked the initiative campaign about the large share of gun deaths from suicide. Dan Newman, a campaign strategist for the lieutenant governor, replied that ""treating ammo sales like guns and screening for dangerous mental illness, taking guns away from people legally prohibited from owning weapons, reporting lost and stolen guns and ammo these will all reduce gun violence of all kinds, from suicide to mass murder."" In October 2015, PolitiFact Texas checked a similar claim by Hillary Clinton, that ""We lose an average of 90 Americans every day because of guns."" That adds up to the CDC total of more than 32,000. They rated it . PolitiFact Texas pointed out that at least once, Clinton has clarified her figure by mentioning suicides; according to a post on her campaign website, she said: ""We lose between 88 and 92 Americans a day from gun violence homicides, suicides and accidents and we have to act."" Our ruling The Safety For All Initiative proposes stronger gun and ammunition restrictions in California. On its website, it says ""More than 32,000 Americans lose their lives to gun violence each year."" That sad statistic checks out, based on an examination of data from the Centers For Disease Control and Prevention. While the statement is accurate, it needs a key clarification that more than 60 percent of those gun deaths result from suicides. Much of the Safety For All Initiative is designed to make it more difficult for individuals to obtain ammunition for assault-style weapons, not typically associated with suicides. The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. PolitiFact California is fact-checking claims made by and about the November ballot measure campaigns. Contact us with suggestions for a fact-check at [emailprotected] or on Twitter @CAPolitiFact
[A]:
More than 32,000 Americans lose their lives to gun violence each year.