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.

Input: Consider Input: The story does not mention the cost of adult male circumcision outside of a clinical trail. It is also not clear whether this is a reimbursible procedure for adult males in the USA when no acute problem exists. The story appropriately describes the design of the two similar studies and provides both absolute and relative evidence that male circumcision reduces a man's risk of acquiring HIV via heterosexual sex. The story also mentions that the trials were stopped early because the benefit of male circumcision so significantly reduced the risk of acquiring HIV that it would be unethical to continue a trial in which uncircumcised men were not offered this protection. What is not mentioned is that the absolute number of avoided infections will be low in lower prevalence populations, so the risks of complications may outweigh the potential benefits for an individual of low risk. The story mentions potential harms of male circumcision such as mild infections. These are treatable and rare, especially when the procedure is performed by a trained medical professional. However, it is difficult to assess the negative consequences of surgery as no publication of adverse events is reviewable. It is also possible that side effects or negative consequences in the real-world (rather than a clinical trial) would be more common. The story doesn't explain whether there was a placebo arm of the study. Was there a sham operation? If so, were patients and evaluators blinded regarding treatment? This is a key indicator of study quality that is not commented upon. (Onecould positthat there is a reduced frequency of sexual encounters after this surgery, and this is the critical predictor of reduced acquisition of HIV, not the surgery itself.) The story does not engage in disease mongering. The story quotes an NIH official for perspective on the results of these studies. But since the NIH sponsored the study, he does have an interest in its outcome. It also quoted representatives of the World Health Organization and the Global AIDS Alliance. There are experts who would disagree with public health-related mass circumcision programs, for reasons both cultural and related to quality of life. The story mentions male circumcision as one method of reducing the transmission of HIV. But the story also mentions safer sex practices such as using condoms for better protection against HIV. The story reports on two large studies of male circumcision and reduced HIV in African heterosexual men. We are not told if these studies have been reviewed in a peer-reviewed journal or where they will be published. The results of these studies may be applicable regardless of geography: While more male infants are routinely circumcised in the U.S. than in Africa, this surgery is available for uncircumcised adult men in the U.S. who wish to reduce their risk of HIV transmission from heterosexual sex. Other protection against theHIV is still necessary. The story does note that this is a routine surgical procedure with few compilcations. What is stressed in the press release, but not the article, is that this procedure should only be performed by a medical professional who can also provide appropriate post-operative care during the healing period. Availability of safe circumcision and safe postoperative care is far from certain around the world. It is clear from the story that the link between male circumcision and HIV prevention was noted as long ago as the late 1980s. The story used several independent experts for comment, so it appears unlikely that it relied solely or largely on a news release.

Output: Two studies in Africa link male circumcision to lower risk of HIV

Input: Consider Input: As he did following last month's Las Vegas massacre of 58 people, Trump resisted any discussion of gun control during a news conference in Tokyo, where he was beginning his first presidential trip to Asia. Instead, Trump characterized the shooting as a "mental health problem at the highest level." Yet White House officials said Trump is unlikely to call for a specific policy response, as he did after last week's Islamic State group-inspired truck attack, which killed eight people in New York City. Devin Kelley, the Texas gunman, was discharged from the Air Force several years ago for assaulting his spouse and a child, the Air Force said. "This was a very based on preliminary reports a very deranged individual. A lot of problems over a long period of time," Trump said when asked about the shooting as he and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe held a joint news conference. Trump's more muted response to gun violence contrasts with his swift call for legislative and military action following the Oct. 31 truck attack in New York City. Within hours of a rental truck ramming through a crowded bicycle path and into a school bus, Trump called for Congress to "immediately" repeal the diversity visa lottery program that suspect Sayfullo Saipov, an Uzbekistan citizen, used to enter the country in 2010. Trump also claimed that the U.S. had already stepped up its retaliation against the Islamic State group after the attack. "We are hitting them 10 times harder," he said Friday. After the Las Vegas shooting, Trump and aides said it was inappropriate to consider a policy response while people were still grieving. Despite days later suggesting openness to outlawing the bump stock device that allowed Las Vegas shooter Stephen Paddock to fire at near-automatic rates, the Trump administration has shown no signs of urgency. "He has asked that that process be reviewed, and we're waiting on some of the details of that to take place," White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders said Oct. 27 when asked about bump stocks. "But a decision hasn't been finalized on that. " Trump, who supported gun control before reversing his position to enter the Republican presidential primary, courted the National Rifle Association's endorsement in 2016, and earlier this year became the first president in three decades to speak at the gun group's annual convention. In February, Trump signed legislation reversing an Obama-era regulation that would have made it harder for Americans with mental illnesses to buy a gun. Under the Obama rule, the Social Security Administration would have been required to send in the names of beneficiaries with mental impairments who needed a third party to manage their financial affairs. The rule would have affected an estimated 75,000 beneficiaries who would have been added to the national background check database. The attack happened in South Texas on Sunday morning when a man dressed in black tactical-style gear and armed with an assault rifle opened fire inside a Baptist church in a small community, killing 26 people and wounding 20 others in the deadliest mass shooting in state history. As Kelley left the scene, authorities said, he was confronted by an armed resident. Kelley later was found dead in his vehicle. Trump said, "Fortunately somebody else had a gun that was shooting in the opposite direction, otherwise it (wouldn't) have been as bad as it was. It would have been much worse." Investigators believe Kelley shot himself. ___ Associated Press writers Kevin Freking, Catherine Lucey and Darlene Superville in Washington contributed to this report.

Output: Trump: Texas mass shooting is about mental health, not guns.

Input: Consider Input: In February 2020, we received multiple inquiries from readers about the accuracy of reports which claimed that 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Mike Bloomberg had once said health care providers should not treat elderly patients with cancer due to the improbability of their recovery and as a means of prioritizing treatments for younger patients and stemming a rise in health care costs and hospital overcrowding. On Feb. 18, the right-leaning Daily Caller website published an article with the headline "Mike Bloomberg Said Elderly Cancer Patients Should Be Denied Treatment to Cut Costs." The article reported that: Billionaire and Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg said in a 2011 video that elderly cancer patients should be denied treatment in order to cut health care costs. "All of these costs keep going up, nobody wants to pay any more money, and at the rate we're going, health care is going to bankrupt us," said Bloomberg, who was then New York City's mayor. "'We've got to sit here and say which things we're going to do, and which things we're not, nobody wants to do that. Y'know, if you show up with prostate cancer, you're 95 years old, we should say, 'Go and enjoy. Have a nice [inaudible]. Live a long life. There's no cure, and we can't do anything.' If you're a young person, we should do something about it," Bloomberg said in the video. The same article was later republished by the National Interest magazine, and on Feb. 17 the right-leaning Red State blog published an article with a headline that stated "Bloomberg Suggests Denying Care to Elderly Patient With Cancer Because Not Cost Effective in 2011 Video." All three articles contained a 40-second video clip of Bloomberg sitting with a group of men, making the following remarks: [] And what things they can't fix right away. If you're bleeding, they'll stop the bleeding, if you need an X-Ray, you're going to have to wait. All of these costs keep going up, nobody wants to pay any more money, and at the rate we're going, health care is going to bankrupt us. So not only do we have a problem, it's going to bankrupt us, and we've got to sit here and say which things we're going to do and which things we're not. Nobody wants to do that. If you show up with prostate cancer and you're 95 years old, we should say 'Go and enjoy, have a nice [inaudible], lead a long life.' There's no cure and you can't do anything. If you're a young person, we should do something about it. Society's not willing to do that yet. So we're going to bankrupt us, and we're not looking at [] Bloomberg says we should deny healthcare to the elderly. "If you show up with cancer & you're 95 years old, we should say, Go & enjoy. There's no cure, we can't do anything. A young person, we should do something. Society's not willing to do that yet." pic.twitter.com/ZExr2Opghx Breaking911 (@Breaking911) February 17, 2020 Bloomberg undoubtedly made the remarks shown in that video. Although the 40-second clip was cut from longer footage, it was not doctored or further edited. Likewise, the video did not present the remarks in their full and proper context, but that did not serve to substantially alter or misrepresent the sense or meaning of what Bloomberg said. He did indeed propose that, in light of rising health care costs and hospital overcrowding in New York, health care providers should not attempt to treat elderly patients with terminal cancer, instead prioritizing younger patients with better prospects of recovery. The conversation shown in the video took place in February 2011. Bloomberg was "sitting shiva" (a Jewish mourning ritual) with the family of Rabbi Moshe Segal, a Brooklyn man who, according to his family, spent 73 hours in a New York emergency room before his death. Shimon Gifter, a Brooklyn photographer, recorded more than nine minutes of Bloomberg's visit and posted it to his YouTube channel. The full conversation can be viewed below. In the interest of providing as much context as possible, the following is an unedited transcript of the section of the discussion during which Bloomberg made his comments about treating elderly prostate cancer patients. The first few seconds shows Bloomberg entering the room, greeting and shaking hands with Segal's family members, some of whom thank him for his visit. Bloomberg, who was mayor of New York City at that time, sits and observes that the deceased was "young." A brother of Segal replies "Very young," then quickly segues into a conversation about health care: Segal's brother: I apologize for bringing up conditions in New York City during this [visit], but in light of my brother's death, I must tell you that we have, I know you know this, but from personal experience the overcrowding in the emergency rooms is insane. He was there for 73 hours [inaudible].
Output: In 2011 Mike Bloomberg said health care providers should not treat elderly prostate cancer patients in order to alleviate health care costs and overcrowding.