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 says gum costs ""a few pennies."" The study itself puts the cost at 4 cents per stick. The report does a good job of handling the statistics, with proper caveats. The story reports: The story does include a comment from a physician who warns that someone chewing gum after surgery may swallow air, which can create problems. The story explains that the findings come from an analysis of five studies, alluding to the fact that this was a meta-analysis. The story could have given a line about the quality of such evidence. The story does not exaggerate the complications following colon surgery. The story is based on a credible meta-analysis published in a top-shelf journal. The report includes comments from both a study co-author and a skeptical independent expert. The independent expert interviewed offers an alternative to chewing gum to speed recoveryintroducing liquids and then foods after surgery. He also recommends avoiding the use of pain killers to speed recovery time. The availability of sugarless chewing gum is not in dispute. The story makes no claims for the novelty of the treatment. By indicating the meta-analysis is based on five previous studies, the article implies it's been used before. The story does not draw excessively from the press release."

Output: Study: You can chew gum and get well at same time

Input: Consider Input: Navajo President Jonathan Nez made the announcement after a spike in deaths that he attributed to shifting traffic patterns after the city of Gallup recently shut down to outside visitors. That lockdown in northwestern New Mexico has since ended. On the Navajo Nation, residents will face citations, with potential fines and jail time, if they leave their homes during the lockdown, which starts Friday night and ends Monday around dawn. Nez urged people to listen and not pack their bags to head out of town during the lockdown. "Stay home, that's the bottom line. There's nothing wrong with staying home and taking care of your home, taking care of your family members," a frustrated Nez said Thursday. "We need to be able to recognize that what you do affects everybody." While the state of Arizona has loosened its restrictions on residents and businesses, the Navajo Nation has clamped down. The tribe already has daily nighttime curfews and requires people to wear masks when out in public. Government offices are closed or have limited services. The tribe's stay-at-home order has been extended to June 7, while Arizona's expired Friday. As of Friday, the tribe reported 127 deaths and 3,740 positive coronavirus cases since it first began tracking the figures. More than 500 people have recovered, tribal health officials said. There were no new deaths reported on Friday. Loretta Christensen, the chief medical officer for the Navajo-area Indian Health Service, said the reservation's three largest hospitals hit capacity last week in line with expected predictions and a significant number of patients were transferred off the reservation. "We're still getting cases across the area, but not at the velocity we did before," she said in a call with reporters Thursday. People who have tested positive but no longer need to be hospitalized are being encouraged to stay in one of three isolation centers set up in basketball gyms on and off the reservation to protect their families. Isolation tents also are available for those who would rather not leave their property, Christensen said. For most people, the new coronavirus causes mild or moderate symptoms, such as fever and cough that clear up in two to three weeks. For some, especially older adults and people with existing health problems, it can cause more severe illness, including pneumonia, and death. McKinley County, which includes Gallup, had been the hot spot on the reservation because of a recent outbreak at a detox center. Apache County in Arizona surpassed it with the most COVID-19 cases on the reservation, according to the Thursday figures. Apache County had 948 positive cases, while McKinley County had 928, tribal officials said. Navajo County in Arizona had 757 cases, and San Juan County in New Mexico had 428. Six other counties in Arizona, New Mexico and Utah had smaller numbers. The Navajo Nation's total cases include 99 that previously weren't included because they took longer than usual to verify. Tribal officials also cited jurisdictional challenges.

Output: Navajo Nation residents to be under strictest lockdown yet.

Input: Consider Input: This story doesn't discuss how much the vaccines cost. Therefore, readers can't compare the affordability of these vaccines to existing treatment options. The story says that four of the six patients had no cancer recurrence after 25 months in the first study, and in the second study, eight of the 13 patients remained tumor free after 23 months. But the studies cited are both phase I clinical trials designed to address safety, not efficacy. Any claims regarding the latter, especially given the limited number of subjects, would be highly speculative. Therefore, the headline is misleading. As noted in the final sentence of the article: "The next step will be to test these personalized vaccines in larger clinical trials to see if they are better than existing treatments, if they improve survival, and what their long-term side effects could be." We give the story credit for making an important point that waiting for the vaccine to be made might be detrimental to patients with advanced cancer. It says, "As the vaccine therapies are designed and generated specifically for each individual there is a lag time from enrollment to commencement of treatmentapproximately fourmonthswhich may be too long from some patients with advanced cancer." The story also notes that "Both vaccines were deemed safe" but it doesn't discuss any side effects that may have shown up in the trials. What happened to the five patients who were not tumor free at 25 months? The story does mention that more research is needed to identify potential harms. The story mentions the types of studies that were conducted and the size of the trials. Both of these factors impact the claims that can be made from the research. And that's important because the claims made seem out-sized compared to the very preliminary nature of the research. Phase I clinical trials are used to look at safety and side effects, not to make conclusions about the future success of personalized medicine. To its credit, the article includes a very important quote from one of the study authors that clarifies that no conclusions should be drawn from these preliminary studies: "It is still unknown whether these vaccines will extend the survival of cancer patients, or whether they are more effective than other recently developed immunotherapies. Additional clinical trials will be required to determine the utility of these individualised neoepitope vaccines." There is no evidence of disease mongering in this story. The story incorporates insights from a few independent sources. This gives readers additional information about how the findings should be interpreted. However, no information is provided about potential conflicts of interest. The story doesn't mention any other treatment options for melanoma by name but states that additional research is needed to determine the effectiveness of these vaccines in comparison to existing options. The story could have been improved by including information about the prevalence of cancer recurrence among cancer patients using existing treatment options such as surgery and chemotherapy. One of the trials described was conducted in people who had had surgery and no other treatment options. It would have been helpful to include the length of time to tumor recurrence in people who had not received any other interventions. Although not explicitly stated, most readers will understand that the vaccines are not currently available and have to undergo a lot more testing before they are available if ever. The article discusses what is and isn't new about the researchin this section: "Cancer vaccines that are personalized to the patientdesigned tohelp the immune system identify tumors as foreign bodies and destroy themhave been considered as a potential treatment for a number of years. But working out the unique mutations of each person's cancer, a time-consuming and complicated process, must first be identified before a vaccine can be developed for them." The story includes independent sources and does not appear to be reliant on a news release.
Output: CANCER BREAKTHROUGH: PERSONALIZED MELANOMA VACCINES 'SAFE AND EFFECTIVE' IN FIRST HUMAN CLINICAL TRIALS