instruction:
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.
question:
Bottles of Corona beer speed past a worker in the bottling line of Mexico City's Modelo brewery, May 19, 2004. REUTERS/Andrew Winning He may be in for worse than a surprise: a nasty skin reaction that one doctor is calling "Mexican beer dermatitis." A substance in lime juice, if left on the skin in the sun, can cause the skin to become discolored, as if by poison ivy or a jellyfish sting and the marks can last for months, reports Scott Flugman in the Archives of Dermatology. Mexican beers, particularly Corona, are typically served with a lime slice wedged in the top of the bottle. The drinker shoves the lime into the bottle and holds his or her thumb over the bottle's mouth while turning the bottle over to mix in the juice. But if the drinker is not careful, the beer's carbonation can spray lime juice and beer all over his or her skin "especially in a patient who is shirtless by a beach or pool," wrote Flugman, a dermatologist in New York. The resulting reaction is due to a substance called psoralen, used to make the skin more sensitive to a wavelength of ultraviolet light, UV-A, used to treat certain skin conditions. Lemons contain psoralens too, but not as strong. "It's just a cosmetic issue," Flugman told Reuters Health, though he said the discoloration most frequently in people like bartenders who work outdoors with limes may take an emotional toll. "People are worried that it's something serious. You might have some brown spots you're been looking at for a few months," he said. Olive-skinned Caucasians may be especially susceptible. No ties have been shown between the reaction and skin cancer, said Flugman, who added that he sees two or three cases a year. They are often mystified why a dermatologist is asking them if they've recently drunk Mexican beer. His advice? "If you do this and you spritz the beer or the lime, just wash it off. Don't leave it on there and sit out in the sun," he said. Or, if you are disinclined to get up for a while, "throw a towel over it."
answer:
Hold the lime with Corona, may cause skin reaction.

question:
But one theory about the epic undertaking reserves a special place for a nearby river, now known as the Frome, that may have served as a conduit for ferrying some of the smaller megaliths toward the site on rafts. Today, the placid waterway is once again playing a supporting role in a grand vision, albeit one its architects want to etch in the statute books, not in stone. Frome, a market town in the county of Somerset, is petitioning the British government to grant the River Frome "legal personhood" in effect, giving it human rights. In throwing down this gauntlet, the town has joined a global "rights of nature" movement linking river basins in New Zealand to rainforests in South America and towns in the U.S. Midwest. In each case, communities are reimagining ways to harness the law to defend the Earth's living tissues, and the places they call home. Some have dubbed it Mother Earth's MeToo moment. In practical terms, supporters hope that granting the Frome rights will give lawyers a new avenue to seek redress whenever its waters are sullied by runoff from pig and dairy farms or overflowing sewers. Last month, one of the River Frome's tributaries turned an unnatural shade of neon blue highlighting wider concerns over water quality in British rivers. But Peter Macfadyen, an undertaker who redrew Frome's political map by leading a band of independent candidates to take over the town council, wants to do more than protect one river. In an era of accelerating climate change, Macfadyen and his allies see their quest as part of a struggle to reset the balance between nature and the modern world. "This is much bigger than just wanting to punish people for doing something wrong," said Macfadyen, who also served as Frome's mayor. "It's about trying to change a mindset about the environment in which we live." Supporters of the nature's rights movement see Frome as the first test case for the concept in Europe. Nevertheless, the town has been waiting for months for the government to respond. And just as critics have questioned the effectiveness of campaigns in other countries, some in Frome have their doubts. Neil Howlett, a lawyer who lives by the river in Frome, says he backs many of the community-building steps taken by Macfadyen and other independent local politicians. But he sees the council's vision for a "river's rights" bylaw as a distraction. "Having a law which is completely outside the cultural basis of the society in which you pass the law doesn't make for law that works," Howlett said. "It's lovely as an idea. But it's only lovely as an idea." "PROGRAMMED FOR SELF-DESTRUCTION" Although indigenous peoples have long shared the intuition that rivers, mountains and lakes are in some sense living, sentient beings, American legal scholar Christopher Stone framed the idea in contemporary legal terms. In his 1972 book, "Should Trees Have Standing?", Stone argued that voiceless natural features would be best protected by granting them the kinds of legal protections and access to courts usually reserved for two-legged plaintiffs. The argument was a novel twist on the long-established principle in the United States that companies can enjoy "legal personality" to distinguish their legal obligations from those of their directors and shareholders. The idea is starting to spread. Campaigners won what is hailed as the first "rights of nature" courtroom victory in Ecuador in 2011 when judges stopped a road-widening project from dumping gravel in the Vilcabamba River. Around the same time, Bolivia enshrined a far-reaching vision of nature's rights in a statute known as "The Law of the Rights of Mother Earth." In 2017, New Zealand's parliament became the first legislature to acknowledge a river's legal personhood when it passed a bill recognising the rights of the Whanganui River as an "indivisible and living whole." That same year, a high court in India declared the Ganga and Yamuna rivers legal entities along with two Himalayan glaciers and their meadows, waterfalls and forests. Colombia's constitutional court made a similar move for the Atrato River basin, where riparian communities face illegal gold mining and paramilitary violence. This summer, Bangladesh recognised the rights of all its rivers. Although legal systems in many developing countries were implanted during colonial times, nature's rights campaigns in Europe and North America represents a role reversal in which "eco-cratic" indigenous worldviews are enjoying a revival. Advocates see this new "Earth jurisprudence" as a skeleton key to unlock a shift away from the endless pursuit of economic growth, regardless of the ecological consequences. "The current system is programmed for self-destruction, and the legal system is the enabler," said Mumta Ito, a lawyer and founder of Nature's Rights, a Scotland-based advocacy group, which is advising Frome town council. "The only way we'll be able to change things is by creating a new operating system with nature's rights at its core." Although the quest to win legal personhood for the River Frome was started barely a year ago, the roots of the campaign stretch back to a meeting at the Griffin pub in Frome one evening in 2011. Fed up with party divisions hobbling the town council, Macfadyen and a group of like-minded collaborators resolved to stand as independents at the next elections. Nestling in a shallow bowl of hills and noted for picturesque cobbled lanes, Frome has long been a magnet for free thinkers. But in a town of almost 27,000 people, the mavericks had never attempted a takeover. Surprising even themselves, the Independents for Frome movement won 10 seats on the 17-seat council with their model of a new participatory form of decision-making. In 2015, the Independents swept all 17 seats, prompting the Frome Times to dub the town "The People's Republic of Frome." In elections this May, independents won almost 80% of the vote. On a recent afternoon, Macfadyen led Reuters on a tour of some council-backed projects grouped loosely along the river, whose green-brown waters curve gently through the town. Wildflowers, nettles and brambles had been deliberately allowed to run riot on its steep, shaded banks. Near the bridge in the town centre, Frome's "share shop" allows people to rent items such as power tools, musical instruments or camping gear at low rates. Nearby, a community fridge means nobody's excess fresh vegetables need go to waste. The town council also backed a new renewable energy cooperative, which raised 300,000 from locals to put solar panels on buildings such as the health centre and football club. Macfadyen laid out step-by step instructions for running a town council in his book "Flatpack Democracy" a play on the idea that thriving localism could be replicated at scale like self-assembly furniture. Inspired by Frome's example, independents have taken over more than 20 other town councils and have strong representation on another 20, Macfadyen says. Jamie Kelsey Fry, a contributing editor at the New Internationalist magazine, co-founded a similar initiative in the neighbouring county of Devon. He sees the campaigns as part of a "new municipalism" movement reshaping politics in cities as diverse as Barcelona in Spain, Jackson in Mississippi and Valparaiso in Chile their organisers often driven at least in part by concerns over climate change. "These groups are going to become exceptionally valuable, because as society functioning in its normal, business-as-usual way begins to collapse, we're going to have to be in a position to look after ourselves," Kelsey Fry said. Although the rights of nature movement is growing fast, turning its aspirations into effective restraints on commercial interests remains a challenge. In the United States, the city of Toledo, Ohio, voted in February to amend its charter to state that the giant Lake Erie, plagued by toxic algae blooms, had a right to "exist, flourish, and naturally evolve." This summer, state lawmakers quashed the move, saying nature did not have appropriate standing. In the case of Frome, legal practitioners would be astonished if the government approves the town's draft bylaw, partly because there are already laws protecting the river. For example, in 2017, a court in the nearby city of Bath fined a Somerset farmer 22,000 for allowing slurry to spill into the water. The contamination had turned the River Frome brown and foul-smelling and killed at least 1,700 fish. Frome town council said the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government informed it last week that a decision on its application was still pending. The ministry did not respond to a request for comment. With the world's water bodies facing growing pressure from the extremes of heat, drought and rainfall driven by climate change, Macfadyen argues that any initiative that helps people to look at nature with fresh eyes is worthwhile. "We're in the situation we're in because we've misunderstood our position in the ecosystem," Macfadyen said. "And unfortunately, we were wrong. We can't do what we like. If we pour poison over everything, it comes back to bite us."
answer:
Mother Earth's MeToo moment: English town joins campaign for 'nature's rights'.

question:
"Gov. Gretchen Whitmer's stay-at-home orders prompted conservatives to organize protests, but Whitmer said she will base decisions on how and when to relax Michigan's social distancing guidelines on facts and science. At a press conference April 15, Whitmer said that the protests where people gathered without masks in close proximity ""may have just created a need to lengthen it, which is something that we're trying to avoid at all costs."" Whitmer said she is working with experts in health care and other sectors to create a data-driven approach to reopening the state. ""I want to be very clear that our decision to re-engage sectors is going to be based on the best facts and the best science, and what facts and science have told us is that re-engaging our state too soon or too fast will lead to a second wave of COVID-19 in Michigan,"" she said. ""During the flu pandemic of 1918, some cities lifted social distancing measures too fast, too soon, and created a second wave of pandemic."" Whitmer said that as a result of lifting social distancing measures too fast in 1918, many cities had to revert to quarantines and ""suffered a lot of additional deaths."" We will explain the source of her data, which comes from an academic paper in 2007. The influenza pandemic of 1918 spread worldwide and killed at least 50 million people, including about 675,000 in the United States. Since there was no vaccine for the virus and no antibiotics to treat secondary bacterial infections, control efforts were largely limited to social distancing and quarantines, which were applied unevenly. During her press conference, Whitmer pointed to a chart by National Geographic, which displayed the findings of a 2007 study about the death rates in 43 cities during the 1918 pandemic. The study was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association and written by researchers from the University of Michigan Medical School and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Two of the authors summarized their findings in the Washington Post in April. ""The experience of 1918 also reminds us that early, layered (i.e., more than one at the same time) and lengthy mitigation measures are the best strategy. For social distancing to work, it must be sweeping and enforced across a wide swath of the community,"" wrote Howard Markel and J. Alexander Navarro. The researchers examined social distancing in 43 cities during about 24 weeks in 1918-19. Public gathering bans typically meant the closure of saloons, public entertainment venues and sporting events. Indoor gatherings were banned or moved outdoors. Researchers found that cities that implemented social distancing in a timely and comprehensive manner and sustained those rules suffered the least. St. Louis, for example, implemented a relatively early, layered strategy that included school closures and the cancellation of public gatherings. It sustained those interventions for about 10 weeks and did not experience nearly as harmful an outbreak as 36 other communities. Conversely, Philadelphia held a massive Liberty Bond Parade to bolster the World War I effort. That led to a spike of thousands of flu cases within days. In Atlanta, the mayor sided with the business community and ended closures after three weeks, despite objections from the board of health. The epidemic raged in Atlanta. Researchers documented public pressure to end social distancing as soon as the flu seemed to peak and ebb. Cities then lifted the measures, and people lined up for movies and packed into dance halls and shopping districts. ""The result? Cases and deaths resurged. Most cities closed their schools once again,"" the researchers wrote. Researchers noted caveats including that there could be errors in the historical record and the difficulties in interpreting data from 90 years ago. Navarro, one of the study authors, told PolitiFact that the study shows that communities must be very careful about removing social distancing restrictions too soon. Social distancing flattens the curve, but it doesn't end the epidemic. It ends when a community reaches hard immunity through vaccine or antibody reaction from infection. A separate paper published in 2007 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciencesexamined 17 U.S. cities during the flu pandemic. It found that cities in which interventions were implemented early had peak death rates about 50% lower than those that did not. It concluded that social distancing and other measures ""can significantly reduce influenza transmission, but that viral spread will be renewed upon relaxation of such measures."" It's tricky to compare lifting restrictions ""too early"" with ""holding them for longer,"" said Marc Lipsitch, a Harvard epidemiologist and one of the co-authors of the National Academy of Sciences paper. In either case, there will be some amount of resurgence once social distancing is let up. A recent paper he co-authored in Science suggested that a single period of distancing could not permanently solve the problem; prolonged or intermittent social distancing may be necessary into 2022. ""So overall, the problem is that it's not short vs. long, but single vs. repeated (or some other strategy such as a vaccine),"" he told PolitiFact. On April 15, President Donald Trump said he thinks some states can open up before May 1. Many scientists have warned that ending the interventions prematurely will lead to more deaths. Dr Anthony Fauci, the country's top infectious disease expert, told the Associated Press on April 14 that the U.S. doesn't yet have the contact tracing and testing needed to reopen the economy. He said Trump's goal was a ""bit overly optimistic"" for parts of the country. ""I'll guarantee you, once you start pulling back there will be infections. It's how you deal with the infections that's going count,"" Fauci told the AP. Whitmer said, ""During the flu pandemic of 1918, some cities lifted social distancing measures too fast, too soon, and created a second wave of pandemic."" Typically, when social distancing ends, there is a second wave. The goal is to make the second wave as small as possible. Whitmer pointed to research from the University of Michigan in 2007 that found after social distancing rules ended in many cities, cases and deaths surged."
answer:
"During the flu pandemic of 1918, some cities lifted social distancing measures too fast, too soon, and created a second wave of pandemic."