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: One student was diagnosed with a variant of the disease on Oct. 24, and a second was diagnosed this past weekend. Both students are in stable condition and health workers are contacting people who may have been in touch with the infected students. Meningitis, which can cause inflammation around the brain and spinal cord, is typically caused by one of five variants one of which had no vaccine until recently and isn't covered under standard college vaccinations. UMass is offering the vaccination by appointment. University health officials are advising students to avoid contact with saliva, which can spread the disease.

A: UMass Amherst officials say 2 students have meningitis.
****
Q: Although there was no discussion of costs, the article was clear in stating that vaccines arefor the most partin an early stage of development, so this omission is understandable. We wanted to seebetter coverage of the data here. The story leads with an anecdote about a patient who kicked a pack-a-day smoking habit after treatment with a nicotinevaccine in a study. And later,the story says that smokers who received thatvaccine were "about three times as likely to be off cigarettes 44 weeks after vaccination than subjects given a placebo."The story should have providedthe absolute rates of success reported in the study, which were only 16% for the treatment group compared with 6% for the placebo group, according to theheart.org. Elsewhere,the storydescribes an experimental anticocaine vaccine that was apparently very effective in a mouse study; it could have reported onphase II human data that is available for theTA-CDanticocaine vaccine that was also mentioned in the story. These data again suggest that only a minority of patientsmay benefit from the use of anti-addictionvaccines. The story states that "clinical trials have so far revealed no significant side effects" from vaccine treatments. However, we think the story should have included an important caveat: that these are early stagetrials involving small numbers of patients thatcan't provideconclusive evidence of safety. In addition, it should be recognized that addictions arechronic conditions and these vaccine treatments are likely to be long-term as well. Therefore, longer-term adverse effects should be expected, especially for a treatment that interferes with molecules closely related to the body's natural chemical messengers. The story could have been a bit more circumspect on this point. The promise of this new vaccine technology is counterbalanced by coverage of the uncertainties. The story gives appropriate weightto thedisappointing resultsreported in a number of early clinical studies, noting: "Failures have so far outnumbered successes." The story adds thateven in one of the successful vaccine studies, the benefitswere not as robust as those seen with a smoking cessation drug that is already on the market. There also is no prospect for a vaccine to treat alcoholism, according to the story. The article should have been more direct about the limitations of mouse research, and there was not enough detailon thedata publishedin the various studies reported on (a deficiency we address under the "Benefits" criterion). However, since the story was trying to present a broad overview of happenings in the field and wasn't attempting to summarize any particular study, we'll give the benefit of the doubt here and award a satisfactory. The story didn't exaggerate the effects ofsubstanceabusedisorders or otherwise engage in disease-mongering. The sourcing of this story was good. We hear fromacademics, government researchers, and industry executives. Their voices provide balance and give texture to the coverage. It should be noted, however, that most of these experts have a vested interest in the field or the success of a particular treatment, whether because of industry ties or because they are leading experiments ona particular approach. Even the government experts might be biased by their provision of significant financial support for research in this area. It would have been nice to heara comment about the vaccines from someonewho is certifiably free of all potential conflicts. But we can't justify docking pointssince there is no voice that is overly enthusiastic about the concept. The story compares the potential of vaccines with the benefits of existing medications for addictionand notes that theavailable drugs might work better. We would liketo haveseen more ink givento the role ofbehavioralapproaches in the management of addiction, which are supported by considerable evidence. However,the story does acknowledgethatvaccines "would likely be used alongside psychological therapy."We'll call it good enough for a satisfactory. The article helpfully states that "It could be years, if ever, before any vaccines to treat addiction reach the market." The article does a good job of describing how far along the various experimental vaccines mentioned in the article are in their development. Although the story could haveprovided more background on the history ofanti-addiction vaccines (aheroin vaccine was explored in the 1970s), the treatments being explored now are different fromanything currently available. So we don't think this story overstates thenoveltyof the research. This story is not based on a news release.

A: Quest for Vaccines to Treat Addiction
****
Q: The lung cancer rate dropped by 2.6 percent per year among men and 1.1 percent per year among women, between 2005 and 2009, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found, using the most recent available data. The largest decline was seen in adults aged 35 to 44, with a 6.4 percent drop per year among men and a 5.9 percent decrease for women in that age group, the study said. "This is a big deal," said Clifford Hudis, president of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. But Hudis added that there is still much more work to be done to reduce smoking given all the health problems it creates in addition to lung cancer. More than half of American men and over a third of women were smokers on January 11, 1964, when Dr. Luther Terry delivered the Surgeon General's Report on Smoking and Health outlining the links between tobacco use, lung cancer and death. Since the surgeon general's 1964 report, the prevalence of smoking by U.S. adults has been cut by half, the CDC said. "I'm not satisfied with reducing smoking," Hudis said. "It should be eliminated. There's no upside to it." Up to 90 percent of lung cancer cases are linked to cigarette smoking and second-hand smoke, the CDC said. The CDC, whose officials call the fight to reduce tobacco use a "winnable battle," promotes increased funding for anti-smoking campaigns. In 2007, the CDC recommended spending $3.7 billion on state-level anti-smoking campaigns. But in 2010, states spent $640 million, only 2.4 percent of the money they received from settlements in lawsuits against tobacco companies, the CDC said. More than half of American men and over a third of women were smokers on January 11, 1964, when Dr. Luther Terry delivered the first Surgeon General's Report on Smoking and Health outlining the links between tobacco use, lung cancer and death.

A:
Lung cancer rates decline for U.S. men, women: study.
****