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: The story should have stated how much CAD costs per mammogram, and how that compares to the costs of a radiologist or technician providing a second reading of the images. The story quotes a researcher saying cost-effectiveness needs to be studied. This should have triggered additional reporting comparing costs. The story says Medicare pays $15 per CAD reading, but this does not indicate whether this covers costs. The story does a good job of describing the methodology and the outcomes in terms readers can understand. The study results showed that the recall ratesthe percentage of women brought back for a second mammogramwas signficantly higher with CAD than with double readings (3.9 percent vs. 3.5 percent). Yet CAD discovered no more cancers. These additional mammograms without more accurate diagnosis can produce increased anxiety and potentially more biopsies. The report should have mentioned this. This news report is based on a peer-reviewed study published in a top-tier medical journal. The underlying study itself is a randomized, blinded trial involving about 30,000 women. The story does nothing to exaggerate either the prevalence or severity of breast cancer, or the benefits of CAD. The reporter quotes the article itself, the lead author, a breast cancer clinician at a major teaching hospital, a medical society's breast cancer expert, and a clinician who uses CAD in his practice. This is excellent sourcing. The story reports the study's funding, as well as two of the researchers' links to CAD makers. The story clearly compares the options of having two human readers of mammograms against one reader using CAD. Yet the reporter fails to compare the value of these methods with those when a single human reader is used, which remains the common practice in the U.S. The study reports that double readings have been shown to be 4 to 14 percent more effective in detecting cancers than single readings, with a recent meta-analysis showing a 10 percent advantage to double reading. This context would have been very valuable, to demonstrate that U.S. diagnostic practices miss a lot of cancers. The story states that computer-aided dectection (CAD) of breast cancer is used for about a third of mammograms in the U.S. This implies availability at more specialized facilities and teaching hospitals. A more direct statement of this would have been useful. But the story meets minimum standards under this criterion. The story says CAD is used for about one-third of mammograms in the U.S. and is likely to be used more as digital imaging becomes more widespread. The report does not appear to draw on the press release.

A: Computers help docs spot breast cancer on X-rays
****
Q: Scientists dubbed the startling findings "immune amnesia." The body can rebuild those defenses but it could take years. And with measles on the rise, "it should be a scary phenomenon," said Dr. Michael Mina of Harvard's school of public health, lead author of research published Thursday in the journal Science. "This goes under the radar" because doctors wouldn't necessarily connect a child's pneumonia to measles they suffered a year earlier, Mina explained. "But would they have gotten it if they hadn't gotten measles?" The Harvard team analyzed blood samples taken from 77 children before and after a measles outbreak in an unvaccinated community in the Netherlands. They looked for antibodies, which remember viruses and bacteria they encounter to guard against a repeat infection. After recovering from measles, the youngsters were left with plenty of antibodies against that virus but ones they'd previously harbored against other germs had plummeted. In the most severe cases, "they're just as vulnerable as if they were infants," said study senior author Stephen Elledge, a Harvard geneticist. Elledge is paid by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, which also supports AP's Health & Science Department. A separate study, published Thursday in Science Immunology, supported the findings. Researchers from Britain's Wellcome Sanger Institute used the Dutch blood samples to genetically test antibody-producing cells, and concluded measles is eliminating enough to re-set the immune system to a baby-like state. If protection against the misery and sometimes life-threatening effects of measles isn't enough reason to vaccinate children, specialists said the two studies offer a powerful new rationale. "There really are profound gaps and holes" in someone's immunity after measles, said Dr. Anthony Fauci of the U.S. National Institutes of Health, which helped fund the Harvard work. "You ultimately recover but after a year or two or sometimes more." "It's doubly important to vaccinate children," agreed Dr. Mark Mulligan of NYU Langone Health, who wasn't involved with the new research. "It's a vaccine that protects against the specific target, measles virus, but also against immune suppression." Measles is one of the world's most contagious viruses, able to spread through coughs and sneezes for four days before someone develops the characteristic rash. It sometimes leaves children with brain damage or hearing loss, and while deaths are rare in the U.S., measles killed 110,000 people globally in 2017. The vaccine offers powerful protection but a lack of access means measles remains rampant in many lower-income countries. Even the U.S., where most children are immunized, has seen a resurgence fueled by outbreaks in unvaccinated communities that in turn threaten people too young or sick to be immunized. So far this year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has counted more than 1,200 U.S. measles cases, the most since 1992. Doctors have long known that people temporarily experience weakened immunity after measles. Using decades of health records, Mina previously reported that child deaths from other infections jumped after a measles outbreak, increases that lasted two or three years. But no one knew why, until the new study. The Dutch children started out pretty healthy: Technology developed in Elledge's lab found antibodies in their blood against typical childhood germs. But two months after recovering from measles, the children had lost on average 20 percent of their usual antibody mix. Some lost up to 70 percent of protection against specific bugs, limiting their ability to respond if they encounter that germ again. Importantly, researchers didn't find loss of antibodies in "control" populations that didn't get infected with measles or in children after they received the measles vaccine. ___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

A: Measles saps kids' ability to fight other germs.
****
Q: The Texas woman's name is Cathy Flanders and she has been on a crusade to bring the problem of indoor pollution from candles to the forefront. She has filed a lawsuit against the store that sold her candles which she says resulted in toxic levels of lead in her home and with serious medical consequences on her family. Regardless of the merits of her case, it is true that indoor pollution from certain kinds of candles is becoming a focus of research and is one of the hot topics right now among professionals concerned with health issues in the home. Not all the researchers are focused on lead and there are some who say they feel the danger from lead is reduced by the fact that U.S. candle makers have not used lead in candles for more than 25 years. There is increased focus on what researchers say is a significant contribution of candles to soot residue in buildings, more than has previously been realized, and to what extent that soot can contribute to health problems. While that is being studied, pollution experts recommend choosing candles from U.S. manufacturers that are made of hard wax, have low aromatic properties, burn with a low, even flame and with wicks that burn down evenly with the rest of the candle. They also recommend keeping burning candles out of drafts and not allowing an extinguished candle to continue emitting smoke. For more information: CNN Article about Cathy Flanders Article about Black Soot in the Home from the Environmental Illness Society of Canada Comments

A:
An email is making the rounds that talks about a woman in Texas whose family has experienced a variety of health problems which she says are due to the lead content of some candles. The email warns that burning candles in the home can lead to health problems.
****