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]: This is a sentence spoken by Trump, not a piece of modernist stream-of-consciousness pastiche. pic.twitter.com/vfhdKzg9Uy Stig Abell (@StigAbell) August 9, 2016 On 19 July 2016, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump appeared at Sun City's Magnolia Hall in South Carolina to deliver a noontime speech. The event was an otherwise unremarkable campaign stop, save for one portion of Trump's speech (transcribed below) in which he apparently started out attempting to criticize the nuclear deal that the Obama administration negotiated with Iran but veered into a minute-and-a-half long sentence that spanned his uncle's academic qualifications, his own education, Democrats' denying Republicans' credentials, the power of nuclear technology, the number of American prisoners freed by Iran in conjunction with the nuclear deal, and the adeptness of "Persian" negotiators (particularly women), before circling back to how the Iranians "killed us" in the nuclear deal: "Look, having nuclear my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart you know, if you're a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, OK, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I'm one of the smartest people anywhere in the world it's true! but when you're a conservative Republican they try oh, do they do a number that's why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune you know I have to give my like credentials all the time, because we're a little disadvantaged but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me it would have been so easy, and it's not as important as these lives are nuclear is so powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what's going to happen and he was right, who would have thought? but when you look at what's going on with the four prisoners now it used to be three, now it's four but when it was three and even now, I would have said it's all in the messenger; fellas, and it is fellas because, you know, they don't, they haven't figured that the women are smarter right now than the men, so, you know, it's gonna take them about another 150 years but the Persians are great negotiators, the Iranians are great negotiators, so, and they, they just killed, they just killed us, this is horrible." The one thing that puzzles us the most about this sprawling statement is this: Donald Trump's late uncle, Dr. John Trump, was indeed a renowned professor at MIT, and among his many notable contributions to science were developing methods for treating cancer through radiation and studying how to radiate deep tumors without harming nearby healthy tissue. But what did he reveal to his nephew about "nuclear" 35 years ago that it would have been surprising for anyone to think of?
[A]: A tweet reproduces a 90-second long sentence from a Donald Trump speech.

[Q]: The study tracked about 20,000 severely obese patients with Type 2 diabetes. Those who had weight loss surgery had a 40 percent lower chance of developing a heart attack or stroke in the five years following surgery compared to those who got usual care with diabetes medicines or insulin. For every 1,000 patients in the study who had surgery there were roughly 20 heart attacks or strokes compared to 40 such events per 1,000 who got regular care. More than 30 million Americans have diabetes, mostly Type 2 where the body loses the ability to produce or use insulin to turn food into energy. Other research has shown obesity surgery can reverse and even prevent diabetes. Taken together, it means doctors should discuss weight loss surgery more often, said study co-author Dr. David Arterburn of Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute in Seattle. Doctors usually mention insulin and pills, "but it's not always brought up that weight loss surgery is another available treatment option," Arterburn said. Researchers analyzed records from four U.S. health care systems: HealthPartners in Minnesota and Kaiser Permanente in Washington state, Northern California and Southern California. Results were published Tuesday in the Journal of the American Medical Association. The study can't prove cause and effect because patients weren't randomly assigned to get surgery. The researchers tried to match patients for gender, age, blood sugar levels and other factors. But other things they didn't account for could have contributed to the surgery patients' better results. Everyone in the study had a BMI, or body mass index, of at least 35. For instance, someone who is 5-foot-8-inches and weighs 230 pounds has a BMI of 35. Of the more than 5,300 who had surgery, most had gastric bypass, the most common type of stomach-shrinking operation. Some had gastric sleeve or gastric band procedures. The rest, nearly 15,000 people, had usual care. Obesity surgery can cost $20,000 to $25,000. Insurers are increasingly covering it, but some impose strict limits. The new findings suggest insurance coverage should be expanded for the right patients, Dr. Sayeed Ikramuddin of the University of Minnesota wrote in an accompanying editorial. Surgery is thought to help by affecting hormones, gut bacteria and other substances that affect how the body handles insulin and blood sugar. Weight loss without surgery also helps, but is difficult for many people to achieve. Most weight loss surgery today is done through small incisions. The dangers are similar to other surgeries, including a small chance of life-threatening complications, and some people need to have their surgeries repeated. ___ Follow AP Medical Writer Carla K. Johnson on Twitter: @CarlaKJohnson ___ The Associated Press Health & Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
[A]: Obesity surgery may lower heart attack danger in diabetics.

[Q]: The story doesn't specifically address costs, but it does discuss some of the most common types of fiber-rich food such as fruits, vegetables, legumes and whole grains. Given the diversity, and widespread availability, of these foods, we'll give this a Satisfactory rating. However, it would have been nice to see some acknowledgment that many people people particularly people with limited financial resources live in so-called "food deserts," which have little access to fresh produce, etc. The story discusses a wide range of benefits, ranging from reduced risk of heart disease to weight loss. But the focus of the story was on weight loss, so that's what we'll focus on here. The story refers to two studies, only one of which appears to have been published. The first study is an analysis of people who have used the MyFitnessPal app in an attempt to lose weight. In that case, users who came within 5 percent of their weight loss goal consumed an average of 29 percent more fiber than users who did not come close to their weight loss goals. The second study was actually published (in 2015), and compared weight loss across two groups of study participants who had metabolic syndrome. One group followed the American Heart Association's recommended diet, while the other was told only to eat 30 grams of fiber per day. Both groups ended up eating the same amount of fiber per day (19 grams), and both groups lost weight. At the end of a year, the AHA diet group lost more (an average of 5.6 pounds), but the second group still lost 4.6 pounds. Neither of these studies are in the mold of a conventional intervention/health-benefit paradigm. But then neither is specifically looking at either a precisely-defined intervention (such as a pharmaceutical trial) or a disease they're looking loosely defined dietary guidelines and weight loss (and while weight can be a risk factor, it is not an illness). Bearing that in mind, the story does a satisfactory job of quantifying the relevant benefits in each instance. In general, eating more fiber carries few potential harms. The primary risks are, as the Mayo Clinic notes, "adding too much fiber too quickly can promote intestinal gas, abdominal bloating and cramping." To minimize that risk, the Mayo Clinic urges people to "Increase fiber in your diet gradually over a period of a few weeks. This allows the natural bacteria in your digestive system to adjust to the change. Also, drink plenty of water. Fiber works best when it absorbs water." This story does not outline these harms specifically, which is too bad. But the story does tell readers that they should "add fiber slowly and with plenty of water." That's enough to rate this as Satisfactory (though it's clearly not ideal). The two studies, mentioned above under benefits, have some problems: It's not clear where the unpublished MyFitnessPal data come from or how they were analyzed; and the 2015 study was of only 240 volunteers. These limitations were not noted. Also,the story would have been much stronger if it had addressed one key question: Were there any differences between groups (in either study) in regard to their age, sex, or physical activity? Any of those factors could play a key role in differences in weight loss, and the story sheds no light there. A side note: As we mentioned above, this story discusses a wide range of other benefits associated with eating enough fiber, ranging from reduced risk of heart disease to reduced risk of diabetes. We mention this because the story links to relevant research supporting each of those claims. We applaud that. There is no overt disease mongering. But we did want to point out two things. The story states: "fiber may play an important role in that ever-elusive health goal, weight loss." First, while being obese may be a disease, simply being overweight is not. Second, many people who aspire to lose weight do so for reasons other than health (and aren't overweight in the first place). Those are important distinctions, and ones that this story doesn't make. The story quotes from a wide variety of sources, and clearly labels each source's affiliation. One issue that's not addressed in the story is the utility of fiber supplements. Are they good? Bad? Beneficial? Useless? The story doesn't offer any insight here. It would be useful for readers to know whether such supplements may be useful tools for meeting daily fiber intake goals. Foods that contain fiber have been around longer than humans have, so we'll rate this N/A. Dietary fiber isn't new, and the story doesn't claim that it is. We'll rate this N/A. The story doesn't appear to be based on a news release. (In fact, given that the story doesn't seem to draw on any particularly new studies, guidelines or other external drivers, we're kind of curious as to what spurred this story. We're suspecting a pitch from MyFitnessPal.)
[A]:
It's Comical. It's Critical. It Might Even Help You Lose Weight.