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.

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."
Mother Earth's MeToo moment: English town joins campaign for 'nature's rights'.

Actual occurrences can sometimes take on folkloric lives of their own, making the shift from news stories to cautionary tales through emotional responses to elements of those events. That was the case with the 4 June 1999 death of 12-year-old Catherine "Casey" Fish, who did indeed die while playing the marshmallow-stuffing game known as "Chubby Bunny" descriptions of her death have become part of the cautionary lore spread among parents. The rules of "Chubby Bunny" require competitors to enunciate that phrase with marshmallows stuffed in their mouths. No swallowing or chewing is allowed, and any participant who gags, coughs, or spits is "out" of the game. The winner is whichever child manages to utter the expression through the largest number of marshmallows. Casey Fish choked on four marshmallows and collapsed during the annual Care Fair held at Hoffman Elementary School, a grade school in Chicago's North Shore area, and died at the Glenbrook Hospital a few hours later. The "Chubby Bunny" competition was to have been part of the day's activities and would have been supervised by a teacher. However, Casey began playing the game with some of her friends when her teacher momentarily left the area ten minutes before the scheduled start of the "Chubby Bunny" competition to have a word with a janitor. As Casey choked, the teacher was summoned back to the room, but he arrived too late to head off the youngster's death. Casey's death was reported by the media at the time of the incident. But, unlike many news stories about the death of a child, the deceased sixth-grader's story was told and retold in ensuing months, primarily via The Oprah Winfrey Show, which talked about the case (including airing interviews with the distraught parents) in January, March, and June 2000. The tale of how Casey's life ended continued to surface in the news as her parents pursued a civil suit against the school district, asserting that a failure to properly supervise the children led to the death of their daughter. (In 2005, her parents settled their lawsuit for $2 million.) All of this additional attention served to keep the story in circulation. The folkloric shift this real-life tragedy has taken involves the mode of death. While a very real youngster did indeed lose her life through playing "Chubby Bunny," she did so through choking on the intact confections in her mouth, not (as developing lore would have it) via the marshmallows' somehow breaking down to form a windpipe-clogging glue. In the example quoted above, the bonbons were said to have "emulsified" that is, turned into a liquid mass. Another Internet-spread description of the death says "The marshmallows were heated in the mouth and throat and effectively turned into a sticky enough substance that it could not be removed by conventional attempts at first aid." Yet another version claims that "The marshmallows, warming-up to body temperature, took on the form of her air passage, and choked her to death." We know the marshmallows did not eventually turn into a sticky, fatal mass after Casey held them in her mouth for a while because, during the lawsuit brought by Casey's parents, Casey's best friend testified seeing her pal's lips turn purple just a few seconds after she had put the marshmallows into her mouth. While marshmallows can be quickly melted into a thick liquid, goopy substance in a pot on the stove (as anyone who has made Rice Krispies squares will attest), the temperature inside the human mouth is not sufficient to reduce them to that state. Absent chewing or licking, a marshmallow can be held in one's mouth approximately 15 minutes before it entirely disappears, its bulk gradually dissolving and being swallowed across the span of that quarter hour. At no point in that process does the resultant fluid become thick or gluey it is thin, watery, and easily swallowed. The danger presented by the game comes not from the marshmallows being rendered into a suffocating goo in the human mouth by the heat of that environment, but from their bulk. In the zeal to best others, a child may stuff more of the confections into his mouth than he can cope with, potentially lodging one in his throat where it will block his windpipe the way a cork would. It is not any special "melting" property inherent to marshmallows that makes the game hazardous, but rather that the marshmallows take up so much space, and their consistency makes them difficult to remove either via the Heimlich maneuver or with medical instruments. On 13 September 2006, another "Chubby Bunny" death occurred when a 32-year-old Janet Rudd choked on a marshmallow and collapsed while participating in the game at a fair in London, Ontario. Emergency crews were unable to remove the blockage from her throat at the scene; she was taken to a hospital where she was revived, but she died later that evening.
"A child suffocated while playing a ""Chubby Bunny"" marshmallow-stuffing game. "

In late May 2020, readers searched the Snopes.com website questioning the veracity of a statement attributed to U.S. President Donald Trump, as quoted in a widely shared tweet posted by Washington Post journalist Felicia Sommez: Sommez's tweet accurately captures Trump's statement regarding his diagnostic test result amid the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic. Trump made the remark on May 21, 2020, on the South Lawn of the White House, as he was about to depart on Marine One for Michigan, where he toured a Ford manufacturing facility. Trump was responding to a reporter who asked how long the president expected to take hydroxychloroquine, a drug that Trump has been promoting as a potential treatment for COVID-19 without medical evidence for its safety or efficacy. Here is a transcription of the exchange between the reporter and Trump, per WhiteHouse.gov: Q Sir, how long do you expect take hydroxychloroquine? THE PRESIDENT: I think it's another day. I had a two-week regimen of hydroxychloroquine. And I've taken it, I think, just about two weeks. I think it's another day. And I'm still here. I'm still here. And I tested very positively in a in another sense. So, this morning Q Negatively?
U.S. President Donald Trump said he "tested very positively" for COVID-19, meaning his test results came back negative, and he did not have the coronavirus disease.