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.

Input: Consider Input: "While these studies examined prostate cancer mortality rates and treatment outcomes, monetary costs are an important part of the larger conversation about the value of screening. There are significant financial costs associated with population-wide screenings, along with the follow-up diagnostic procedures and treatments that these studies suggest are of little benefit. The reporter should have referenced costs of screening and treatments at least briefly. There are two studies involved here, each with its own methodology, outcomes and limitations. Under the circumstances the news report describes the findings adequately, using a broad brush. The report states that the U.S. study found no decline in death risk in the screened population, while the European study showed a 20 percent reduced risk of deathyet it also documented considerable overtreatment. The reporter gets points for using the always valuable ""number needed to treat"" measure to describe the European findings: 48 additional men would need to be treated to prevent one death from prostate cancer. The story focuses in part on the harms of overdiagnosis and overtreatment. The story is based on results of two high-quality clinical trials, and it describes the methodologies sufficiently. The story does an excellent job of laying out the caveats very early: that the results won't end the controversy over the value of prostate cancer screening; and that the studies continue and may provide clearer answers in the future. The reporter gets extra points for mentioning too that the two studies aren't directly comparable. The report does nothing to exaggerate the effects of prostate cancer or its treatments. The reporter includes comments from the lead authors of the two studies, the author of a related editorial in the New England Journal of Medicine, and a physician representing the American Cancer Society. The story adequately explains that screening options include the PSA blood test and the digital rectal exam. The story also refers to the options for treatment after a cancer is identified, indicating that ""there's no agreement on the best treatment approach""watchful waiting, surgery, hormone therapy or radiation. The wide use of the PSA test is implied throughout the story. No claims are made for the novelty of the screening techniques or the findings of the study. The story does not appear to draw directly from press releases of NIH, the Washington University School of Medicine, or others publicizing the results."

Output: Studies don't end prostate cancer test controversy

Input: Consider Input: "Republican Party of Virginia Chairman Pat Mullins kicked off the New Year attacking recentside effects of health care overhaul on Flexible Spending Accounts, which allow workers to pay medical expenses with pre-tax dollars. In an e-letter titled ""FSA at Work? Jim Webb Just Made It a Lot Less Useful,"" Mullins staples Virginia's senior Senator to new provisions of the health care law that took effect Jan. 1. ""Desperate for tax dollars to pay for their $1 trillion health care takeover, Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama, and Jim Webb decided to pick the pockets of consumers who opted to take responsibility for their own health care costs and remove the ability of consumers to use FSA and HSA plans to pay for things like aspirin and other non-prescription health needs,"" Mullins wrote. He later reiterates the point, writing: ""Until this week, consumers could use their accounts to set aside pre-tax money for medical expenses. But thanks to Webb and other tax happy Democrats, over-the-counter drugpurchases are now off limits to FSA and HSA accounts."" There's plenty of confusion about health care reform, so we checked to see if his claim about over-the-counter drugs is correct. As a source, Mullins cited a news report from KSAT 12out of San Antonio, Texas. The report says, ""Over-the-counter medications will no longer be reimbursable through a health care flexible spending account, or FSA, even if the account has a grace period. So, Dec. 31 is the last day to stock up on pain relievers, allergy tablets, antacids and more for people who want to use them to exhaust their use-it-or-lose-it FSA."" Not convinced San Antonio's KSAT 12 is an end-all source for health care reform, we dug deeper. According to the Internal Revenue Service guidanceon flexible spending accounts, a new provision ""as added by the Affordable Care Act, provides that...beginning after December 31, 2010, expenses incurred for a medicine or a drug shall be treated as a reimbursement for medical expenses only if such medicine or drug is a prescribed drug (determined without regard to whether such drug is available without a prescription) or is insulin."" In other words, you will no longer be able to use FSAs to pay for your aspirin, antacids and other over-the-counter drugs if they're not prescribed by a physician. What about HSAs -- tax-advantaged health savings accounts? Pretty much the same. The IRS says that ""a distribution from an HSA...for a medicine or drug is a tax-free qualified medical expense only if (1) the medicine or drug requires a prescription, (2) is an over-the-counter medicine or drug and the individual obtains a prescription, or (3) is insulin."" Otherwise, those ""non-qualified expenses"" will be taxed at 20 percent rather than the current 10 percent for HSA plan participants. So, while the recently enacted portion of the health care law will not stop consumers from being able to buy over-the-counter drugs through their plans, it will require a prescription to do so. On that count, Mullins stays relatively safe by employing the phrase ""non-prescription health needs"" at the end of his claim. , those items like aspirin can still qualify for reimbursement with a prescription, but then they would not longer be ""non-prescription."" But the same phrase also presents a problem for Mullins because other ""non-prescription"" items such as medical supplies and first-aid items remain eligible for reimbursement without a prescription. ""Over-the-counter medications are treated differently than over-the-counter medical items like Band-Aids, which are covered without a prescription,"" said Michael Waxman of Save Flexible Spending Plans. If you're wondering why these changes are taking place, the answer is likely money. ""I think [federal officials] were just looking for revenue raisers,"" Mike Thompson, a human resource services principal with the PwC recently told the Washington Post. As that story notes, employee contributions to FSAs are made on a pretax basis, reducing earnings and thus the amount workers pay in income tax. According to the Joint Committee on Taxation, tightening up the tax break on over-the-counter purchases will generate an estimated $5 billion in federal revenues through 2019. And one last note: Webb, as Mullins said, did vote for the massive health care reform bill that limits the use of flexible spending accounts. Let's look back. Mullins says health care law provisions that took effect Jan. 1 will ""remove the ability of consumers to use FSA and HSA plans to pay for things like aspirin and other non-prescription health needs."" It's that as of Jan. 1, FSA and HSA plans no longer offered reimbursements for over-the-counter drugs without a prescription. However, those same items could be covered with a prescription. Mullins misses a caveat by not noting that non-prescription items like crutches, bandages, and health supplies like diagnostic devices and blood sugar test kits remain covered. But his comments seem directed at drugs. We find his claim ."

Output: New provisions of the health care law bar the use offlexible spending accounts and health savings accounts to pay for aspirin and other non-prescription health needs.

Input: Consider Input: Unlike tests to diagnose diseases, antibody tests show who has been infected and recovered. The body makes antibodies in response to many illnesses and infections, including other coronaviruses. New blood tests are being developed to identify antibodies unique to SARS-CoV-2, the official name of the new coronavirus. The tests look for two kinds of antibodies: immunoglobulin M (IgM) and G (IgG). The body quickly produces IgM antibodies for its initial attack against infections. It makes IgG antibodies more slowly and retains them longer; IgG antibodies suggest possible immunity. Some companies are developing finger-prick tests that get results in minutes. Others are developing far more accurate tests called enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) that require sending blood samples to a lab for analysis. "I would argue that in the present circumstance, sensitivity, specificity and accuracy are more important than convenience," said Dr. James Zehnder, director of clinical pathology at Stanford Medicine in California. Labs across the country are developing antibody tests that could be widely available within weeks, said Dr. Elitza Theel, director of the Infectious Diseases Serology Laboratory at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. It is not yet clear how many tests will be needed - but that number could run into the hundreds of millions - or when supplies will be adequate. More than 60 vendors have notified the U.S. Food and Drug Administration of plans to release antibody tests, Theel said. The FDA will allow release of some tests without standard review if developers determine they are accurate. Abbott Laboratories (ABT.N) launched a lab-based IgG antibody test on Wednesday without going through FDA review and is expecting to ship nearly one million tests this week alone. Dozens of manufacturers are also seeking FDA approval for antibody tests under an accelerated emergency review process. Earlier this month, Cellex Inc became the first company to win emergency approval for an ELISA test. BioMedomics Inc and Becton Dickinson and Co (BDX.N) have launched a point-of-care finger-prick test and said they expect to supply more than one million tests over the coming months. As tests flood the market, accuracy will vary, Theel warned. "We have to make sure the test we are using is giving us the most accurate results," she said. An ELISA test for IgG antibodies being developed at Mayo Clinic correctly identifies who has coronavirus antibodies more than 95% of the time, Theel said. Antibody tests can help calculate what portion of the population has already been infected, as well as whether infections were mild or severe. Governments and companies could use antibody tests to determine who would most likely be safe to return to work and public interactions, and whether it is safe to lift stay-at-home orders all at once in some regions or in stages based on infection risk. People with negative antibody tests or very low antibody levels would likely have higher risk of infection than people with high antibody levels. While antibodies to many infectious diseases typically confer some level of immunity, whether that is the case with this unique coronavirus is not yet known. And how strong immunity might be, or how long it might last in people previously infected, is not clear. With some diseases like measles the immunity can be lifelong. With others, immunity can wane over time. "We cannot know with certainty that reinfection is not possible until further research is performed," said Dr. David Reich, president and chief operating officer of The Mount Sinai Hospital in New York City.
Output: Explainer: What are coronavirus antibody tests?.