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.

[EX Q]: Researchers from Durham University and the British Museum discovered the evidence of tumors that had developed and spread throughout the body in a 3,000-year-old skeleton found in a tomb in modern Sudan in 2013. Analyzing the skeleton using radiography and a scanning electron microscope, they managed to get clear imaging of lesions on the bones which showed the cancer had spread to cause tumors on the collar bones, shoulder blades, upper arms, vertebrae, ribs, pelvis and thigh bones. "Insights gained from archaeological human remains like these can really help us to understand the evolution and history of modern diseases," said Michaela Binder, a Durham PhD student who led the research and excavated and examined the skeleton. "Our analysis showed that the shape of the small lesions on the bones can only have been caused by a soft tissue cancer ... though the exact origin is impossible to determine through the bones alone." Despite being one of the world's leading causes of death today, cancer is virtually absent in archaeological records compared to other diseases - and that has given rise to the idea that cancers are mainly attributable to modern lifestyles and to people living for longer. According to the World Health Organisation's cancer research agency, new cancer cases rose to an estimated 14 million a year in 2012, a figure seen rising to 22 million within the 20 years. Yet these new findings, published in the Public Library of Science journal PLOS ONE on Monday, suggest cancer is not only a modern disease, but was around in the Nile Valley even in ancient times. Binder said the discovery should help scientists explore the underlying causes of cancer in ancient populations and give fresh clues about the evolution of cancer in the past. Ancient DNA analysis of skeletons and mummies with evidence of cancer can be used to detect mutations in specific genes that are known to be associated with particular types of cancer. The skeleton is of an adult male estimated to be between 25- and 35-years-old when he died. It was found at the archaeological site of Amara West in northern Sudan, on the Nile, 750 km downstream from the capital Khartoum. The researchers said they could only speculate on what may have caused of the young man's cancer, but it may have been as a result of environmental carcinogens such as smoke from wood fires, or due to genetic factors, or from an infectious disease such as schistosomiasis, which is caused by parasites. Schistosomiasis would be a plausible explanation, they said, since the disease has plagued inhabitants of Egypt and Nubia since at least 1500 BC and is now recognized as a cause of bladder cancer and breast cancer in men.
[EX A]: Archaeologists discover earliest example of human with cancer.

[EX Q]: "In a press conference on May 5 in which Gov. Greg Abbott updated his reopening plan to add businesses such as hair salons and gyms, he recommended that at-risk populations ""remain at home if at all possible"" and avoid in-person gatherings, such as a church service, funeral or wedding. ""We strongly encourage at-risk populations to try to watch or participate remotely, remembering this very important point, and that is almost 75 percent of the deaths from COVID-19 in the state of Texas are a result of people contracting COVID-19 who are age 65 and older,"" Abbott said. Texas was among the first states to start reopening businesses and lifting restrictions put in place to curb the spread of the coronavirus, allowing retail stores and restaurants to open May 1 at 25 percent capacity. Abbott announced the latest set of reopenings Monday, expanding restaurant capacity to 50 percent and granting bars the ability to open at 25 percent capacity within the next couple weeks. This comes as the state continues to see its number of infections and deaths rise and clusters form mostly in rural parts of the state where meatpacking plants are located. Hospitalizations, however, have decreased since mid-April. With that in mind, we had to ask: Is Abbott right that almost 75% of coronavirus deaths in Texas are people older than 65? Looking at the numbers Abbott's spokesman John Wittman said Abbott's claim is based on figures from the Texas Department of Health Services, which publishes daily numbers on the state's COVID-19 testing and cases. The data includes a breakdown of coronavirus deaths by age, race and gender, but only for those cases where the deaths have been investigated by the local and regional health departments. As of Wednesday, the majority, or 489, were still under investigation. ""The demographic data on cases and fatalities come from the case investigation forms submitted by local health departments and our regional offices,"" said DSHS spokesman Chris Van Deusen. The purpose of the investigation is to confirm that the person had COVID-19 but also to collect other details about them and the circumstances around their death, Van Deusen said. Wittman said the data showed that 75% of investigated deaths were people 65 and older when Abbott made this statement. ""It alternates almost daily, but it's generally around that range,"" Wittman said. As of May 6, the day after the press conference, the death toll in Texas was 948. Fewer than half, or 433, had been investigated. Of those, about 71 percent were Texans 65 and older. It was still about 71 percent, or 345 out of 489 investigated cases, as of Wednesday. The age groups broke down like so: Ages 10 to 19 years old: 2 deaths, or 0.4% Ages 20-29: 10 deaths, or 2.04 % Ages 30-39: 9 deaths, or 1.8% Ages 40-49: 21 deaths, or 4.29% Ages 50-59: 54 deaths, or 11.04% Ages 60-64: 45 deaths, or 9.2% Ages 65-69: 59 deaths, or 12.06% Ages 70-74: 45 deaths, or 9.2% Ages 75-79: 45 deaths, or 9.2% Ages 80+: 196 deaths, or 40.08% Across the United States, about 79% of coronavirus deaths have been people 65 years and older, according to the National Center for Health Statistics data submitted between the beginning of February to the beginning of May. Like Texas' statistics, the national numbers are also incomplete. The number of deaths represent only those entered between those dates and only include people with confirmed or presumed COVID-19. ""While 80% of deaths are electronically processed and coded by NCHS within minutes, most deaths from COVID-19 must be coded by a person, which takes an average of 7 days,"" the NCHS states on its website. The data is also always somewhat behind because of the lag time between when a death occurred and when a death certificate is completed, submitted to NCHS and processed for reporting purposes. The delay can last anywhere from one week to eight or more. Our ruling Abbott said almost ""75 percent of the deaths from COVID-19 in the state of Texas are a result of people contracting COVID-19 who are age 65 and older."" Of confirmed coronavirus deaths, close to 75% were people within the age group Abbott provided, but he failed to include the caveat that this statistic leaves out more than half of the total deaths that have not yet been investigated."
[EX A]: "Almost 75 percent of the deaths from COVID-19 in the state of Texas are a result of people contracting COVID-19 who are age 65 and older."

[EX Q]: Many sugar-rich packaged and prepared foods are more expensive than home-made foods.But the study was not designed to compare the costs of diets, and most people know how much different types of food that contain sugar cost. So we'll rate this Not Applicable. On the other hand, it would have been useful to cite estimates of the cost of treating the disorderslinked to metabolic syndrome components, such as high blood pressure, as well as the costs of treating the chronic diseases that are a consequence of the syndrome, such as diabetes and heart disease. The quantification of the results does not quite clear our bar here. The story says this: Overall, their fasting blood sugar levels dropped by 53%, along with the amount of insulin their bodies produced since insulin is normally needed to break down carbohydrates and sugars. Their triglyceride and LDL levels also declined and, most importantly, they showed less fat in their liver. We would have preferred more numbers documenting the changes for each outcome, in absolute terms (the "53%" figure is a relative reduction), along with a comment or some description of how meaningful the changes were clinically. It'shard to say what "harms" or risks would result from cutting sugar from childrens' diets. We'll rate this Not Applicable. The story does a fine job of explaining how the study was done and why the evidence it provides is meaningful. It explains that compared with previous research, which was observational in nature and couldn't prove cause and effect, the new study suggests that cutting out sugar may be causing the beneficial metabolic changes observed. We do have a problem with the story's framing, however, which frontloads discussion about how important the findings are, while burying discussion of limitations far down in the text. Experts point out some problems with the study, but we think the story could have gone further explaining for example that the study was small and time-limited and that it had no control group. Though the story feels slightly unbalanced, we'll acknowledge that it did make an attempt to critically evaluate the findings hence the Satisfactory rating. As noted, increased sugar consumption, especially in children, has long been linked to alarmingly high and growing rates of obesity, diabetes and other chronic diseases in children and adults. There is no disease mongering here, and indeed, some numbers (prevalence) would have helped the story. The story includes restraining comments from two independent experts, although those comments come far down in the story and should have been placed higher. The story perhaps also could have mentioned that Dr. Lustig is author of a 2012 book called "Fat chance:Beating the Odds Against Sugar, Processed Food, Obesity, and Disease," and so may have an intellectual and financial conflict of interest when it comes to sugar. The study was funded bythe NIH and Touro University, as well as UCSF another aspect that could have been mentioned for context. The article did a fairly good job of describing the limitations of previous dietary studies, compared to this one, especially as it relates to the effects of cutting sugar vs. losing weight. It would have also been helpful to mention the role of exercise in controlling metabolic disease. The story explains that the dietary changes they made in the study could be made by anyone. The story says: "We took chicken teriyaki out, and put turkey hot dogs in. We took sweetened yogurt out, and put baked potato chips in. We took pastries out and put bagels in," says Lustig. "So there was no change in [the children's] weight and no change in calories." It's always risky at best to call something a first of its kind as this story does, without citing any evidence for that or being more specific about what, exactly, was a "first." But the story does give the general sense of what's new and important about the study the fact that it suggests beneficial changes of reducing sugar independent of weight loss. And it also draws a line between previous correlation studies and this experiment. Close call here but we'll give the benefit of the doubt. There's enough original reporting here for us to be sure this story didn't rely on a news release.
[EX A]:
Sugar Is Definitely Toxic, a New Study Says