Teacher: 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.
Teacher: Now, understand the problem? If you are still confused, see the following example:
"Although the story didn't cite the cost of appendectomy emergency or urgent surgery and we wish it had, we nonetheless will give it a satisfactory score because it at least cited what the editorial writer wrote, ""A secondary benefit is the savings to the hospital generated by minimizing staff and anesthesiologist presence late in the evening and during the wee hours of the morning."" As with our harms score above, although the story didn't give absolute numbers, in this case we think it was sufficient for it to report that ""The scientists found no significant difference among the groups in the patients' condition 30 days after surgery or in the length of their operation or hospital stay."" Although the story didn't give absolute numbers, in this case we think it was sufficient for it to report that ""The scientists found no significant difference among the groups in the patients' condition 30 days after surgery or in the length of their operation or hospital stay."" Despite running less than 300 words, this story did an adequate job in explaining the quality of the evidence, including pointing out limitations. No disease-mongering here. The story meets the bare minimum requirement for this criterion in that it at least cited what an editorial stated. The focus of the story was on a study comparing emergency appendectomy with surgery done up to 12 hours later or beyond. This is the whole focus of the story and one we applaud when it begins: ""Appendectomy is the most common emergency surgery in the world, but it doesn't have to be."" There were no claims made about the novelty of this research, and we may have wished for a bit more context on this. Nonetheless, the potential for guiding future care decisions was made clear. Not applicable. Given that the story only pulled excerpts from the journal article and the accompanying editorial, and didn't include any fresh quotes from interviews, we can't be sure of the extent to which it may have been influenced by a news release."
Solution: Some appendicitis cases may not require 'emergency' surgery
Reason: The paragraph mentions that "Appendectomy is the most common emergency surgery in the world, but it doesn't have to be." which is considered evidence for the output. Thus, the output is a valid claim.

Now, solve this instance: In February 2020, we received multiple inquiries from readers about the accuracy of reports which claimed that 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Mike Bloomberg had once said health care providers should not treat elderly patients with cancer due to the improbability of their recovery and as a means of prioritizing treatments for younger patients and stemming a rise in health care costs and hospital overcrowding. On Feb. 18, the right-leaning Daily Caller website published an article with the headline "Mike Bloomberg Said Elderly Cancer Patients Should Be Denied Treatment to Cut Costs." The article reported that: Billionaire and Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg said in a 2011 video that elderly cancer patients should be denied treatment in order to cut health care costs. "All of these costs keep going up, nobody wants to pay any more money, and at the rate we're going, health care is going to bankrupt us," said Bloomberg, who was then New York City's mayor. "'We've got to sit here and say which things we're going to do, and which things we're not, nobody wants to do that. Y'know, if you show up with prostate cancer, you're 95 years old, we should say, 'Go and enjoy. Have a nice [inaudible]. Live a long life. There's no cure, and we can't do anything.' If you're a young person, we should do something about it," Bloomberg said in the video. The same article was later republished by the National Interest magazine, and on Feb. 17 the right-leaning Red State blog published an article with a headline that stated "Bloomberg Suggests Denying Care to Elderly Patient With Cancer Because Not Cost Effective in 2011 Video." All three articles contained a 40-second video clip of Bloomberg sitting with a group of men, making the following remarks: [] And what things they can't fix right away. If you're bleeding, they'll stop the bleeding, if you need an X-Ray, you're going to have to wait. All of these costs keep going up, nobody wants to pay any more money, and at the rate we're going, health care is going to bankrupt us. So not only do we have a problem, it's going to bankrupt us, and we've got to sit here and say which things we're going to do and which things we're not. Nobody wants to do that. If you show up with prostate cancer and you're 95 years old, we should say 'Go and enjoy, have a nice [inaudible], lead a long life.' There's no cure and you can't do anything. If you're a young person, we should do something about it. Society's not willing to do that yet. So we're going to bankrupt us, and we're not looking at [] Bloomberg says we should deny healthcare to the elderly. "If you show up with cancer & you're 95 years old, we should say, Go & enjoy. There's no cure, we can't do anything. A young person, we should do something. Society's not willing to do that yet." pic.twitter.com/ZExr2Opghx Breaking911 (@Breaking911) February 17, 2020 Bloomberg undoubtedly made the remarks shown in that video. Although the 40-second clip was cut from longer footage, it was not doctored or further edited. Likewise, the video did not present the remarks in their full and proper context, but that did not serve to substantially alter or misrepresent the sense or meaning of what Bloomberg said. He did indeed propose that, in light of rising health care costs and hospital overcrowding in New York, health care providers should not attempt to treat elderly patients with terminal cancer, instead prioritizing younger patients with better prospects of recovery. The conversation shown in the video took place in February 2011. Bloomberg was "sitting shiva" (a Jewish mourning ritual) with the family of Rabbi Moshe Segal, a Brooklyn man who, according to his family, spent 73 hours in a New York emergency room before his death. Shimon Gifter, a Brooklyn photographer, recorded more than nine minutes of Bloomberg's visit and posted it to his YouTube channel. The full conversation can be viewed below. In the interest of providing as much context as possible, the following is an unedited transcript of the section of the discussion during which Bloomberg made his comments about treating elderly prostate cancer patients. The first few seconds shows Bloomberg entering the room, greeting and shaking hands with Segal's family members, some of whom thank him for his visit. Bloomberg, who was mayor of New York City at that time, sits and observes that the deceased was "young." A brother of Segal replies "Very young," then quickly segues into a conversation about health care: Segal's brother: I apologize for bringing up conditions in New York City during this [visit], but in light of my brother's death, I must tell you that we have, I know you know this, but from personal experience the overcrowding in the emergency rooms is insane. He was there for 73 hours [inaudible].
Student:
In 2011 Mike Bloomberg said health care providers should not treat elderly prostate cancer patients in order to alleviate health care costs and overcrowding.