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.
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."
Example solution: Some appendicitis cases may not require 'emergency' surgery
Example explanation: 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.

Problem: Established in 2017, the FSFW focuses on eliminating usage of cigarettes and works toward smoking cessation using new technologies and alternative products. It says it works independently, but the World Health Organization (WHO) has said there are "clear conflicts" due to the $80 million in annual funding the foundation receives from Philip Morris. At least three Indian anti-tobacco groups earlier this year wrote to the federal health ministry in New Delhi calling for the rejection of any possible partnerships with FSFW, according to copies of their representations seen by Reuters. India's federal health ministry has sent a letter, dated June 24, to chief secretaries of all states, saying they should not partner with FSFW and also advise other departments and institutions in their region accordingly. The ministry said Philip Morris was funding FSFW as well as manufacturing and promoting harm-reduction smoking devices. Reuters has previously reported Philip Morris has plans to launch its iQOS smoking device in India which it says is less harmful than conventional cigarettes. "Any collaboration with the Foundation for a Smoke Free World should be avoided in the larger interest of Public Health," senior health ministry official, Sanjeeva Kumar, wrote in the letter, which was reviewed by Reuters. The Foundation for a Smoke-Free World, which is led by former WHO official Dr. Derek Yach, said it "operates with complete independence from Philip Morris" and was committed to full transparency about who its funders were. Philip Morris, which has a stated longer-term vision to replace cigarette sales with products such as its iQOS device, in a statement said FSFW was "an independent body governed by its own independent Board of Directors". In recent years, the Indian government has intensified its tobacco-control efforts, raising cigarette taxes and ordering companies to print bigger health warnings on cigarette packs. India has 106 million adult smokers, second only to China, and more than 900,000 people die each year in India due to tobacco-related illnesses. A federal health ministry official said on Sunday the letter on FSFW had been sent as a preventive measure to dissuade states from any collaboration with the foundation, and similar instructions were likely to be sent to other federal ministries. The FSFW said there were no projects with any state government institutions in India. "We seek partnerships with all who share our goal to end smoking in the world," a spokesperson said in a statement to Reuters. In May, FSFW said its team was committed to working with others "to accelerate an end to smoking in this generation" in India. It also invited people to study its strategic plan. That same month, Philip Morris in a press statement said it had urged the Indian government to create a regulatory environment for devices such as its iQOS. When the FSFW was launched in 2017, the WHO had said it will not partner with the foundation and asked governments around the world and public health communities to follow the agency's lead. (Story refiled to fix grammar in paragraph 4)
Solution: India asks its states not to partner with Philip Morris-funded foundation.