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]: Karen Sage of Austin, facing a Tuesday runoff with Mindy Montford of Austin for the Democratic nod for a judgeship, touts her experience as a prosecutor overseeing a new unit focused on defendants with mental illness. With no Republican opponent in November, the winner of the runoff will likely be a shoo-in for Travis County's 299th state District Court judgeship. In a mailer sent to voters April 3, Sage celebrates the new program, saying that jail "time for non-violent, mentally ill offenders has been reduced by 50 percent."We wondered if Sage's statementechoed in a TV ad she debuted Wednesdayreflects reality. Sage's campaign initially referred us to Rosemary Lehmberg, the Travis County district attorney. Lehmberg confirmed that she asked Sage, an assistant district attorney, to helm the felony mental health unit, which was started in January 2009. Claire Dawson-Brown, the DA's director of strategic prosecutions, said a magistrate started handling a special docket comprised of "mental health" defendants in late April 2009. To be in the program, Dawson-Brown said, defendants must usually be charged with a non-violent crime. They also must be diagnosed with major depression or considered bipolar, schizo-affective or schizophrenic, and seen as unstable in the jail. "It would be someone in a crisis situation," she said, "or their mental illness is impairing their behavior." Experts team to address the needs of the mental health inmates, Dawson-Brown said. She said participants get services they need in custody and when they return to the community. Besides Sage, who has a paralegal and a secretary, each defendant has an attorney familiar with mental health issues; she said the magistrate, a jail counselor and officials serving the local mental health and adult probation systems also play roles, with social workers sometimes getting involved. And how has the program affected jail stays? Sage said she reached her 50-percent reduction statement by comparing a baseline estimate that "mental health" inmates facing felony charges were averaging 106 days in jail before the program began to the 42-day average for participants in the program at the time she left the office in mid-December to run for judge. The decrease amounts to 60 percent. Dawson-Brown agreed that as of late 2008 and early 2009, the average Travis County jail stay for all its "mental health" defendants, including violent offenders, was 106 days. We pointed out that the baseline figure sweeps in the longer jail stays of individuals charged with violent crimes who aren't automatically put in the new program, driving up the pre-program average and potentially skewing before and after comparisons. Dawson-Brown then gave us more detailed jail-stay information enabling an improved review of the change in average jail stays. Based on the new figures, we estimate that defendants who have been through the new program would have averaged 77 days in jail before the program began. The nitty gritty: We multiplied the number of affected defendants categorized by the level of felony they faced--ranging from first-degree felony charges to second- and third-degree felonies to state-jail felony charges--by the days that similarly charged defendants averaged in jail before the program began. Next, we totaled those defendant-days-in-jail and divided the total (19,432) by the number of defendants (253) to reach the pre-program estimate of an average of 77 days in jail. Through February, the magistrate had processed 253 defendants since the program's start, according to Dawson-Brown, and they averaged 36 days in jail. Best we can tell, the average jail stay for defendants dropped by 41 days, or 53 percent.
[EX A]: "Karen Sage Says that under a new program jail ""time for non-violent, mentally ill offenders has been reduced by 50 percent."

[EX Q]: "Quoting the study lead, the cost of ginger dietary supplements ranges from $6 to $30 for 50 to 100 capsules; however, as noted by the researchers, it is not apparent if dietary supplements would be as effective as the formulation developed specifically for the study. The study lead is quoted as saying the use of ginger resulted in a 40% improvement in patients' nausea. In the placebo group, the study lead indicated that ""hardly any difference"" was noted. But we're not given any context on important questions such as how much change in the nausea scale is actually clinical perceptible to patients. This is what's really needed to understand any potential benefit. While there were no reported adverse effects associated with the use of ginger in this study, the story points out that ginger supplements can interfere with blood clotting, which can be particularly harmful to cancer patients undergoing treatment or surgery. The story suggests that people should talk with their doctors before using it. The story does not make it fully apparent that this research has not yet been published in a medical journal and only the abstract has been released. Unlike published articles, this study has not gone through a review process to check for errors in the methodology. While the story points out that2/3 of the study participants were being treated for breast cancer, it would also be important to clearly state that the majority (90%) were women, which suggests that the results may not be applicable to the general population. Furthermore, it is not clear from thestory or the abstractif patients received different types of chemotherapy or why the researchers included patients with various types of cancer. The story does not appear to exaggerate the prevalence of nausea as a side effect of chemotherapy treatment. In addition to interviewing the research lead, this story also includes quotes from a director at the American Cancer Society, as well as the president of the American Society of Clinical Oncology; however, the president of the oncology society did not comment directly on the research. The story mentions that the study was funded by the National Cancer Institute and researches did not have any ties with the capsule maker who supplied the ginger formulation for this study. The story briefly mentioned anti-emetics, which reduce vomiting, but more detail could have been supplied regarding the efficacy of other medications for chemotherapy-related nausea. Ginger capsules sold as dietary supplements and products containing ginger flavoring, such as ginger teas or ginger spice, are widely available; however, the story notes that they may not provide the same benefits as the formulation used in the study. According to the story, the company that developed the capsule used in this study is seeking approval from the FDA to market the ginger formulation as an anti-nausea drug. Up front, the story points out that ginger has long been used to quell nausea; however, it also mentions that this is the first large-scale study evaluating its efficacy in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. Other studies, as this story indicates, have had conflicting results. This story does not appear to rely on a press release."
[EX A]: Study: Ginger capsules ease chemotherapy nausea

[EX Q]: The Arizona Senate approved a resolution this week calling for a systemic effort to prevent exposure to porn that's increasingly accessible to younger kids online. At least one legislative chamber has adopted a similar resolution in 15 other states. "It is an epidemic in our society, and this makes a statement that we have a problem," said Arizona Sen. Sylvia Allen, a Republican who blamed pornography for contributing to violence against women, sexual activity among teens and unintended pregnancies. Linking those social issues to pornography is "compete fear-mongering," said Mark Kernes, a senior editor at the trade publication Adult Video News media network. Pornography is harmless entertainment meant for adults, he said. "We're not really a public-health anything," Kernes said. The Arizona resolution that passed Monday doesn't ban pornography or create any other legal changes, but it could signal future action. Similar declarations have been passed in GOP-controlled states ranging from Tennessee to Montana and been adopted in the Republican Party's national platform. Many of the resolutions are based on a model written by the National Center on Sexual Exploitation, an anti-porn group that cites research linking it to a range of problems and argues that it's become too ubiquitous for individuals to combat alone. But others say the public-crisis label is a misguided approach. Research has raised questions about the effect of explicit material on young kids, but links to other often-cited issues like human trafficking are tenuous at best, said Emily Rothman, a community health sciences professor at Boston University. The resolutions risk creating a stigma for marginalized groups like LGBTQ people and miss a key piece of the puzzle by leaving out calls for more robust sex education for teenagers, she said. And porn isn't like a deadly virus, she said. "If you stub your toe, that might be something you can't solve yourself, but that doesn't make it a public health issue," Rothman said. Several Arizona Democrats said the state has more important health threats to confront, such as measles, opioids, homelessness and suicide. Plus, pornography can be part of a healthy sex life for adults, said Albuquerque-based sex therapist David Ley, who sees the resolutions as a backlash against changing attitudes about sexuality. "It's just virtue signaling, there's literally no effect," he said. But the legislation could pave the way for future steps, like keeping publicly funded internet at places like schools and libraries from being used to access porn, said Haley Halverson with the National Center on Sexual Exploitation, which is working on new model legislation for states taking those next steps. "We think these resolutions are really powerful, although they're non-binding, because they raise awareness and educate the public, and hopefully can lay the groundwork to make more resources available to those people who potentially struggle with pornography," she said. Any future steps to restrict access to pornography have to be handled carefully to avoid running afoul of the First Amendment, said David Boaz, executive vice president of the libertarian-leaning Cato Institute. "When you declare it as a public health crisis, people see that as a blank check for the government to do something about it," he said. Utah was the first state to pass an anti-porn resolution in 2016. In the years since, lawmakers have passed bills tightening up filters on wireless internet at public libraries and getting out information to parents about controls available at home, said Republican Rep. Todd Weiler, the effort's sponsor. Another new state law lets parents sue pornography makers if their kids need treatment for problems related to porn use, though it wasn't immediately clear whether anyone has made a legal challenge through it. "We're trying to shed a light on an issue that some people don't think it's OK to talk about," he said. ___ Whitehurst reported from Salt Lake City.
[EX A]:
A growing number of states call porn a public health crisis.