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.
One example is below.
Q: "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."
A: Some appendicitis cases may not require ’emergency’ surgery
Rationale: 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.
Q: A spectator holds up inflatable aliens during the Live Earth concert at Wembley Stadium, London July 7, 2007. REUTERS/Stephen Hird Britain’s Royal Society found that 66 percent of respondents to a survey to mark its 350th anniversary said that disease control and eradication should be a top priority for science. Around 53 percent said they would like science to enable them to extend their lifespan. Royal Society President Martin Rees said the lives of modern humans are hugely different from those of our ancestors because of the scientific advances made since the society was founded in 1660, when science was in its infancy. “Science is an unending quest for understanding and over the coming 350 years our appetite for discovery could see us develop a cure for cancer, a solution to climate change, and even discover extra-terrestrial life,” he said in a statement. In terms of developing new vaccinations - after cancer, preventing HIV/AIDS was seen as important for 60 percent of the 2,000 people surveyed and with malaria 37 percent. “There can be no better way to celebrate the Royal Society’s 350th anniversary than to look to the future of science, built on the foundations of today’s cutting-edge research,” Rees said. Nearly half of people in Britain (44 percent) believe in the existence of aliens, according to the poll. Over a third think scientists should be actively searching for and attempting to make contact with aliens, a figure that rises to 46 percent for male respondents. However, fewer than one in 10 people believe that space exploration should be a top priority for the scientific community. After health issues, climate change was the next highest priority for the public with a third of those questioned considering it important. This figure rises to 44 percent among 18 to 24-year-olds, suggesting that younger generations are more in tune with the threat of global warming. As the curtain falls on the 350th anniversary year, the Royal Society is publishing “Science sees further,” a new report examining the most pressing issues facing the world today and asks what the future of science will hold. Launched on Tuesday, it includes chapters on whether we are alone in the universe, how we can manage the increasing demands on our planet’s resources, and whether science can save the lives of millions with new vaccines.
A:
Science should find aliens, halt cancer: survey.