instruction:
Given a paragraph and a claim, classify it this way: If the claim contradicts the evidence present in the paragraph, classify the claim as '0'. If the claim has multiple supporting *AND* contradicting evidences, classify the claim as '1'. If the claim has supporting evidence and the paragraph is in overall favor of the claim, then classify the claim as '2'.
question:
Paragraph: In May 2016, photographs and messages reproduced above began circulating on Facebook along with claims that lurking underneath labels of pricey salon-brand hair products purchased through discount retailers were cheaper, lower quality brands. Photographs show the CHI line of hair care products with T.J. Maxx price tag and the label half peeled away to show a bottle bearing a less expensive (and presumably lower-quality) hair care product. Most versions of the claim included an assertion that salon-brand hair products should only be bought at hair salons, not discount retailers. The rumors served as a tacit criticism of salon clientele who purchase product from third parties rather than from salons or stylists (who would earn commission and meet salon sales goals otherwise). A similar social media rumor maintained that eyelash extensions can cause “lash lice,” a story spread primarily by multi-level marketing salespeople hawking mascara. In another instance, salons and stylists spread a rumor that Pantene (one of the top-selling drugstore hair care brands) can be flammable in combination with popular hair-lightening treatments. Both rumors began with or were passed along by people invested in the sale of competing products at full price. T.J. Maxx said that the CHI products depicted were genuine: At T.J. Maxx, conducting our business with integrity means everything to us and we take pride in offering our customers great values on high quality brand-name products. We have looked into your concerns and can assure you that the contents of the bottle are authentic and are as described on the outer label. We have also confirmed with our supplier that its relabeling of the bottle was appropriate. We thank you for your ongoing patronage of our stores. CHI also responded our questions about the photographs. The company explained that the labeling was due in part to manufacturing fluctuations, as well as cutting back on unnecessary waste: Recently, several of our customers have noticed cans of CHI® products with labels covering up other products. We sincerely wish to clear up any confusion. The Egyptian Oil and French Oil and other cans you may have seen were originally another CHI® product brand we manufactured. Due to a legal challenge that arose concerning the new brand names and designs, we were forced to cease production. As a result of this, we were left with many empty cylinders. To avoid them taking up vital space in our warehouse but most importantly, adding unnecessary waste to landfills, we decided to uphold our environmentally conscious efforts that we have maintained since 1986. We felt we made the right decision by placing original CHI® labels over these cylinders and filling them with our CHI® formulas. Therefore, the product is authentically made by Farouk Systems with the correct CHI® label on them and product inside. We sincerely apologize for any confusion this may have caused our customers. One of the two viral photographs didn’t display a T.J. Maxx or Marshall’s price tag, strongly suggesting that the relabeled bottles were indeed not restricted to non-salon retail environments. CHI’s statement affirmed the relabeled bottles were in no way different than any other from the brand, whether purchased in a salon or a discount department store. In this instance, both the retailer and the manufacturer said that the product packaging was simply repurposed, but the contents remain authentic and identical to products sold in salons and other non-discount retail environments. (In instances where counterfeiting occurs, the company being impersonated is typically the first to object to dilution of their brand.) Claim: Retailers T.J. Maxx and Marshall's sell counterfeit salon products.
answer:
0


question:
Paragraph: Italy has concluded Covid-19 is not a virus, and people are actually dying of amplified global 5G electromagnetic radiation poisoning. Italy disobeyed world health law from the WHO saying not to carry out autopsies on Covid-19 patients. The WHO never said autopsies couldn’t take place. Italy has found that Covid-19 is actually disseminated intravascular coagulation (thrombosis). The way to cure this is antibiotics, anti-inflammatories and anticoagulants. Antibiotics do not directly treat Covid-19, which is caused by a virus. The anti-inflammatory ibuprofen is being trialled for use against Covid-19 and an anticoagulant has been used in some Covid-19 cases. Aspirin is not a specific cure. Covid-19 is not a virus, but a bacterium being amplified by 5G which causes inflammation and hypoxia. Covid-19 patients can get secondary infections from bacteria. Hypoxia and types of inflammation can be symptoms of Covid-19. There’s no proof Covid-19 is in any way related to 5G. People with Covid-19 should take aspirin 100mg and Apronax or paracetamol. Trials into both of these drugs’ effectiveness in treating Covid-19 are ongoing, but haven’t concluded yet. Paracetamol can ease symptoms but isn’t a specific treatment. Covid-19 clots the blood causing thrombosis, stopping blood flow and oxygenating the heart and lungs. Severe Covid-19 can cause blood clotting problems and issues like this have been seen in Covid-19 patients, but this is not the only thing that can be fatal in patients. In a day, Italy sent home more than 14,000 patients after treating them with Aspirin and Apronax. The Italian Medicines Agency doesn’t mention aspirin or apronax in its list drugs used to treat Covid-19 outside of clinical trials. And there’s no record of a day when 14,000 people were sent home from hospital in Italy. There is an order to incinerate or immediately bury Covid-19 bodies without autopsy. There is no such order. Claim 1 of 10 Claim: Covid-19 clots the blood causing thrombosis, stopping blood flow and oxygenating the heart and lungs.
answer:
0


question:
Paragraph: Cost is particularly important when many patients may have to pay out of pocket for weight loss drugs. The story does not provide any information about the cost of orlistat, the cost of the food in the study diets, or the cost of the counseling provided to study participants. A quotation from one of the study researchers suggests that a low-carb diet might be a cheaper alternative to a low-fat diet plus medication. While this is certainly possible, it also seems possible that low-carb eating, with its emphasis on protein from meat, would be more expensive than low-fat eating, and that this would cancel out any savings on medication. In any case, making any kind of judgment in this area would require more hard data, but the story provides only speculation. The story earns points for noting the absolute reduction in blood pressure in each group. We wish, though, that it had provided the weight loss in similar terms of actual pounds or kilograms lost instead of as a percentage of bodyweight. Similar to the HealthDay piece, the story provides no information about the potential adverse effects of orlistat or a low-carbohydrate diet. Similar to the HealthDay piece, the story gives a decent overview of the basic study design and outcomes. However more information would have helped us judge how well these diet plans might work in the real world. There is no information on who dropped out of the study or how well the two groups were able to adhere to the diet. In addition, the story states that low-carb dieters were advised to consume 20 g of carbohydrate per day, but it seems very unlikely that participants were able to maintain that level of carbohydrate restriction for almost a year. Overall, this story squeaks by with a satisfactory. The story does not exaggerate the prevalence or consequences of obesity. The story’s only quotes come from Dr. Yancy, a researcher affiliated with the study. The story also does not inform readers that Dr. Yancy and another co-author on the study have received funding from the Robert C. Atkins Foundation, which promotes research on low-carb diets. Given the story’s focus on blood pressure, it should have mentioned how the results of this study might compare to treatment with blood pressure medication. The story mentioned that orlistat, the weight loss medication tested in the study, is the active ingredient in Xenical and Alli. Unlike the competing piece in HealthDay, however, it did not specify that Xenical is a prescription drug and that Alli is available over the counter. Although this information would have been helpful, providing the trade names for both drugs is probably enough to orient most readers. The story mentions that both low-carb and low-fat diets are proven to produce weight loss. However, it suggests that we should be surprised that a low-carbohydrate diet could produce such beneficial effects on blood pressure. In fact, this effect was well-documented in another comparison of weight loss diets published in JAMA in 2007. The story lifts two quotes directly from a news release put out by Duke University. While the story admits that the quotes came from a release, it doesn’t perform the basic task of finding another source to provide an alternate viewpoint. The reader is left wondering if this is journalism or simply an extension of the Duke University press office. Claim: Low-Carb Diet Lowers Blood Pressure
answer:

0


