Generate an explanation for the given claim using the provided supporting material from the paragraph. Please consider the following points while generating an output. 1) The claim will always have supporting proof in the paragraph, and the paragraph will have a clear point of view supporting the claim. 2) There can be instances where direct correlation to the claim is not available. Make use of the sentences in the paragraph to provide a corresponding output supporting the claim. 3) The explanation should be at least one and at most twelve sentences long.

Example Input: Paragraph: Made by Bayer AG and Onyx Pharmaceuticals Inc, Nexavar is  approved in the United States for kidney and liver cancer. Eight out of the first nine patients who took the drug saw  improvements in their ability to exercise, and six out of nine  had significant improvement in their right ventricular ejection  fraction, which measures the heart’s ability to pump blood to  the lungs. Four patients had decreased pressure in their pulmonary  artery, which supplies blood to the lungs. “What patients are telling us is they are able to do more  in their daily lives,” said Dr. Mardi Gomberg-Maitland of the  University of Chicago, who presented her findings at a meeting  of the American Thoracic Society in Toronto. The original  research on the drug was done at the University. She said the surprising thing is that the drug worked so  quickly. Patients saw benefits in only four months. The study is the first human trial to examine the  sorafenib, or Nexavar, in pulmonary hypertension, a disease in  which blood vessels feeding the lungs narrow, forcing the heart  to work harder. Like cancer, pulmonary hypertension is a disease marked by  abnormal cell growth, which narrows the arteries feeding the  lungs, reducing blood flow and taxing the heart. Sorafenib  appears to interfere with this process. The trial enrolled patients with stable disease who  continued to take their primary medications, which included a  continuous infusion of a drug called prostacyclin and Pfizer  Inc’s Viagra or sildenafil. Both relax blood vessels that feed  the lungs. Gomberg-Maitland said this therapy typically slows  progression of the disease, but does not reverse it. They added sorafenib for 16 weeks, but at a lower dose than  cancer patients use. Most patients in the trial increased their exercise  capacity, as measured by time on a treadmill or a six-minute  walk test. They saw an average 8 percent improvement in their  right ventricular ejection fraction, a measure of the heart’s  pumping power. Side effects included mild hair loss and skin reactions. The study was designed to last only 16 weeks, but all of  the patients continue to take the drug, some now for more than  a year. “What is exciting about this is all of the patients feel  better and nobody wants to come off the medication,”  Gomberg-Maitland said in a telephone interview. The study was intended to test the safety and dosing of the  drug. It was funded by The Doris Duke Foundation and the  University of Chicago. The researchers now plan to study the drug in 40 to 60  patients at different research centers. Claim: Nexavar helped in pulmonary hypertension study.
Example Output: The cancer drug Nexavar is showed  promise in a small study of people with pulmonary hypertension,  a debilitating condition marked by high blood pressure in the  arteries that supply the lungs, U.S. researchers said on  Monday.

Example Input: Paragraph: Some 100 medical workers are reported to have died from the disease so far, including many nurses, Howard Catton, ceo of the International Council of Nurses, told a news briefing. The world’s 28 million nurses, 59% of all health workers, were overstretched before the crisis began, the WHO, the Nursing Now campaign, and Geneva-based council said in the first “State of the World’s Nursing Report”. Some have become targets out of people’s fear of contagion. “We have picked up reports around the world of abuse, harassment of health workers, we had one case of somebody being spat on as well. It is completely unacceptable, reprehensible,” Catton said. He called for governments to have a “zero tolerance approach” to such abuse and to ensure that public health messages are clear and fact-based. Giorgio Cometto of WHO’s health workforce department said it was a relatively new phenomenon “whereby health workers are seen as a potential risk, as a potential threat as opposed to being a solution to the current crisis”. “This really reinforces the need to have adequate communication for the public as well as specific measures to be put in place to protect health workers particularly in the context of the response to the current pandemic,” he said. Baroness Mary Watkins, chair of Nursing Now, said nurses have been attacked previously during outbreaks of Ebola and the AID-HIV epidemic. Referring to COVID-19, she said: “We have not had active violence that I know of in the UK, but we have had people trying to take nurses’ badges because they have been allowed to go into supermarkets early to buy food before going on their shift... That seems to have had a stop put to it. “But there has been a very very clear directive from the police in many countries that attacking a health care worker is unacceptable. We need to keep pressure up,” Watkins added. There is still a global shortage of nearly 6 million nurses, mainly in low- and lower-middle income countries, where the number of new recruits barely keeps pace with population growth, the report said. Nurses are particularly lacking across Africa, in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, and Venezuela, it added. Claim: Nurses must be protected from abuse during coronavirus pandemic: WHO, nursing groups.
Example Output: Authorities must protect nurses and other health workers from harassment and attacks compounding the already heavy toll they are paying in the pandemic, the World Health Organization (WHO) and top nursing officials said on Tuesday.

Example Input: Paragraph: While there was no mention of coffee cost, this element is not particulary germane to this story. The article reported that drinking four eight-ounce cups of coffee was linked to a 30% reduction in the risk of developing diabetes. Rather than relative reduction, the article should have included the absolute reduction. The rate at which women who drank coffee developed type II diabetes was 6.05% while the rate in women who drank 4-5 cups of coffee per day was 4.30%. The relative difference always sounds more convincing; the absolute difference is what is probably most meaningful to viewers. So, in this case, a 30% relative difference equated to an absolute difference of less than 2%. There was no mention of potential harms that might be derived from increased coffee consumption. The article could have included concern about disrupted sleep, heart palpitations, increased urinary frequency, and jitteriness. Because of the design of the study covered in this story (a prospective epidemiologic study), it is not possible to conclude that increasing decaffeinated coffee consumption will decrease the risk of type II diabetes. This important point was covered by one of the physician quotes in the story. The speculation about what was in decaf coffee that resulted in the decreased risk of type II diabetes was not well grounded. Other than painting perhaps a little too rosy picture of all the potential benefits that might be gained from coffee consumption, this article did not practice disease mongering. It did not present any data on the prevalence of type II diabetes. The story could have mentioned that the Type II diabetes has become rather common place and is a public health issue. It appears that this story is based on a research study in the Archives of Internal Medicine and from comments by one physician and one researcher. It certainly would have been better to actually mention where the study was published rather than referring to it as “the study out today”. It would also have been better to give us some perspective about the value of the quotes provided by giving some background on the two people interviewed. Nonethless, we credit the story for having different perspectives. There was no mention of other lifestyle strategies that an individual might pursue in order to lower the risk of type II diabetes. This is a particularly important public health message. Moderate daily physical activity, such as walking, has also been shown to lower the risk of type II diabetes. The story isn’t about a treatment per se, but about the effects of drinking coffee, which is readily available to all. The story is quite clear about the widespread availability and use of coffee. There is a growing body of literature suggesting that coffee drinking can lower one’s risk of type II diabetes. This story covered the latest such evidence, and made it clear that this is part of a growing body of “more intriguing evidence.” There is no evidence that this story relied solely or largely on a news release. Claim: Coffee found to reduce risk of diabetes
Example Output:
There is a growing body of literature suggesting that coffee drinking can lower one’s risk of type II diabetes. This story covered the latest such evidence, and made it clear that this is part of a growing body of “more intriguing evidence.”  In a brief story (less than 350 words), ABC News did a decent job of covering the latest research. A brief review of the problem of Type 2 diabetes would have been helpful to anchor the piece, along with a review of ways to prevent the disease (avoid becoming overweight, daily exercise, dietary modification).This article reported on the results of a study in the June 26, 2006 issue of the Archives of Internal Medicine which found that increased use of decaf coffee was associated with decreased risk of developing type II diabetes. The article reported this inaccurately as “The study out today found decaffeinated coffee is just as effective against diabetes as regular coffee, because both are loaded with the same nutrients.” In fact, the study found that while decaffeinated coffee was found to be associated with a statistically significant lower risk of developing type II diabetes, caffeinated coffee was not. The story did not address an obvious question: if coffee consumption is so beneficial for reducing the risk of developing type II diabetes, then why is the incidence of this disease on the rise at the same time that Americans are consuming more coffee? Nonethless, in a brief TV news story, ABC News covered many of the bases (and addressed a majority of our criteria).