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.

Q: Paragraph: U.S. Marines of Weapons Company, 1st Battalion, 3rd Marines are silhouetted against the sunset during a joint patrol with Afghan National Army (ANA) soldiers along Helmand river near the Camp Gorgak in Helmand province, southern Afghanistan, July 3, 2011. REUTERS/Shamil Zhumatov The study, published in the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, analyzed medical records of 307,520 children of active-duty Army personnel, aged 5 to 17 years old. It found almost 17 percent of them exhibited mental health problems. “Children of parents who spent more time deployed between 2003 and 2006 fared worse than children whose parents were deployed for a shorter duration,” the study’s researchers wrote. The lead researcher was Alyssa Mansfield, who was at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill at the time the study was conducted. The U.S. Army reported some 562,000 members in active duty and more than 570,000 children of such members in 2010. Just under two-thirds of all active-duty servicemen and women were married and 15 percent were raising children as single parents. The children whose parents deployed at least once, for an average of 11 months, as part of the U.S. Operation Iraqi Freedom or Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan were especially likely to suffer from adjustment, behavioral, depressive or stress disorders than those whose parents never went to war, the study found. Boys were more likely to have mental health problems than girls, according to the report, which reviewed records for patients cared for at military medical facilities and at civilian facilities using military medical insurance. “We used to think about deployment as a single experience: I go, I’m away, it’s difficult and then I come back. Well, it’s a way of life in the military that deployments continue to occur and families have to manage the consequences,” said Dr. Stephen Cozza, psychiatry professor at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences. Cozza has studied the issue and wrote an editorial accompanying the report. “These are consequences that aren’t necessarily short-term,” he said. The challenges don’t necessarily end with the final return home, he said, as soldiers may bring back their own mental health issues which affect relationships with their children. Claim: Mental problems of soldiers' kids tied to wars.

A: The longer U.S. soldiers were deployed in Iraq or Afghanistan, the more likely their children would be diagnosed with mental health problems, according to a study published Monday.
****
Q: Paragraph: "The story covers cost in the very last two lines. Adequate quantification of benefits seen in the study. Story says ""few eye-related complications"" were reported in the Lucentis group, but didn’t say what few means or what they were. We don’t think that’s quite adequate. Adequate job explaining how the study was done and what it means. No disease mongering in the story. One quote from the head of the National Eye Institute. But he didn’t really evaluate evidence – only talked about hope. Meantime, no mention that Genentech funded  the trial (a strength of the NYT story was its discussion of the ""pay for play"" aspect of the research) – and no mention that Dr. Bressler disclosed financial ties to Genentech. From the Times: Some doctors criticized the organizers of the trial for testing Lucentis rather than another Genentech drug, Avastin, which works in the same way as Lucentis. Although it is a cancer drug, Avastin is often used off-label for eye diseases because it is far cheaper than Lucentis, costing only $20 to $100 a dose, compared with $2,000 for Lucentis. Avastin is undercutting sales of Lucentis, which totaled $1.1 billion in the United States last year. Organizers of the trial conceded that a major reason Lucentis was chosen was that Genentech, which is now owned by Roche, agreed to provide the drug free of charge and to contribute $9 million in additional financing — but only if Lucentis were used. “Obviously you can’t underplay $9 million,” said Dr. Ferris of the eye institute, which is part of the part of the National Institutes of Health. But he said there were other factors as well, like a belief that Lucentis might have been the better drug. Dr. Philip J. Rosenfeld, a professor of ophthalmology at the University of Miami, said the decision was “clearly a case of pay to play” since Genentech’s money dictated the choice of drugs. At least the story mentioned the uncertainty about whether Lucentis is any better  than the cheaper Avastin, and mentioned an upcoming trial comparing the two in age-related macular degeneration. The story explains that Lucentis was approved 4 years ago for another cause. Story explains the drug is already approved for another use, and it also – at the very end – mentions that an older and much cheaper drug is also effective. It’s clear the story did not rely on a news release." Claim: Drug Reverses Diabetes-Related Vision Loss

A: The key difference between this and the NYT story was that WebMD didn’t reflect on the question of why Genentech didn’t test its cheaper Avastin against the much more expensive Lucentis. The important issue of corporate sponsorship of a clinical trial was overlooked. You want to talk about comparative effectiveness research? This would have been a good place for it.
****
Q: Paragraph: Estimates cost to be $2-3 /day. Provides at least a ball park estimate for people about the amount of weight that might be anticipated to be lost with the use of this medication. The story explains that about 70% of users experience gastrointestinal complications and lists some. While discussion of a particular study is provided, there is no information about the nature of the study (i.e. randomized or not) and no details that would permit the reader to access the reference. Brief mention of medical benefits that can be gained from the amount of weight loss attained with the use of xenical (e.g. lower BP, improved cholesterol levels, reduced risk of diabetes). Provides quotes from drug maker, researchers, and public watchdog organization Article presents information on weight loss results from xenical, diet, and exercise (7% of body weight) compared with diet and exercise (4% of body weight) over a 4 year period. The story did not mention sibutramine, another prescription weight loss drug. Article includes the fact that the switch in status from prescription only to OTC is under FDA consideration. Article is about a medication, xenical, available by prescription that is being considered for sale as an over-the-counter (OTC) drug. Claim: Weighing a Pill For Weight Loss

A:
This article is a balanced presentation about the risks and benefits of a weight lost drug (Xenical) that is currently marketed as the prescription medication Orlistat and is under current consideration by the FDA for over-the-counter distribution. Use of xenical along with diet and exercise can result in modest weight loss that may result in beneficial health outcomes. The common side effects (seen in ~70%) of consumers of this medication include flatulence, increased bowel movements, diarrhea and anal leakage.
****