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.

[EX Q]: Paragraph: We give the story credit for at least citing a $30,000 cost for the “surgeries” but wish it had explained what that included and what it might not. Surgery to change the battery every two years certainly adds to cost. Undoubtedly patients require more intensive expensive followup and perhaps specialized checks to ensure the device is working. With broad strokes across discussion of three different uses for three different conditions, the story did an adequate job quantifiying benefits. As stated in the “Evidence” criterion above, this is where a control group and reporting response rates for treated versus control groups would be very informative. Instead, we only get a qualitative description of benefits which is useful but which might leave careful readers asking for more. This is one area where the story could have been improved. There was no detailed discussion of what can go wrong with deep brain stimulation. There was a brief mention of “if” the electrodes cause neurological side effects. But how often does that happen? And the story noted that the surgery does “sometimes” cause dangerous brain bleeding or infections. How often is “sometimes”? At a very high, overview level, the story explained the current state of the evidence. But more information would have been better. Current evidence for depression/OCD is based on case series. These studies don’t have a control group, making the results more subject to bias. No disease mongering of any of the conditions discussed. The story was repeatedly clear about deep brain stimulation being used when standard medications or behavior therapy had not worked. But it would be helpful to give estimates of the proportion of patients with depression or OCD who aren’t helped by available treatments. Several sources were cited. Dr. Mayberg’s connection to St. Jude Medical was mentioned. The story could have mentioned that Dr. Okun’s center and Dr. Greenberg have received funding from Medtronic. Greenberg’s current funding from the National Institute of Mental Health was noted. We think the sourcing and disclosure was adequate. A strong point of the story was that it repeatedly provided the context for the use of deep brain stimulation — “when standard medications fail…worst-case patients…doesn’t mean patients can abandon traditional therapy…people with intractable (problems)…(people who) failed behavior therapy.” This story already attempted to accomplish a lot, but to be complete, it could have offered explicit description of currently approved options: antidepressant medications (multiple classes); psychotherapy (multiple options); combinations of medications or medications and therapy; transcranial magnetic stimulation (limited availabilty), vagal nerve stimulation, ECT – and estimate of the proportion of patients who fail these treatments. Nonethless, we feel it met the criteria for a satisfactory score. The story states that 70,000 have had deep brian stimulation for Parkinson’s or other movement disorders, and that studies are underway on at least 60 people with intractable obsessive-compulsive disorder and 100 with severe depression. The experimental nature of these approaches is clear from the story. A nice touch would be to give a link to clinicaltrials.gov to allow readers the option of looking up more information on the studies in progress and finding out if recruitment is open and how to access the study. The story did a good job putting the new uses of deep brain stimulation into the context of other research and other therapeutic approaches. It’s clear that the story did not rely on a news release. Claim: Trying brain pacemakers to zap psychiatric disease
[EX A]: We especially appreciate the lack of hype in this story. The reporter clearly worked hard to stick to the evidence – not merely to promote the potential. About 65-70 percent of patients with major depressive disorder improve substantially with 1 to 2 course of standard treatment (medication, psychotherapy or combinations). Subsequent treatment options have progressively lower rates of treatment response. Therefore, a significant number of people need other treatment options. Deep brain stimulation is an invasive treatment, but one that has shown promise in a small number of patients.

[EX Q]: Paragraph: A day after Australia recorded its hottest day on record, thick smoke blanketed the harbor city, shrouded the Opera House and brought many outdoor activities to a halt. The state of emergency declaration gave firefighters broad powers to control government resources, force evacuations, close roads and shut down utilities across New South Wales, which is home to more than 7 million people. Authorities said nearly 120 fires remained ablaze by late afternoon, more than half of which are uncontrolled, and with temperatures forecast to top 45 degrees Celsius (113°F) in some areas, officials warned residents to be on high alert. “The firefront has been spreading very quickly and intensely,” NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS) Commissioner Shane Fitzsimmons told reporters in Sydney, adding that two firefighters had been airlifted to hospital with burns to their faces and airways. “It’s still a very difficult and dangerous set of circumstances.”  Days out from Christmas, a time when many Australians head to the coast for the holidays, NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian advised people to make sure “you are prepared to change your plans should circumstances change.”  In Shoalhaven, a popular coastal destination some 190 km (120 miles) south of Sydney, local mayor Amanda Findley said people were poised to evacuate. “There is a large amount of smoke looming over the city, which shows how close the fire is,” Findley told Reuters by telephone. “It is extremely hot and windy now so we are all worried the fire could spread. People are really worried that they may lose everything.”  The RFS posted footage on its official Twitter account showing firefighters tackling one of the three blazes ringing Sydney. A waterbomber aircraft was dwarfed by thick grey and black billowing cloud as it attempted to douse flames in bushland just meters away from homes. Australia has been battling wildfires across much of its east coast for weeks, leaving six people dead, more than 680 homes destroyed and nearly 3 million acres (1.2 million hectares) of bushland burnt. Berejiklian said as many as 40 homes had been destroyed on Thursday. Australia on Wednesday broke all-time heat records for the second day running, with maximum temperatures reaching an average of 41.9 degree Celsius, the Bureau of Meteorology said. Some 1,700 firefighters have been deployed across NSW, but officials warned that was still not enough to cover every potential danger and urged people in high risk areas to evacuate while it was still safe to do so. The current state of emergency will last for seven days, while a total fire ban that has been in place since Tuesday will remain until midnight on Saturday. The major fires around Sydney, which is home to more than 5 million people, have resulted in days of heavy pollution in the city usually known for its sparkling harbor and blue skies. One megafire in the Kanangra Boyd National Park to the city’s southwest had crept to the very outskirts of Campbelltown, a suburb of 157,000 people. By late afternoon, Sydney was sitting at No.4 on the IQAir AirVisual live rankings of pollution in global cities, above Dhaka, Mumbai, Shanghai and Jakarta. Many commuters have donned breathing masks in recent weeks as air quality has plunged to hazardous levels not previously seen in the city. NSW Ambulance Commissioner Dominic Morgan said the service had experienced a 10% surge in call-outs for patients suffering respiratory conditions over the past week and urged susceptible people to remain indoors and keep their medication close. Prime Minister Scott Morrison has weathered a storm of criticism on social media in recent days for going on an overseas holiday during the emergency, adding to criticism that his government is failing to deliver adequate climate change policies. As local media reported Morrison was in Hawaii on a family holiday, about 500 protesters gathered outside his official Sydney residence to demand urgent action on climate change. Morrison’s office refused to confirm his whereabouts. One protestor, wearing an Hawaiian shirt, carried a sign reading, “ScoMo, where the bloody hell are you?” referencing the leader’s nickname and a decade-old international advertisement for Tourism Australia that was banned in several countries because the language was deemed offensive. Australia’s low-lying Pacific neighbors have been particularly critical of the coal-rich nation’s climate policies following modest progress at the U.N. climate talks in Madrid. “It was particularly disappointing to see our Pacific cousins in Australia actively standing in the way of progress at a time when we have been watching in horror as their own country is ablaze,” Marshall Islands president Hilda Heine said in a statement on Wednesday. Claim: Ring of fire: Australian state declares emergency as wildfires approach Sydney.
[EX A]: Australia’s most populous state declared its second emergency in as many months on Thursday as extreme heat and strong winds stoked more than 100 bushfires, including three major blazes on Sydney’s doorstep.

[EX Q]: Paragraph: On March 1 2020, a Facebook user shared a Twitter screenshot about Pablo Picasso having died in 1973, which appeared somewhat in the style of “I was today years old when I learned” memes. On Facebook, the post racked up 40,000 shares and counting within 48 hours. On Twitter, the original February 28 2020 tweet was even more popular:Picasso died in 1973… no one fucking talk to be i thought this man lived in 1500— ells| wrens bitch (@stanscaps) February 28, 2020It read:Picasso died in 1973… no one fucking talk to be i thought this man lived in 1500Although 1973 was not even fifty years before 2020, the claim seemed to resonate wherever it was shared. In fact, a number of “today I learned” and similar Reddit subreddit posts expressed nearly identical sentiments over the years:TIL That Pablo Picasso died in 1973 – for some reason I thought he was alive a really long time ago. from todayilearnedTIL Pablo Picasso lived until 1973, long enough to have a colour photograph taken of him. from todayilearnedTIL Pablo Picasso died in 1973! from todayilearnedCommenters in those threads replied with sentiments similar to the one in the tweet — that they had believed that Picasso was of a far earlier era:I’m ashamed to admit that before reading this factoid on here a couple days ago I would’ve placed his death sometime in the late 19th/early 20th century. I excitedly announced to my wife that “Picasso just died in 1973!” and she called me an idiot. But whatever, she thinks the expression “play it by ear” is play it by year, and sometimes modifies it like “we’ll play it by month.”One of the TIL posts had a title indicating Picasso “lived until 1973, long enough to have a colour photograph taken of him.” A top comment accepted the poster’s point, but pointed out that color photography itself was not very new in 1973:Color photography was around way before 1973, but i see your point, most people don’t realize he lived that far into more modern times.Had to add this bit of info;1973 – Fairchild Semiconductor releases the first large image forming CCD chip: 100 rows and 100 columns of pixels.So in theory Pablo could have had a digital photograph taken of him.In threads like that, comments edged uncomfortably close to unspoken questions about what life was like in the 1970s. And a popular post on r/tumblr again demonstrated disbelief at hearing Picasso died in 1973, also indicating that post on Tumblr had a lot of engagement (due to Tumblr users all apparently believing that the artist wasn’t around during the 20th century):picasso died in 1973? from tumblrAlthough the original Tumblr post was inaccessible, it lived on in reblogs, and read:finding out picasso died in 1973 feels like the fakest thing ive ever heard. everyone talks about him like he lived in a cave with nothing but a torch and paint he made from berries or bear shit or somethin but nah this dude probably sat down watchin looney tunes thinkin “damn i should draw some dude with a nose on his forehead thatd be dope” i feel so lied toOther users shared where they were when they learned Picasso was a relatively modern artist, describing the moment as some “Mandela effect type shit”:This is really like some Mandela effect type shit because I thought the exact same thing until I was watching a show from the 90s and one of the characters claimed to have met Picasso and I was so dumbfounded until I looked him up and realized he lived in the 1900s— bruno (@itsbrunoleon) February 29, 2020Barstool Sports even reported Picasso’s 1973 death as new news in December 2018. Once again, the existence of archival images in color or video of Picasso proved mind-blowing to the author:1973! 1973! 1973! Not 1328. Not 1439. Not 1573. Not 1612. 1973! 1973 was like a couple days ago. Pablo and I missed each other by a mere 16 years. I thought we missed each other by 1,600. If you had walked up to me 45 minutes ago and asked, “Hey what year do you think Pablo Picasso died?” I would’ve guessed something like 1654. Just a complete and total shot in the dark but I know for a fact he died hundreds and hundreds of years ago. Him and Shakespeare surely drank tea together. Nope. 1973. So you’re saying Pablo Picasso was alive at the same time as my parents? Get the fuck outta here. The Godfather came out in 1972. So you’re telling me Pablo Picasso probably saw The Godfather? Pablo saw us walk on the moon! My brain hurts. I’m still not even sure I believe what Google says (despite checking no less than 50 times). […]Not only that but there’s VIDEO OF HIM PAINTINGNot only did Picasso die in 1973, outlets like the New York Times and New York Daily News had accessible obituaries for the artist on their respective sites:PARIS, April 8 [1973] — Pablo Picasso, 91, the most influential and prolific painter of the 20th century, died today at his country home at Mougins on the French Riviera, overlooking the rust-colored hills and the blue Mediterranean which had become his spiritual home.He died of pulmonary edema, an accumulation of water in the lungs. Although he had had several bouts with flu during the winter, his death came as a surprise to his wife, Jacqueline, and to the few friends who had visited him recently, still hard at work in his immense, cluttered atelier.One element of the repeated rediscovery of this fact was ongoing confusion about the era in which Pablo Picasso had lived and died. Commenters routinely stated they believed Picasso was notable several centuries prior, not unlike other relativity of historical events facts which had previously gone viral.It was extremely common for commenters to concur with the misperception, and then chide themselves for being “stupid” or “uneducated.” But art history isn’t something to which most people outside art school are often exposed, and a simple online search suggested that cognitive grouping of well-known names in art might be why readers repeatedly surprised one another with Picasso’s death date.We searched on Google for “who were the greatest painters of all time?”; Google automatically sorts a header to the top of results. Picasso was ranked third by Google, but the ordered list and its range of notability seemed to show where the idea Picasso was from an earlier era might have arisen.Leonardo da Vinci and Vincent Van Gogh were first and second, dying in 1519 and 1890 respectively. Picasso was third, followed by Rembrandt (1669) and Michelangelo (1564):In the next six spots were Monet (1926), Vermeer (1675), Caravaggio (1610), Raphael (1520), Salvador Dali (1989), and Cezanne (1906):Finally, there was Velazquez (1660), Jackson Pollock (1956), Rubens (1640), Klimt (1918), Renoir (1919), and Matisse (1954):When we averaged the first row of dates, it came out to about 1723. Adding the second row brought the average up to 1750, and the inclusions of the 20th century painters of the third row (Pollock, Klimt, Renoir, and Matisse) only brought that average up to 1780. So many of the most well-known artists were from broadly-recognized periods like the early and late Renaissance — if a list cites da Vinci (1590) and Michaelangelo (1564) alongside Picasso (1973), it was probably natural for people to assume that Picasso came after the Renaissance, but not long after.It was fairly easy to verify that Pablo Picasso indeed died in 1973, but that didn’t really seem to be the interesting information revealed in the referenced posts over the years. More interesting to people was how so many users were mistaken about Picasso’s era — which seemed likely down to human tendency to group similar items. It also raises profound questions about groupings and how this very human tendency is exploited in the age of weaponized digital disinformation — questions to which we are only beginning to answer. Claim: Artist Pablo Picasso died in 1973.
[EX A]:
‘Picasso Died in 1973, Surprising the Internet Every Year’