instruction:
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.
question:
Paragraph: Strong point. The story said, “There’s one other thing, the CDC says. Make sure patients understand that warding off HIV isn’t cheap. Each pill currently costs around $36, which adds up to more than $13,000 a year. Some insurers might pay, but some might balk” The story stated the benefits clearly – albeit only in relative risk reduction terms. We would have preferred absolute numbers. But it did such a good job in telling the updated story about proper use of the drug in question that we give it a satisfactory score. Several clear points were made about harms: The story did a great job of communicating the read-between-the-lines reality of the evidence for the use of this drug. NO disease-mongering here. The story is based on the CDC’s evaluation and warnings about proper use of the drug. We would have liked to have seen a clinician-researcher’s perspective – someone not affiliated with the CDC analysis. Not applicable. Because of the nature of this drug, no comparison is really necessary. As the story stated, “It’s the first time anybody’s shown that taking a pill can prevent HIV – and it was the first new weapon against HIV unveiled in many years.” The story is clear that Truvada is already on the market. The story stated, “It’s the first time anybody’s shown that taking a pill can prevent HIV – and it was the first new weapon against HIV unveiled in many years.” We  have no evidence that the story relied on a news release. Claim: CDC To Doctors: Anti-HIV Pill No Magic Bullet Against Virus
answer:
Clear, succinct, and important reporting that tones down some of the celebratory tone that greeted a drug’s “landmark study” from a few months ago. The story notes that there was a lot of celebrating when news came out in November that taking a pill can reduce the risk of getting HIV. But the story delivered a clear dose of evidence and caution – important journalism.


question:
Paragraph: Hampden County Sheriff Nick Cocchi has designated a wing of his jail for the treatment of men civilly committed for substance abuse reasons. It’s the only facility in western Massachusetts housing the men, and just one of three in the entire state for men. While some are trying to end the practice, Cocchi and his supporters — including local mayors and lawmakers — say the jail’s year-old Stonybrook Stabilization and Treatment Centers is key to curbing the opioid problem in the county, which includes the former manufacturing cities of Springfield and Holyoke. Fatal overdoses surged more than 80% in Hampden County from 2017 to 2018 even as they declined statewide for the second straight year in 2018, according to state data. “People coming into our program are angry, violent and sick,” Cocchi said as he and other officials celebrated the program’s anniversary earlier this week. “They are at the end of the road, and their families have recognized that if they don’t intervene, they might not survive.” But the civil rights group Prisoners’ Legal Services of Massachusetts has sued the state in an effort to end the use of jails and prisons for forcibly treating men with addiction. The class action lawsuit was filed in March on behalf of 10 men who complained of poor conditions and mistreatment at another civil commitment program run out of a state Department of Corrections prison. A state commission has also recently recommended ending the practice of sending civilly committed men to jails and prisons, as the state did for women three years ago, following a similar lawsuit. Women are now sent to substance abuse treatment facilities run or contracted by public health agencies, as most civilly committed persons are in other states. “This should not be a choice between prison or nothing,” said Bonnie Tenneriello, a staff attorney with Prisoners’ Legal Services. “Why are we giving money to a sheriff to run treatment programs rather than funding civilian treatment?” Under state law, family members can ask a judge to order their relatives into treatment if they’re unwilling to go voluntarily and are deemed a danger to themselves or others. At least 35 states have such civil commitment laws, but Massachusetts is just one of a handful where it’s widely used, The Associated Press found last year. About 9,950 civil commitments requests were filed in state courts in the budget year that ended June 30. That’s down from more than 10,770 the prior year but up significantly from the 6,105 in fiscal year 2016 and the under 3,000 in fiscal year 2006, according to state data. Tenneriello and other opponents say forcing people into jails and prisons for treatment only reinforces the stigma around addiction. And studies, including the state’s own research , also suggest forced treatment largely doesn’t work and could raise the danger of overdose for those who relapse after treatment. Like the state corrections-run civil commitment facility, Hampden County’s program takes place, at least initially, behind the razor wire of its secure jail campus. Civilly committed men are also similarly segregated from the regular inmate population but required to wear corrections-issued uniforms and follow certain corrections protocols. But, in an effort to make the program feel less institutional, cell doors remain largely unlocked and program participants aren’t handcuffed, Cocchi and some recently released patients said. “Yes, it’s a jail setting. There are corrections officers walking around,” said Keith Molyneux, a 40-year-old recovering from heroin addiction who was among the first to complete the program last year. “But they’re more committed to helping you here than to actually being a correctional officer. You definitely feel like they’re there to help.” After a few weeks of detoxing at the jail, most are eventually transferred to a less secure facility located off-campus in a converted nursing home. There, the men can wear civilian clothes and are housed in rooms that are larger and more dorm-like. Early results of the approach — which also includes health care professionals administering addiction treatment medications and leading counselling sessions — are encouraging, Cocchi said. Since opening last May, more than 850 men have gone through the program, staying 47 days, on average — weeks longer than they do at the state’s other two facilities. The longer stays increase the odds that the men will stay sober, Cocchi said. So far, less than 5% have had to be recommitted, though two fatally overdosed after leaving the program. Lawmakers, meanwhile, have committed $1 million to the program in the current state budget, proving the effort has strong support, despite its detractors, he said. “Let us continue doing what we’re doing,” Cocchi said. “No one else is doing this work out here, but we’re doing it, and we’re doing it well. Why shouldn’t we be applauded and supported?” ___ Follow Philip Marcelo at twitter.com/philmarcelo. ___ This story has been corrected to identify the Hampden County sheriff as Nick Cocchi, not Thomas Cocchi. Claim: Region hit hard by opioids embraces jail-based treatment.
answer:
As western Massachusetts struggles with a dramatic spike in fatal overdoses, officials are embracing a controversial solution: sending men who have not committed any crimes to jails and prisons for court-ordered addiction treatment.


question:
Paragraph: In May 2016, well-meaning tourists at Yellowstone National Park put a bison calf into their car and drove it to a ranger station because they thought that the animal was cold. A few days later, park rangers had to euthanize the calf after it was repeatedly rejected by its herd: Yellowstone bison calf euthanized after father & son brought it in car, thinking it was cold https://t.co/JFZIIzF7fE pic.twitter.com/vNVQy5Yd30 — CNN (@CNN) May 16, 2016  While the people may have had good intentions, their actions ultimately led to the bison’s death: Last week in Yellowstone National Park, visitors were cited for placing a newborn bison calf in their vehicle and transporting it to a park facility because of their misplaced concern for the animal’s welfare. In terms of human safety, this was a dangerous activity because adult animals are very protective of their young and will act aggressively to defend them. In addition, interference by people can cause mothers to reject their offspring. In this case, park rangers tried repeatedly to reunite the newborn bison calf with the herd. These efforts failed. The bison calf was later euthanized because it was abandoned and causing a dangerous situation by continually approaching people and cars along the roadway. Yellowstone explained the decision to euthanize the bison calf on social media: In order to ship the calf out of the park, it would have had to go through months of quarantine to be monitored for brucellosis. No approved quarantine facilities exist at this time, and we don’t have the capacity to care for a calf that’s too young to forage on its own. Nor is it the mission of the National Park Service to rescue animals: our goal is to maintain the ecological processes of Yellowstone. Even though humans were involved in this case, it is not uncommon for bison, especially young mothers, to lose or abandon their calves. Those animals typically die of starvation or predation. […] The management of wild animals sometimes requires decisions that may seem harsh if you focus on an individual. But when you focus on populations of animals, and the ecological processes that sustain them, things like a bison losing or abandoning a calf is part of the fabric this ecosystem. It’s unfortunate that these visitors intervened: the calf may have been found by its mother, but it’s also likely that the calf would have died naturally of starvation or predation. While the park stopped short of blaming the visitors to the park (and didn’t clarify whether the calf had already been ill or abandoned by its herd before it was placed in a car), the National Park Service also called on visitors to follow rules in order to ensure the safety of both humans and wildlife: Approaching wild animals can drastically affect their well-being and, in this case, their survival. Park regulations require that you stay at least 25 yards (23 m) away from all wildlife (including bison, elk and deer) and at least 100 yards (91 m) away from bears and wolves. Disregarding these regulations can result in fines, injury, and even death. The safety of these animals, as well as human safety, depends on everyone using good judgment and following these simple rules. The tourist who put the calf in his SUV was later cited for violating those rules. Claim: A bison calf was euthanized at Yellowstone National Park after well-meaning tourists put it in their car to keep it warm.
answer:

After well-meaning tourists put a calf into their vehicle to keep it warm, but rangers were unable to reunite the animal with its herd.