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: The National Park Service and the U.S. Public Health Service told the San Francisco Chronicle they launched an investigation after employees and visitors reported the problems this month. Federal officials said they haven’t identified the illness or the origin of the outbreak. Park officials said those who had gotten sick are getting better or already recovered. Federal officials were working with Aramark, the concessionaire that operates Yosemite’s restaurants, snack shops and hotels, to clean up and disinfect food service facilities in the park, including the famous Ahwahnee Hotel, Yosemite spokesman Scott Gediman said. “The park is reminding all employees and visitors to wash their hands frequently and stay home if they experience any symptoms of a gastrointestinal illness,” Gediman said in a statement. A message seeking comment from a spokesman for Aramark has not been returned. Aramark received numerous complaints from visitors about poor food quality, shuttle service and other services since it began managing Yosemite’s concessions four years ago. The Ahwahnee Hotel lost its prestigious four-diamond rating by AAA, a distinction the luxury hotel held since 1991, and is now listed as a three-diamond hotel. Visitors to the hotel at the foot of the iconic Half Dome have included Queen Elizabeth II and U.S. presidents. Claim: Stomach illness outbreak at Yosemite prompts major clean-up.
answer:
Federal health officials are inspecting Yosemite National Park’s food service areas after at least a dozen people have fallen ill with stomach issues.


question:
Paragraph: "It is less surprising that neither story discussed costs, given that so few stories do. But sample costs could have been obtained by calling any of the numerous medical marijuana outlets in states where it is legal. Both stories did a decent job of quantifying the benefits.This story provided more details, though, including the differences in patient experiences between the three different concentrations of marijuana. It also repeated this important bit of information: ""There was also no difference in the quality of life or mood scores that participants reported when they were on any of the four treatments."" The story also does a great job of pointing out that the treatment duration of five days in each dosage phase is too short to judge utility for chronic pain, which is a long-term affliction. Neither story actually quantified the harms, but they both noted there were side effects. This story did a better job, though, by noting that the only dose that seemed to work also seemed to produce the most side effects and by raising the issue of long-term safety concerns. It also was the only story to answer the question that readers surely would have when reading about an illegal narcotic being used as medicine. Did these patients feel high as a result? This story says that most did not. Because of the additional information and context, the rating here is satisfactory. This story, unlike the competing WebMD piece, establishes in the first sentence — even in the first three words — that this was ""a small study."" It then discusses the limitations of the study at several points. The second sentence says, ""The pain reduction was ""modest"" – less than 1 point on an 11-point scale for the strongest marijuana – and patients reported no overall difference in their quality of life based on what they smoked."" The writer elegantly and succinctly described the study design — a complex randomized cross-over trial with double blinding and delved into an important feature of the study, that the subjects in retrospect may have been able to detect during which phase of their experience they inhaled placebo versus the most potent drug. This story avoids disease mongering, and, in fact, goes beyond that to note how few people actually suffer from the type of chronic pain that was the subject of the study: ""About 1 to 2 percent of adults in the U.S."" The story quotes two outside experts, one of whom is completely independent from the study and the journal, Dr Andrea Hohmann. Beyond that, we would bet that the reporter spent more time interviewing Dr. Mark Ware, the lead researcher, or at least asked tougher questions. Because Ware is more measured in this story than in the WebMD story. He even goes so far as to say, ""What about long-term safety issues?"" he asked. ""These need to be considered before the drug becomes prescribable."" As with the WebMD story, it would have been nice to see who funded the research. Unlike the WebMD story, this one did not point out the conflicts of interest of Dr. Henry McQuay. This story talks about a range of treatment options and even has the study’s lead author suggesting, that ""these patients should also be getting behavioral and physical therapy."" Strangely, neither story we reviewed pointed out that marijuana is illegal in most states and in Canada, where the study took place. The story could have, at a minimum, mentioned which states have medical marijuana laws or talked about whether any other countries currently allow cannabis to be sold in pill form the way it was used in this study. The story alludes to the fact that this study ""supports a limited number of trials that have suggested marijuana may be helpful for people suffering from chronic pain,"" indicating that the treatment is not very novel at all. It would have been nice to see more context around that. The WebMD story provides a little more information in this regard. If the news release is to be believed, ""This is the first trial to be conducted where patients have been allowed to smoke cannabis at home and to monitor their responses, daily"". That could have been made clear. The story goes well beyond the release. Here’s the release." Claim: Pot may provide some chronic pain relief: study
answer:
The story did a great job evaluating the evidence, providing outside voices, discussing alternatives to marijuana smoking, and presenting both the benefits and the potential harms. It could have done a better job discussing possible costs, availability and conflicts of interest. From the headline to the last sentence, this report avoided overstatement of the applicability of the potential benefit and used clear incisive language that left the reader with a good understanding of the study and its implications. This topic lends itself to jokey, pun-filled writing, but this story played it straight. Chronic pain can ruin lives, and a breakthrough with an alternative approach would be important news. As this story makes clear, until some larger studies with fewer limitations are undertaken, we are far from the point where marijuana can be considered a safe and effective treatment for chronic pain.


question:
Paragraph: Chlamydia cases have been rising since 2010, increasing from 432 cases in Deschutes County a decade ago to 675 last year, The Bulletin newspaper in Bend reported . The number of cases in Crook County has nearly doubled and the number in Jefferson is up 52 percent. Syphilis cases are also on the rise, and gonorrhea diagnoses rose from single digits in the early part of this decade to 65 cases in Deschutes County, 49 in Jefferson and 14 in Crook County last year. “It’s been an increase that I haven’t seen before in all my years of public health in Central Oregon, said Karen Yeargain, communicable disease coordinator for Crook County Health Department. “And it’s been sustained. It hasn’t gone away.” The trends match patterns across the state and country, but for reasons that remain unclear, both Deschutes County and Jefferson County have been well above the national average for STD transmission rates. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced in September that the number of chlamydia, gonorrhea and syphilis cases in 2016 surpassed 2 million for the first time ever. While those conditions can be cured with antibiotics, left untreated they can lead to serious health consequences including infertility, life-threatening ectopic pregnancies, stillbirth and an increased risk for HIV transmission, CDC officials said. Public health officials say the evolution of HIV infection into a manageable condition has reduced the perceived risk of unprotected sex for many, allowing chlamydia, gonorrhea and syphilis to spread more rapidly. The emergence of dating apps for phones hasn’t helped. While some of the increase might be attributed to better monitoring or easier testing for the diseases, epidemiological studies have concluded there has been a real increase in the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. And it comes at a time when health departments are least equipped to deal with it. “Unfortunately we’ve had large federal, state and local cutbacks to STD prevention programs and services over the last decade,” said David Harvey, executive director of the National Coalition of STD Directors. “And this is having a direct impact on the people’s lack of awareness about their risk of getting STDs.” It’s also left smaller health departments struggling to keep up. Jefferson County Health Department relies mainly on part-time staff who must find extra time to do partner notification. “When the nurses are doing that, they’re not able to provide direct services (to patients),” Jefferson County Health Director Michael Baker said. “It takes away from the other services we provide.” ___ Information from: The Bulletin, http://www.bendbulletin.com Claim: Health officials concerned about STDs in central Oregon.
answer:

A big jump in cases of sexually transmitted diseases in central Oregon is causing concern and testing health agencies with fewer resources, according to health officials across multiple counties.