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: Although Pfizer continues to test the drug, called dacomitinib, in another Phase III study, hopes for its success have now largely faded, according to ISI Group analyst Mark Schoenebaum. “We believe consensus expectations (for the drug) will be close to zero given today’s readout” of unsuccessful trial results, Schoenebaum said in a research note. In one of the failed trials, called ARCHER 1009, patients given Pfizer’s once-daily pill did not show improved survival without the cancer worsening, compared with Roche Holding AG’s widely used Tarceva (erlotinib). Tarceva is the current standard of care in patients with mutated forms of a protein called Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR). The protein plays a role in normal regulation of cell growth, but when mutated is believed to cause cells to proliferate and thereby help spur various types of cancer. Dacomitinib is designed to block several types of Epidermal Growth Factor receptors, while Tarceva and similar treatments for lung cancer target only one type of receptor. Cowen and Co had forecast annual sales of $500 million by 2020 for dacomitinib, if it were approved for lung cancer. That would make it a moderate-sized product for Pfizer, the largest U.S. drugmaker, which has annual revenue of $50 billion. Schoenebaum said there has been little investor interest in the drug and that Wall Street had expected it to generate annual sales of only $300 million by 2018. The second failed trial, named BR.26, involved patients that previously had failed to benefit from chemotherapy as well as from treatment with an EGFR inhibitor. Overall survival of patients taking the Pfizer drug was not prolonged in the study, compared with patients given a placebo. Pfizer said adverse events seen with dacomitinib were consistent with those seen in smaller earlier studies. In the meantime, Pfizer said dacomitinib is also being tested in a third late-stage trial, called ARCHER 1050, among patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer who have not received prior treatment. The study will compare dacomitinib with Iressa (gefitinib), an EGFR inhibitor sold by AstraZeneca Plc. Results from that study are expected in 2015. Pfizer shares were little changed in morning trading on the New York Stock Exchange. Claim: Pfizer lung cancer drug fails in two large studies.
Example Output: Pfizer Inc on Monday said one of its experimental drugs had failed to meet its goals in two late-stage studies among patients who had received prior treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer, the most common form of the disease.

Example Input: Paragraph: Chick-fil-A is a Georgia-based fast food restaurant chain specializing in chicken entrées that opened its first outlet in suburban Atlanta in 1967 and has since grown to encompass over 1,600 restaurants in 39 states. The operations of the chain reflect the religious values of Founder, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer S. Truett Cathy, whose biography notes that he has “built his life and business based on hard work, humility and biblical principles” and that “based on these principles, all of Chick-fil-A’s restaurants operate with a ‘Closed-on-Sunday’ policy, without exception.” Chick-fil-A has been the subject of political controversy due to its WinShape Foundation, a charitable endeavor founded by S. Truett Cathy and his wife, Jeanette, which critics contend has evidenced a bias in the Chick-fil-A company by donating millions of dollars to groups with anti-gay agendas: Let’s all eat at Chick-Fil-A this week. Now the Socialists (AKA Obama Democrats) have targeted Chick-Fil-A, a Southern based company with the below resume. I think, I’ll have a Chick-Fil-A sandwich tomorrow. Chick-fil-A is an American success story. Founded by Georgian entrepreneur Truett Cathy in 1946, the family-owned chicken-sandwich chain is one of the country’s largest fast-food businesses. It employs some 50,000 workers across the country at 1,500 outlets in nearly 40 states and the District of Columbia … The company generates more than $2 billion in revenue and serves millions of happy customers with trademark Southern hospitality. So, what’s the problem? Well, Chick-fil-A is run by devout Christians who believe in strong marriages, devoted families, and the highest standards of character for their workers. The restaurant chain’s official corporate mission is to “glorify God” and “enrich the lives of everyone we touch.” The company’s community-service initiatives, funded through its WinShape Foundation, support foster-care, scholarship, summer-camp, and marriage-enrichment programs. On Sunday, all Chick-fil-A stores close so workers can spend the day at worship and rest. Over the past month, several progressive-activist blogs have waged an ugly war against Chick-fil-A. The company’s alleged atrocity: One of its independent outlets in Pennsylvania donated some sandwiches and brownies to a marriage seminar run by the Pennsylvania Family Institute, which happens to oppose same-sex marriage. In the name of tolerance, the anti-Chick-fil-A hawks sneered at the company’s main product as “Jesus Chicken,” derided its no-Sunday-work policy, and attacked its operators as “anti-gay.” Petition drives on websites are demanding the company change and disavow their standards. Facebook users dutifully organized witch hunts against the company on college campuses. Progressive groups are gloating over Chick-fil-A’s public-relations troubles. This is not because they care about winning hearts and minds over gay rights or marriage policy, but because their core objective is to marginalize political opponents and chill Christian philanthropy and activism. The fearsome “muscle flexing” is being done by the hysterical bullies trying to drive them off of college grounds and out of their neighborhoods in the name of “human rights.” Clearly the Christian business man who lives what he believes deserves our support….Thank God that some people are strong enough to stand up for what they believe even in the face of assault and ridicule from those who have no integrity….Let’s all eat at Chick-fil-A. — Let’s all eat Chick-Fil-A! Truet Cathy founded a wonderful company who hires teenagers and pays their way to college. Not only that, it is delicious. These people are undermining American strongholds in order to weaken us for the enemy within and the enemy without! Please pass this on if you believe companies with Christian principles have a right to freely conduct business in the U.S. As a result, Chick-fil-A has recently faced opposition from students at ten U.S. universities, including New York University (NYU), who have circulated petitions to oppose the opening of new Chick-fil-A franchises on their campuses and lobbied for the removal of existing restaurants. The company has maintained that neither they nor the organizations they donate to through WinShape has an “anti-gay” agenda: The student senate at Northeastern University, in Boston, voted to end negotiations to bring fast-food chain Chick-fil-A to campus after students protested over the company’s affiliation with several Christian organizations the students say have an “anti-gay” agenda.The Atlanta-based company, dogged for months by accusations of homophobia, insists it is “not anti-anybody” but instead simply wants to “graciously serve great food and have a positive influence on all who come in contact with Chick-fil-A.” Company president Dan Cathy insists Chick-fil-A is not a Christian company, just one founded on biblical principles. But thanks in part to the company’s affiliation with pro-family groups, its frequent presence at large religious rallies and the praise music reverberating from speakers in its restaurants, both fans and detractors often refer to it as one of the country’s most overtly Christian businesses. Through the WinShape Foundation, started by company founders Truett and Jeannette Cathy, Chick-fil-A donates to several Christian organizations, including The Marriage & Family Legacy Fund, The Fellowship of Christian Athletes and the National Christian Foundation. According to its statement, Chick-fil-A has given the groups $1,714,199. None of the organizations the company supports has an “anti-gay” agenda, although as Christian groups, they do uphold and support heterosexual marriage, Donald A. Perry, the company’s vice president of corporate public relations, said in his statement. “I want to assure you that the historical intent of our Foundation and corporate giving have been toward compassion, principally by serving youth and families,” he said. The company gives millions of dollars every year toward education. Chick-fil-A president and chief operating officer Dan Cathy’s July 2012 interview with the Baptist Press generated even more controversy over the issue, with critics maintaining he had virtually acknowledged the company supports an anti-gay marriage agenda: Chick-fil-A is “very much supportive of the family,” according to Dan Cathy, president of the popular fast food chain. That is, “the biblical definition of the family unit,” he said. And that doesn’t include Adam and Steve, suggests Cathy, whose father S. Truett Cathy founded the Atlanta-based company. In a new interview with Baptist Press, Cathy puts on the record what critics say his company’s actions have indicated for years. “Well, guilty as charged,” he said in the interview when asked about Chick-fil-A’s backing of families led by a man and a woman. The controversy took flight in mid-July after Cathy gave an interview to the Biblical Recorder, on online journal for Baptists in North Carolina. In the July 2 story — picked up by the Baptist Press on July 16 — Cathy affirmed that his company backs the traditional family unit. “We are very much supportive of the family — the biblical definition of the family unit,” Cathy said. “We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that.” “I think we are inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at Him and say ‘we know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage’ and I pray God’s mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we have the audacity to define what marriage is about,” Cathy also said during an appearance on the Ken Coleman talk show. Proponents of same-sex marriage spread Cathy’s comments, eventually creating a firestorm of criticism on social media, including assertions that his comments and position were bigoted and hateful. The public reaction to Cathy’s remarks prompted Chick-fil-A to issue the following statement: The Chick-fil-A culture and service tradition in our restaurants is to treat every person with honor, dignity and respect — regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender. We will continue this tradition in the over 1,600 Restaurants run by independent Owner/Operators. Going forward, our intent is to leave the policy debate over same-sex marriage to the government and political arena. This controversy prompted readers to ask us about a number of related ancillary issues detailed below: Chick-fil-A had recently joined forces with the Jim Henson Company to offer five customizable puppet toys from Jim Henson’s Creature Shop in children’s meals.But after the Atlanta-based family-owned business made headlines when its president, Dan Cathy, told the Baptist Press recently that the company was “guilty as charged” when it came to not supporting marriage equality and standing by biblical family values, the Henson Company decided to end the partnership. The Jim Henson Company announced it would no longer partner with Chick-fil-A in the wake of the fast food company’s acknowledged support of anti-gay organizations. Now, however, Chick-fil-A officials are reportedly telling franchise customers that the kids’ meal toys which were produced as part of the now-severed collaboration have been recalled due to safety issues.Chick-Fil-A spokeswoman Tiffany Greenway [said] that the company had decided to recall the Muppets toys nationwide “for the protection of our customers.” She said it was a decision completely separate from the Jim Henson Company’s announcement. Mayor Thomas M. Menino is vowing to block Chick-fil-A from bringing its Southern-fried fast-food empire to Boston — possibly to a popular tourist spot just steps from the Freedom Trail — after the family-owned firm’s president suggested gay marriage is “inviting God’s judgment on our nation.””Chick-fil-A doesn’t belong in Boston. You can’t have a business in the city of Boston that discriminates against a population. We’re an open city, we’re a city that’s at the forefront of inclusion,” Menino [said]. “That’s the Freedom Trail. That’s where it all started right here. And we’re not going to have a company, Chick-fil-A or whatever the hell the name is, on our Freedom Trail.” As part of its recent efforts to publicly align itself with fundamentalist Christian values, the Chick-fil-A restaurant chain announced the debut of its new Queer-Hatin’ Cordon Bleu sandwich that would be on sale in all of the company’s 1,600 restaurants.In a press conference to reporters, company representatives said the homophobic new sandwich will include the national fast food chain’s trademark fried chicken filet wrapped in a piece of specially-smoked No Homo ham that would be topped with a slice of Swiss cheese and lathered in a creamy new Thousand Island-based Fag Punching sauce. Responding to Chick-fil-A CEO Dan Cathy’s recent controversial admission of the company’s donations to antigay groups, a statement from competing fast food chain Wendy’s let consumers know that it has long supported same-sex couples and only harbors strong objections to interracial marriage.”It’s important that Wendy’s customers know our restaurant proudly stands by the right of all Americans to marry whomever they choose, so long as it isn’t someone of a different race,” said spokeswoman Jenna Knox, adding that while Wendy’s has always backed pro-gay legislation, it found miscegenation “an abominable offense to God’s will.” “Just like our founder Dave Thomas, we dream of living in an America where two loving people of the same sex can freely wed, provided of course that both people are also of the same race, and that no black, Asian, Latin American, or other non-European heritage is allowed to de-purify the white racial bloodline.” Following the Wendy’s statement, executives from Jack in the Box confirmed that they too had always supported gay rights and the Holocaust never happened. Some readers asked, “Did Chick-fil-A really spend millions lobbying Congress not to condemn Uganda’s ‘Kill the Gays’ bill”? We found no evidence that Chick-fil-A itself spent money (let alone millions) lobbying Congress to prevent that body from issuing a condemnation of a controversial Ugandan legislative bill which carried the death penalty for some homosexual acts. Some sources reported that the Family Research Council (FRC), one of the organizations to which Chick-fil-A donates through its WinShape corporate charity foundation, filed a report stating that it had spent $25,000 lobbying Congress against H.R. 1064, a resolution seeking to “express the sense of the House of Representatives” that Uganda’s proposed Anti-Homosexuality Bill “threatens the protection of fundamental human rights.” However, the FRC said that although they did perform lobbying activities regarding H.R. 1064, they did not support the Uganda bill or the death penalty for homosexuality, and their lobbying efforts were not aimed at killing the Congressional resolution but rather at changing its language “to remove sweeping and inaccurate assertions that homosexual conduct is internationally recognized as a fundamental human right.” In September 2012, the Civil Rights Agenda group reported that Chick-fil-A had pledged not to fund groups that oppose gay marriage: Chick-fil-A has pledged to stop giving money to anti-gay groups and to back off political and social debates after an executive’s comments landed the fast-food chain smack in the middle of the gay marriage debate.The Civil Rights Agenda, which dubs itself the largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender advocacy group in Illinois, said Chick-fil-A agreed in meetings to stop donating to groups such as Focus on the Family and the National Organization for Marriage. Such groups oppose same-sex marriage. Chick-fil-A said that its nonprofit arm, the WinShape Foundation, “is now taking a much closer look at the organizations it considers helping, and in that process will remain true to its stated philosophy of not supporting organizations with political agendas[. ]” Shortly afterwards, Chick-fil-A issued an ambiguous statement about whether it had in fact made any such pledge: For many months now, Chick-fil-A’s corporate giving has been mischaracterized, and while our sincere intent has been to remain out of this political and social debate, events from Chicago have once again resulted in questions around our giving. For that reason, we want to provide some context and clarity around who we are, what we believe and our priorities in relation to corporate giving.A part of our corporate commitment is to be responsible stewards of all that God has entrusted to us. Because of this commitment, Chick-fil-A’s giving heritage is focused on programs that educate youth, strengthen families and enrich marriages, and support communities. We will continue to focus our giving in those areas. Our intent is not to support political or social agendas. Claim: Chick-fil-A has donated money to organizations that oppose same-sex marriage.
Example Output: As we have stated, the Chick-fil-A culture and service tradition in our restaurants is to treat every person with honor, dignity and respect — regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender. We will continue this tradition in the over 1,600 restaurants run by independent Owner/Operators.

Example Input: Paragraph: This release earns praise for clearly mentioning the cost savings derived from the use of chest ultrasounds versus chest X-rays in treating patients in the study — $9,700 from 191 patients. The release could have been even even more helpful by adding information showing chest ultrasounds cost about two-and-a-half times less than chest X-rays ($140 versus $370 respectively). The release also might have mentioned that there’s a large initial outlay for ultrasound machines that may make them too expensive in the developing world. Another upfront cost not mentioned is the expense of training emergency medicine physicians (and presumably also internal medicine, pediatric and family medicine physicians) to do this procedure. The release clearly stated that chest ultrasounds effectively diagnosed study patients who had pneumonia as well as chest X-rays. There were 38.8 percent fewer chest X-rays required for a pneumonia diagnosis in the investigational arm of the study compared to the control group of the study. The study also showed that stays in the emergency department by ultrasound-only patients were almost a half-hour shorter than those of the control group. We offer a word of caution, however. The release didn’t explain how the pneumonia cases were actually diagnosed so we cannot determine if the ultrasound really was accurate and effectively diagnosed study patients who had pneumonia. The release points out that there was no increase in adverse events reported during the study, nor were there any cases where pneumonia was not appropriately diagnosed. There is the potential for some harms that aren’t addressed, namely missed diagnosis and the identification of small pneumonias that don’t need to be treated (overdiagnosis). “In the era of precision medicine, lung ultrasound may also be an ideal imaging option in children who are at higher risk for radiation-induced cancers or have received multiple radiographic or CT imaging studies,” according to the lead study author. This benefit in terms of harms reduction might have been stressed even more. Ultrasound screening could be safer in the long run for children than X-ray since repeated exposure to radiation presents a cumulative risk for cancer. Radiation oncology experts and the FDA have long called for reduced reliance on routine X-ray and computerized tomography (CT) screening in children unless the benefits outweigh the risks. More than 100 professional organizations including pediatricians, radiation physicists and oncologists have signed on to the “Image Gently” campaign which urges the use of ultrasound instead of radiation when feasible. The release makes clear that this was a randomized, controlled trial comparing chest ultrasound versus chest X-rays as a diagnostic tool for identifying pneumonia in young patients. Participants either received an ultrasound possibly followed by a chest X-ray, if needed, in the investigational arm, or a chest X-ray followed by a chest ultrasound in the control group. However, as noted above, it isn’t explained how the pneumonia cases were actually diagnosed. This reduces the quality of the study. Ultrasound should correctly diagnose the larger pneumonias without problems, but small ones can be missed or they may be overdiagnosed. The published article briefly discusses the lack of accuracy in its discussion section. It appears to rely heavily on a meta-analysis of previous studies involving ultrasound accuracy. The study states: “Second, we were unable to calculate test performance characteristics adhering to the STARD (Standards for the Reporting of Diagnostic accuracy studies) statement due to the fact that 38.8% of the subjects in the investigational arm did not receive a CXR [chest x-ray] that would have served as a practical reference standard. By design, our sonologists were not blinded to CXR results in the control arm so that the information could be used to guide treatment. Lack of blinding to a reference standard could be a potential source of bias in calculated test performance characteristics for LUS.” This release doesn’t engage in disease-mongering. The release notes that the study was conducted at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai but doesn’t disclose sponsors or potential conflicts of interest. According to the journal article, one of the researchers has a consulting relationship with an ultrasound company. This should have been included in the release. The release adequately explains that chest X-rays are the diagnostic method of choice for determining cases of pneumonia, according to the World Health Organization. The study’s primary goal was to determine if chest ultrasounds were an adequate alternative to chest X-rays. A non-imaging method used to diagnose pneumonia is a physical examination. The release does make a point that ultrasound technology is widely available in health care facilities around the world. We would have liked for the release to include the fact that in perhaps three-quarters of the world, there is a lack of facilities that can provide even diagnostic X-rays. This fact, attributed to the WHO in the journal article, is absent in the news release. High resolution ultrasound machines would be even further out of reach in these countries. The novelty of a safe and cheaper alternative to expensive radiography that could provide equivalent diagnostic precision is clearly enough to warrant this release. We don’t believe the news release relies on unjustifiable language to summarize the potential benefit of substituting ultrasound over X-Ray in screening for pediatric pneumonia. Claim: Lung ultrasound may be a safe substitute for chest X-ray when diagnosing pneumonia in children
Example Output:
This Mount Sinai news release describes a small study aimed at testing whether chest ultrasounds are as effective at diagnosing pneumonia in children as chest X-rays, the current diagnostic method of choice. Patients were randomized into either a test group, which received a chest ultrasound and a possible follow-up chest X-ray, versus a control group which received first a chest X-ray and then a chest ultrasound. The release does a good job of explaining the study results, and the potential cost savings here and in lesser-developed countries. Weaknesses are no mention of an investigator’s consulting relationship to an ultrasound company and lack of discussion of study limitations. Pneumonia is the number one killer of children on the planet, according to the World Health Organization (WHO). While chest X-rays are the accepted means of diagnosing pneumonia, WHO points out that in three-quarters of the world, the necessary equipment isn’t available, meaning an alternative that is both more widely available and cheaper than radiography would be a great boon for health care. While this was a small study, it provides evidence that ultrasound technology, being both cheaper and more portable, could help fill the gaps in health care in both richer and poorer regions.