TASK DEFINITION: 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.
PROBLEM: Paragraph: The updated legislation unveiled by Sens. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Ron Wyden, D-Ore., would lower the standard copay to 20% from the current 25% for seniors enrolled in Medicare’s Part D prescription drug benefit. It also introduces a feature that would let Medicare enrollees spread out their copays in monthly installments. Because of the current design of the system, seniors taking very expensive drugs can face unmanageable out-of-pocket costs in the first couple of months of any year. The bipartisan Senate bill has the support of President Donald Trump, but it’s unclear if any significant drug pricing legislation can pass a Congress polarized by impeachment. In the House, Speaker Nancy Pelosi plans to bring her own, more ambitious bill to a floor vote next week. The California Democrat’s legislation would empower Medicare to negotiate prices with drug companies and plow the savings back into expanded dental, vision and hearing benefits for seniors. But congressional Republicans are opposed to the government negotiating drug prices. Trump, who supported the idea as a candidate, has since dropped it. And Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky, is reluctant to bring the bipartisan Grassley-Wyden bill to the floor. It could trigger Democratic amendments designed to create political headaches for Republicans on other issues, such as protecting people with pre-existing medical conditions. In terms of policy ideas, there’s considerable overlap between the Senate bill and parts of Pelosi’s plan. Both would cap out-of-pocket costs for Medicare beneficiaries and require drugmakers to pay rebates to the government if they hike prices above inflation. But the political challenges may be impossible to overcome. The Grassley-Wyden bill would limit out-of-pocket medication costs faced by seniors to $3,100, starting in 2022. Currently there is no limit, and some Medicare recipients dealing with serious illness face copays rivaling a mortgage payment. In a statement late Friday, the White House said “President Donald J. Trump applauds the work of Chairman Grassley and Ranking Member Wyden to lower prescription drug costs and further improve their bipartisan legislation, such as adding a provision to limit monthly out-of-pocket spending for seniors with chronic high costs. The White House called on Congress “to act now to give Americans the relief they need by sending bipartisan drug pricing reform to the President’s desk this year.” Supporters of the Senate bill are hoping a deal can still be had, and that major prescription drug legislation can be incorporated in a budget bill expected early next year. The pharmaceutical industry opposes both the Senate and House bills and has poured millions of dollars into a lobbying battle to block them. Claim: "Bipartisan Medicare drug bill gets makeover to lower copays."

SOLUTION: A bipartisan Senate bill to curb prescription drug costs for Medicare recipients got a makeover Friday to lower copays and make it easier for seniors to budget for their expenses.

PROBLEM: Paragraph: We’ll rule this not applicable because, in general, most people have ballpark knowledge of how much chocolate costs. The story did not mention that dark chocolate is typically more expensive than milk chocolate — especially for the premium brands with very high concentrations of cocoa solids. A brief explanation would have been helpful. The story went the extra mile here, providing the absolute rates of stroke seen in the groups consuming the lowest and highest quantities of chocolate. “Among those with the highest weekly chocolate intake — more than 45 grams — there were 2.5 strokes per 1,000 women per year. That figure was 7.8 per 1,000 among women who ate the least (less than 8.9 grams per week).” These statistics weren’t provided in the study text, suggesting that the writer made the calculations based on data contained in one of the study tables. We applaud the extra effort made to provide meaningful statistics to readers! Close call here, but the story goes a step further than WebMD when discussing the possible adverse effects of consuming too much chocolate. In addition to warning that chocolate has a lot of fat, sugar and calories, it explicitly notes that eating too much of it “could be counterproductive.” WebMD offers no comparable warning and suggests that eating more chocolate than was consumed in this study would result in similar health benefits. This story was much more cautious in its depiction of the findings than the competing WebMD coverage. Most important, it was careful to explain high up that the study found only a correlation between chocolate intake and lower stroke risk. As one of the study authors explains: “Given the observational design of the study, findings from this study cannot prove that it’s chocolate that lowers the risk of stroke.” We also appreciate the story’s more nuanced language regarding which constituents of chocolate might be responsible for possible benefits. Whereas WebMD states unequivocally that flavonoids and antioxidants “deserve the credit” for these benefits, Reuters says more judiciously that  flavonoids “may be responsible for chocolate’s apparent effects on health.” [Emphasis ours.] “Whether that theoretical benefit translates into real-life benefits remains to be proven by rigorous studies, however,” Reuters appropriately adds. There was no disease-mongering. This was the only major shortcoming — no independent perspective. An expert in epidemiology might have pointed out, for example, that the data on chocolate consumption were collected from subject self-reports, and therefore should be viewed cautiously. The availability of chocolate is not in question. The story appropriately notes that there is a stronger statistical association with dark chocolate as opposed to milk chocolate. The story notes that previous research has linked higher levels of chocolate consumption with improved heart health. The story includes comments attributed to a direct email from one of the study authors, so we can confirm our overall impression that this story wasn’t based on a press release. Claim: Chocolate lovers have fewer strokes, study finds

SOLUTION: Starting with the headline, this story is careful to explain that the study observed fewer strokes in those who ate more chocolate; it doesn’t suggest that the chocolate prevented strokes. It also features excellent use of statistics, a more explicit description of potential harms, and mentions alternative approaches to prevention. The only major shortcoming was a lack of an independent perspective on the findings. Some journalists may balk at our insistence that stories about observational studies include appropriate discussion of the limitations of the evidence. In only 378 words, this story provides another example that this can be done – and it doesn’t require the length of a full medical journal article to do so.

PROBLEM: Paragraph: Tegu lizards, which currently live in two large colonies in Florida, could expand into an area from the Carolinas to Central Texas, according to the scientific report published in July on the website for the journal Nature. “They are voracious, omnivorous predatory lizards that can live in a variety of habitats, but we can’t know what is going to happen or how intense this invasion is going to become until the effects are upon us,” said Lee Fitzgerald, a professor at Texas A&M University and curator of its Biodiversity Research and Teaching Collections. Fitzgerald, a co-author of the study, said in an interview this week it could take years for the tegu lizards to reach their potential range, but new hot spots pop up as more pet lizards escape or are dumped in the wild by owners. There are no current estimates of wild populations of tegus in the United States. In South America, the large-bodied lizards range widely east of the Andes and include species such as the Argentine black and white tegu. Armed with strong jaws and tails that they can wield as thumping weapons, the lizards in Florida devour the eggs of American alligators and ground-nesting birds, wildlife officials said. The reptiles also have a taste for insects, fruit and birds. “As far as being a damaging invasive species, it really depends on what the threatened resources are in the areas where you might get tegus,” said Robert Reed, chief of the Invasive Species Science Branch at the U.S. Geological Survey, and another report co-author. Tegu owners describe their pets as big, calm and occasionally affectionate lizards that like sunning themselves and are not picky about what they eat. But they can also be ornery and tough to handle. In Florida, local wild populations of breeding tegu lizards are found in at least two counties, Miami-Dade and Hillsborough, home to Tampa, while there have been sightings in other parts of the state, according to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. On private lands, Florida hunters without a license are allowed to kill tegu lizards if it is done humanely. On public lands, the state is trying to get rid of the lizards through traps. “The most important thing that the public can do to stop the spread of nonnative species like tegus is to NEVER release nonnative animals into the wild,” commission specialist Jamie Rager said in an email. “Don’t let it loose.” Claim: Invasion of big, voracious lizards threatens U.S. South: study.

SOLUTION:
A group of South American lizards that can grow up to four feet long (1.2 meters) has established a home in the Florida wild after being brought to the United States as pets, and the reptiles could begin a voracious march across the U.S. South, according to a new study.