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.

Paragraph: Grown in-vitro from cattle stem cells at a cost of 250,000 euros ($332,000), the burger was cooked and eaten in front of television cameras to gain the greatest media coverage for the culmination of a five-year science experiment. Resembling a standard circular-shaped red meat patty, it was created by knitting together 20,000 strands of laboratory-grown protein, combined with other ingredients normally used in burgers, such as salt, breadcrumbs and egg powder. Red beet juice and saffron were added to give it colour. The two food tasters were reserved in their judgement, perhaps keen not to offend their host at the London event, noting the burger’s “absence of fat”. Pressed for a more detailed description of the flavour, food writer Josh Schonwald said the cultured beef had an “animal protein cake” like quality to it, adding that he would like to try it with some of the extras often served with traditional burgers - salt, pepper, ketchup and jalepenos. Even the scientist behind the burger’s creation, vascular biologist Mark Post of Maastricht University in the Netherlands, was relatively muted in his praise of its flavour. “It’s a very good start,” he told the hundreds of reporters who had gathered to watch the meat being cooked and served. The Dutch scientist’s aim was to show the world that in the future meat will not necessarily have to come from the environmentally and economically costly rearing and slaughtering of millions of animals. “Current meat production is at its maximum - we need to come up with an alternative,” he said. The World Health Organization (WHO) says meat production is projected to rise to 376 million tonnes by 2030 from 218 million tonnes annually in 1997-1999, and demand from a growing world population is expected to rise beyond that. According to a 2006 report by the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), industrialised agriculture contributes on a “massive scale” to climate change, air pollution, land degradation, energy use, deforestation and biodiversity decline. The meat industry contributes about 18 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, a proportion expected to grow as consumers in fast-developing countries such as China and India eat more meat, the report said. Chris Mason, a professor of regenerative medicine at University College London, who was not involved in the research, said it was “great pioneering science” with the potential to ease environmental, health and animal welfare problems. But, he added: “whilst the science looks achievable, the scalable manufacturing will require new game-changing innovation”. Post said he was confident his concept can be scaled up to offer a viable alternative to animal meat production, but said it may be another 20 years before lab-grown meat appears on supermarket shelves. He also conceded that the flavour of his meat must be improved if it is to become a popular choice. Post resisted requests from journalists from all over the world eager to try a morsel of the world’s first cultured beef burger, saying there was not enough to go around. Instead, he said, his children would be offered the leftovers. ($1 = 0.7528 euros) Claim: First taste of test-tube burger declared 'close to meat'.
The world’s first laboratory-grown beef burger was flipped out of a petri dish and into a frying pan on Monday, with food tasters declaring it tasted “close to meat”.

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
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.

Paragraph: The blaze erupted early on Wednesday morning in Simi Valley, northwest of Los Angeles in Ventura County, and by nightfall had charred 1,300 acres (526 hectares) as crews fought to protect the Reagan library and some 7,000 homes in the path of the flames. The Easy Fire, which forced 26,000 people to flee, broke out some 30 miles (48 km) from a separate conflagration burning in shrub-covered hills near the Getty Center museum that has displaced thousands of residents from some of the city’s most affluent neighborhoods. The Getty museum houses a collection that includes paintings by Van Gogh, Rembrandt and Manet, ancient Greek statues and an expansive array of manuscripts. The Reagan Library, Getty Center and Getty Villa in Malibu were all forced to close due to the flames and thick clouds of smoke, although all three facilities were said to be out of imminent danger by evening. “The dedication of our staff and the professionalism of our region’s first responders has been nothing short of heroic,”  Getty president Jim Cuno said in a statement posted on the center’s website. The Santa Ana winds were blamed for a string of fire outbreaks across Southern California. In Riverside County, east of Los Angeles, a wind-driven brush fire swiftly blackened 250 acres (101 hectares), forcing the evacuation of hundreds of people from two mobile home parks and a nursing home, county fire spokesman Rob Roseen said. Weather conditions were at their worst, with fierce winds hurling burning embers through the air across bone-dry brush to ignite spot fires. “The fire outflanked us very rapidly today, pushed by those 40- to 50-mile-per-hour (40- to 80 km per hour) winds,” Ventura County Fire Department assistant chief Chad Cook told reporters. “We did experience gusts up to 65 miles per hour (105 kph) this morning, which made long-range spotting very, very dangerous.”  He said erratic, high winds also forced intermittent grounding of firefighting aircraft through the day. The National Weather Service issued an unprecedented “extreme red flag” warning for wildfires in Los Angeles and Ventura counties ahead of two days of intense, dry wind gusts that were forecast to reach near-hurricane force. “I don’t know if I’ve ever seen us use this warning,” forecaster Marc Chenard said. “It’s pretty bad.”   Statewide, the weather service issued alerts for “critical” or “extreme” fire hazards covering more than 34,000 square miles (88,000 square km), encompassing some 21 million people. Power was cut off to nearly 400,000 homes and businesses statewide on Wednesday as a precaution by the state’s largest utility, Pacific Gas and Electric Co, a unit of PG&E Corp (PCG.N), and other utilities. The so-called Easy fire in Simi Valley broke out just before dawn off a road named Easy Street, sending a wall of flames racing across scrub-covered slopes at the edge of the hilltop Reagan Library, which houses the late president’s archives and memorabilia. Pre-positioned strike teams of firefighters, backed by water-dropping helicopters and airplane tankers dumping payloads of fire retardant, swarmed the area as flames closed in on the library campus. “We’re surrounded. It’s a scary situation. But I’m sure they’ll get on top of it,” John Heubusch, the library’s executive director, said in an interview with KNX radio in Los Angeles during the firefight. “It’s as close as it gets.”  By late morning, emergency crews had largely subdued flames, and the fire moved off in other directions. The blaze prompted public schools and at least five college campuses in the area to cancel classes for the day. Health authorities were handing out disposable air filter masks to members of the public at five cites around the county. On nearby ranches, residents in the protective face masks scrambled to coax nervous horses and other livestock into trailers to drive them to safety. “As long as we get up, get out of here, get the car moving, everything else can be replaced in theory so you know breathing at the end of the day is better than not breathing at the end of the day,” resident David Pollack told Reuters. The Santa Ana winds are a regional weather phenomenon that sends gusts westward off the desert to the east, through mountain passes toward the coast. They were forecast to reach sustained speeds of 50 to 70 mph (80 to 110 kph) on Wednesday and Thursday. Investigators say the Getty fire was likely caused by a broken tree branch blown into power lines during high winds on Monday morning. It spread, consuming 745 acres (300 hectares) by Wednesday morning, with about a quarter contained by firefighters. At least 12 homes have been destroyed. In northern California, firefighters struggled for a sixth day against the 76,000-acre (30,760-hectare) Kincade fire in Sonoma County’s wine country. That blaze has destroyed at least 189 homes and other structures but was listed as 30 percent contained on Wednesday. PG&E acknowledged last week that the Kincade fire started near a damaged transmission tower at about the time a live high-voltage line on that tower malfunctioned. The company filed for bankruptcy in January, citing $30 billion in potential liability from a series of deadly fires sparked by its equipment in 2017 and 2018. As many as 190,000 people were displaced at the height of the Kincade fire, but some evacuations have since been lifted. Claim: Twin Southern California wildfires menace Reagan Library, Getty Museum, homes.

A major wildfire threatened thousands of homes and the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library near Los Angeles on Wednesday as the fiercest Santa Ana winds yet lashed Southern California, forcing meteorologists to create new alert levels to warn of the danger.