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.

Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: We give the story credit for at least citing a $30,000 cost for the “surgeries” but wish it had explained what that included and what it might not. Surgery to change the battery every two years certainly adds to cost. Undoubtedly patients require more intensive expensive followup and perhaps specialized checks to ensure the device is working. With broad strokes across discussion of three different uses for three different conditions, the story did an adequate job quantifiying benefits. As stated in the “Evidence” criterion above, this is where a control group and reporting response rates for treated versus control groups would be very informative. Instead, we only get a qualitative description of benefits which is useful but which might leave careful readers asking for more. This is one area where the story could have been improved. There was no detailed discussion of what can go wrong with deep brain stimulation. There was a brief mention of “if” the electrodes cause neurological side effects. But how often does that happen? And the story noted that the surgery does “sometimes” cause dangerous brain bleeding or infections. How often is “sometimes”? At a very high, overview level, the story explained the current state of the evidence. But more information would have been better. Current evidence for depression/OCD is based on case series. These studies don’t have a control group, making the results more subject to bias. No disease mongering of any of the conditions discussed. The story was repeatedly clear about deep brain stimulation being used when standard medications or behavior therapy had not worked. But it would be helpful to give estimates of the proportion of patients with depression or OCD who aren’t helped by available treatments. Several sources were cited. Dr. Mayberg’s connection to St. Jude Medical was mentioned. The story could have mentioned that Dr. Okun’s center and Dr. Greenberg have received funding from Medtronic. Greenberg’s current funding from the National Institute of Mental Health was noted. We think the sourcing and disclosure was adequate. A strong point of the story was that it repeatedly provided the context for the use of deep brain stimulation — “when standard medications fail…worst-case patients…doesn’t mean patients can abandon traditional therapy…people with intractable (problems)…(people who) failed behavior therapy.” This story already attempted to accomplish a lot, but to be complete, it could have offered explicit description of currently approved options: antidepressant medications (multiple classes); psychotherapy (multiple options); combinations of medications or medications and therapy; transcranial magnetic stimulation (limited availabilty), vagal nerve stimulation, ECT – and estimate of the proportion of patients who fail these treatments. Nonethless, we feel it met the criteria for a satisfactory score. The story states that 70,000 have had deep brian stimulation for Parkinson’s or other movement disorders, and that studies are underway on at least 60 people with intractable obsessive-compulsive disorder and 100 with severe depression. The experimental nature of these approaches is clear from the story. A nice touch would be to give a link to clinicaltrials.gov to allow readers the option of looking up more information on the studies in progress and finding out if recruitment is open and how to access the study. The story did a good job putting the new uses of deep brain stimulation into the context of other research and other therapeutic approaches. It’s clear that the story did not rely on a news release. Claim: Trying brain pacemakers to zap psychiatric disease

Output: We especially appreciate the lack of hype in this story. The reporter clearly worked hard to stick to the evidence – not merely to promote the potential. About 65-70 percent of patients with major depressive disorder improve substantially with 1 to 2 course of standard treatment (medication, psychotherapy or combinations). Subsequent treatment options have progressively lower rates of treatment response. Therefore, a significant number of people need other treatment options. Deep brain stimulation is an invasive treatment, but one that has shown promise in a small number of patients.


Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: "Charlie Crist’s most recent TV attack labels Republican Gov. Rick Scott as ""extreme"" on women’s issues. A few days after he snagged the endorsement of Planned Parenthood PAC, Crist issued an ad showing a series of women attacking Scott’s record on abortion, birth control and equal pay for women. One of the claims in the ad is that Scott ""thinks employers should be able to deny women coverage for birth control."" PolitiFact Florida has fact-checked multiple claims about Crist’s record on abortion and we gave him a Half Flip for holding various positions on it throughout his career -- even before he switched parties to become a Democrat. Several media reports have also covered bills signed by Scott that limit access to abortion. Here we decided to fact-check Scott’s record on birth control. (Technically the Florida Democratic Party paid for the ad, but the Crist campaign announced the ad and promoted it.) Legal decisions about birth control during Scott’s tenure We reached out to Scott’s office and campaign and Crist’s campaign and searched news archives and found very few statements Scott made related to employers and birth control. Scott, a former health care executive, campaigned for governor on his opposition to President Barack Obama’s health care law in 2010. The law includes access to birth control for women; however, that was not at the root of Scott’s opposition to the law, which was more broadly about the federal government’s role and the individual mandate. We only found a couple of statements Scott made related to whether employers should be forced to provide birth control. The 2010 health care law required that most plans include birth control coverage without out-of-pocket costs. The Obama administration carved out a religious exemption for most churches and some parochial schools, finalized on Jan. 20, 2012. Certain religious entities, including Ave Maria University in Florida, opposed Obama’s rules. On Feb. 10, 2012, the White House announced a compromise: If a religious employer objected to providing birth control in its health plan, the employer would not have to pay for it, but the insurance company would pay. The next day, Newsmax TV asked Scott his thoughts about that decision while he attended the Conservative Political Action Conference. Scott said: ""This week what they did with regard to the Catholic Church and the contraceptives, it's an example [of] when government gets more involved in something they take away your rights. And this is, they are telling the Catholic Church what they have to buy. The government should not be telling us what type of insurance we should buy with our own money. The change they made makes no sense -- saying the insurance company is going to pay for it? That makes no sense. Money is going to be coming out of the Catholic institutions’ pocket to buy that insurance, so they are paying for it."" About two weeks later, Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi joined six other states in a lawsuit to challenge the birth control mandate arguing that it violated religious institutions' First Amendment rights. (Scott wasn’t a plaintiff.) In July 2012, a federal judge in Nebraska threw out the lawsuit arguing that the states failed to prove they would suffer immediate harm once that part of the law was enacted. The states appealed, but lost in 2013. On June 30, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that certain companies like Hobby Lobby that have religious objections can opt out of the birth control mandate. The companies opposed providing certain types of contraception that they believe is equivalent to inducing abortion, including morning-after pills and IUDs, while they didn’t oppose other methods of birth control. We asked a Scott campaign spokesman if Scott made any statements about Bondi’s lawsuit, the Hobby Lobby case, and in general if he thinks employers should be able to deny women birth control coverage. Spokesman Greg Blair pointed to one statement Scott made after the Hobby Lobby ruling, when a radio station reported that Scott said that the Supreme Court ""upheld our freedom of religion again this week."" ""Gov. Scott believes that people should have access to the contraception and health care they want, and he also believes in religious freedom,"" Blair told PolitiFact Florida. Our ruling Crist’s ad states that Scott ""thinks employers should be able to deny women coverage for birth control."" We struggled to find statements Scott made about employers and birth control. His spokesman didn't give us a denial when asked. We found a couple of statements which show he is against the federal government dictating to companies that they must provide birth control -- something that certain religious institutions opposed. It’s also worth noting that Scott doesn’t appear to be flat out against birth control but it’s clear that overall, he doesn’t like telling employers what they have to cover." Claim: "Charlie Crist Says Rick Scott ""thinks employers should be able to deny women coverage for birth control."

Output: "Crist’s ad states that Scott ""thinks employers should be able to deny women coverage for birth control."" We struggled to find statements Scott made about employers and birth control. His spokesman didn't give us a denial when asked. We found a couple of statements which show he is against the federal government dictating to companies that they must provide birth control -- something that certain religious institutions opposed. It’s also worth noting that Scott doesn’t appear to be flat out against birth control but it’s clear that overall, he doesn’t like telling employers what they have to cover."


Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: Everett, a working-class city of about 108,000 north of Seattle, sued Connecticut-based Purdue Pharma in January, alleging the company knowingly allowed pills to be funneled into the black market and into the city and did nothing to stop it. Purdue filed a motion to dismiss in March. Before hearing arguments Monday, U.S. District Court Judge Ricardo S. Martinez called the case an interesting one with some novel legal issues. Purdue attorney Patrick Fitzgerald told the judge the case should be tossed for a number of reasons. Among them, the city fails to show a direct relationship between the company’s conduct and the alleged harms. “It’s a textbook example of remoteness,” Fitzgerald said. He argued there are nine steps — including wrongdoing by pharmacies and criminal gangs — between Purdue’s conduct and the expenses the city incurred in responding to the problems of opioid addiction. The lawyer for the city, Christopher Huck, told the judge that emails and other internal documents show that Purdue knowingly put their painkillers into a supply chain they knew ended at an organized drug ring, and the city has suffered for it. The city should be allowed to make its case at trial, he said. “OxyContin has devastated the community and inflicted enormous harm,” said Huck, who was joined at the table by Everett Mayor Ray Stephanson. The injury here is the diversion and misuse of OxyContin and the damages is what the city had had to deal with that harm, Huck said. Three city council members, the police chief and others filled the benches in the courtroom Monday. “Our city has been significantly damaged. Obviously, we hope the case is not dismissed and goes forward on its merits,” the mayor said outside the courtroom. “Our community needs help. And clearly we believe our city has been damaged by this crisis.” Purdue knew their pills were going into the black market, had an obligation to report it and they didn’t do that, Stephanson said. Fitzgerald argued in court that there’s no proof Purdue was dealing to drug dealers and noted that Purdue provided pills to a wholesaler. The company argued Monday that the statute of limitations has passed for the city to file the lawsuit. In court documents, it also argued that city can’t hold it responsible for illegal trafficking when law enforcement officials knew and were already investigating criminal trafficking at issue. The lawsuit doesn’t say how much money the city is seeking. Stephanson said that will be determined in the weeks and months to come. Everett filed its lawsuit after the Los Angeles Times reported that Purdue had evidence that pointed to illegal trafficking of its pills but in many cases did nothing to notify authorities or stop the flow. That newspaper investigation prompted the city’s lawsuit. Last week, a second city in Washington state, Tacoma, sued Purdue Pharma and two other opioid manufacturers, Endo Health Solutions and Janssen Pharmaceuticals. That lawsuit alleges the companies made false and misleading statements about the benefits and risks of opioids to doctors and patients over the past two decades. ___ Information from: The Daily Herald, http://www.heraldnet.com Claim: City asks judge to let case against OxyContin maker proceed.


Output: A Washington city that says the pain medication OxyContin has devastated the community asked a federal judge Monday to let it move forward with its lawsuit seeking to hold the pill’s manufacturer accountable for damages.