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.

[EX Q]: Paragraph: The news release includes information about costs. We would have liked a little more context. The release states: “The costs associated with home infusion were also consistently lower than services provided in a health care facility, with savings ranging between $1,928 and $2,974 per course of treatment.” We need to know what percentage of savings that is per course of treatment. If the whole course costs $100,000, then saving $1,928 is a pretty small percentage. If the whole course is $10,000, than a savings of $1,928 looks more substantial. We found the news release skimmed over giving crucial numbers and metrics for benefits. Separate from the cost benefit to home infusion versus hospital or clinic infusion, the release should have given us some numbers for safety. Here is what the release stated (emphasis ours): “The research showed that patients receiving intravenous therapy at home had as good or better clinical outcomes as those patients who received the same therapy in a traditional health care setting. In addition, patients overwhelmingly preferred receiving their infusion therapies at home, reporting fewer disruptions in personal schedules and responsibilities. We need numbers to demonstrate how “as good” the clinical outcomes were. We need numbers to represent “overwhelmingly preferred.” By what percentage did what number of patients demonstrate preference? This is where the release could have taken some quantitative data from the study. The word “harms” does not appear in the news release. During intravenous infusions there are complications that may arise. The release does not mention harm, even to dismiss the probability as rare. The study being reported is a systematic literature review that only considered 13 prior studies. The release does not address the limitations of a literature review or give us the total number of patients represented by the 13 studies. Only 5 of the 13 studies used in the analysis addressed outcomes. One had no comparison group (“However, no adjustment for confounders was performed, and higher OPAT success rates were likely due to purposeful selection of younger, healthier patients for OPAT therapy,” according to the published study). In another study, “IPAT patients were selected from a time period during which OPAT was not available for any patients, minimizing selection bias by the matching fact.” In any case, less than half of the studies looked at outcome data and those that did involved different diseases from different time periods, some had control groups and some did not. We don’t think the evidence is strong enough to suggest outcomes were improved. The bias inherent in CVS employees culling the studies is also concerning. A better description of the review’s search and selection process may have helped allay any concerns about studies being cherry-picked. There is no disease mongering. The release is clear that the study was done by the CVS Health Research Institute. Since this is a news release from a profit-making company that operates directly to sell services under study, we hope the readers quickly understand there is an inherent conflict. This is the equivalent of a Coca Cola study about the benefits of drinking their product. The release explains the alternatives of clinic or hospital infusion compared to home infusion. Home infusion services are widely available. Their reimbursement is not widely available. The release says “clinical outcomes and quality of care have not previously been systematically evaluated.” The release doesn’t rely on any unreasonable or unjustified language. However, we do not think the news release proves the words used in the headline that say “Home Infusion Care Improves Patient Outcomes and Quality of Life While Reducing Overall Costs.” Based on a literature review, which does not randomize people into apples-to-apples comparison, you cannot claim to show better outcomes. The release does not offer any quantified benefits to support medical outcomes and doesn’t provide quantified information about quality of life improvement. The fact that patients prefer home infusion to travel to a clinic is not by itself a proof that their lives have been improved. As we wrote in the benefits section above — we are not given numbers to prove by what amount patients prefer home infusion. Claim: CVS Health Research Institute Study Shows that Home Infusion Care Improves Patient Outcomes and Quality of Life While Reducing Overall Costs
[EX A]: This news release describes the cost savings and safety of home infusion services from 13 previously published studies compared with infusion services at a clinic or hospital. Home infusion appears safe and clinically effective while saving money in the studies reviewed, but the release does not address limits in the review. We aren’t given any numbers to back up the claims that clinical outcomes were equal and that patients preferred the home setting. The release notes that CVS has a home infusion business–Coram–so at least they make this transparent. We applaud CVS for attempting to quantify the cost savings and other potential benefits of the service — and the claim that there are advantages are likely valid — but some context/background from other, independent studies would be helpful. Besides the lack of quantification, the release doesn’t delve into the potential risks from using the home infusion service. Treatments for chronic diseases, which often require drugs administered through infusion, are one of the fastest growing costs in the US health care system. If patients can be served at home, rather than in outpatient clinics or hospitals, it saves both money and time. But outcomes studies, which compare outcomes and safety between locations, are essential to judging whether home infusion is equal to clinic or hospital infusion. This release does not go far enough with numbers to quantify benefits and risks. We also see that CVS has a conflict of interest, because they have a business arm, Coram, that sells home infusion services. It appears this release (and study) are getting attention just as Congress is “discussing how to implement a comprehensive home infusion benefit for Medicare beneficiaries.”

[EX Q]: Paragraph: During the warm, waning summer days, fresh air workouts offer a wealth of new ways to boost the mood, channel the inner child and even burn extra calories. Chris Freytag, a personal trainer and health coach with the American Council on Exercise, loves the gym but lives in Minneapolis, Minnesota, a city notorious for brutal winters. “I’m a big believer in change of venue, of getting away from the same treadmill, the same spot. And there’s something about fresh air and moving in space,” said Freytag, who leads boot camp and circuit classes in parks and parking lots during the summer months. The changing terrain can also inspire the solitary exerciser to mix it up. “I’m all about hills: every time you see a hill or steps or stairs, lunge at it,” said Freytag. “Step up and down on curbs and park benches.”  A child’s playground offers core-strengthening possibilities from deep plank pushups, with feet placed on swings, to training with resistance bands slung around poles, to monkey bar pull-ups, she explained. Research suggest the outdoor boost can be mental as well as physical. In a 2014 study on indoor versus outdoor activity published in the journal Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being researchers analyzed national survey data from Finland. They found that nature provides an added value to the known benefits of physical activity and repeated exercise in nature is, in particular, connected to better emotional well-being. In his book “Beat the Gym,” Connecticut-based running coach and personal trainer Tom Holland said running on a treadmill is slightly easier than running on the ground. “You don’t have to deal with changing terrain, wind resistance,” he said, adding that the zero incline on most treadmills is actually slightly downhill. New York City-based personal trainer JR Allen, said the first benefit of the outdoor workout is balance. “You have to be aware of your surroundings because you could step in a pothole,” Allen said. “It is a less safe, more uncontrolled environment that is more of a strain on your body.”  Allen suggests the newcomer to outdoor exercise should start with a simple walk around the neighborhood. The seasoned exerciser should head to the park for sprints, power push ups, in which hands leave the ground, and walking planks, moving side to side and back to back on hands and feet. Daniel Taylor, author of the book “Conditioning to the Core,” thinks outdoor training is great as long as people take some precautions. “People who utilize children’s playground equipment ought to double check it. Make sure bars aren’t slippery,” he said. “One of the reasons we go to the gym is it’s safe and dry.” Claim: Parks, playgrounds offer fresh air alternatives to gym workouts.
[EX A]: From park bench pushups and monkey bar lifts to open air runs, fitness experts say the workout possibilities of playgrounds and parks are worth the consideration of even the most diehard gym users.

[EX Q]: Paragraph: “It seems like a huge invasion of privacy,” said owner Cathy Lipincott, who is nonetheless trying to comply with Austin’s local public health guidelines by asking, but not requiring, customers to give their information. Few states are rebooting quicker than Texas, where stay-at-home orders expired May 1. With cases still rising — including single-day highs of 1,458 new cases and 58 deaths Thursday and only slightly lower Friday with 1,347 new cases and 56 new deaths reported, bringing the state’s total to more than 45,000 — Republican Gov. Greg Abbott has defended the pace by emphasizing that hospitalization and infection rates are steady, and pointing out that Texas’ 1,200 deaths still lag similarly big states, including California and Florida. The true number of cases and deaths is likely higher because many people have not been tested, and studies suggest people can be infected without feeling sick. Even so, on the cusp of even more restrictions ending Monday, including gyms being cleared to reopen, a political confrontation is growing over attempts by big cities to keep some guardrails in place. The dispute underscores the gulf between Democrats who run city halls and GOP leaders who call the shots in the capital in Texas, one of a number of states where local officials and governors have clashed over restrictions during the pandemic. The renewed tensions come at a moment when Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s top infectious disease expert, warned Congress this week of “needless suffering and death” if the U.S. moves too quickly. Nevertheless, Wisconsin’s courts tossed out the state’s stay-at-home orders, throwing communities into chaos as some bars opened immediately while strict local restrictions were kept elsewhere. In Georgia, Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms has also expressed unease at the speed that Republican Gov. Brian Kemp has reopened the state. Oklahoma lawmakers, irritated by local officials who imposed stricter measures during this health crisis, passed a House bill Thursday that would weaken the power of cities during the next one. And in Texas, Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton this week lashed out at the cities of Dallas, Austin and San Antonio over what he called “unlawful” local orders that are tougher than restrictions prescribed by Abbott, and threatened lawsuits if the cities don’t back off. The warning came one day after El Paso pleaded to postpone easing up on any more lockdown measures in light of the number of COVID-19 cases there surging 60% over the past two weeks. “Unfortunately, a few Texas counties and cities seem to have confused recommendations with requirements and have grossly exceeded state law to impose their own will on private citizens and businesses,” Paxton said. City leaders said their local orders, which include more stringent emphasis on face coverings in public and restaurant protocols that aren’t strictly enforced, don’t conflict. El Paso County Judge Ricardo Samaniego, the county’s top elected official, said he made his case to the governor during a phone call and asked for a few more weeks to assess data and reduce cases before more restrictions are lifted. But he doesn’t think he’ll get an answer before Abbott’s public announcement Monday. “I’m not fighting his plan, I’m fighting his timing,” Samaniego said. “It looks like it would work for us months from now.” The spat is a reversal from the early days of the outbreak in Texas, when Abbott gave cities and counties wide latitude to issue restrictions as they saw fit. But Abbott has since taken the reins over how quickly Texas will reboot, which last week included moving up the reopening of hair salons following complaints from conservatives. Testing for most of May has fallen well short of Abbott’s stated goal of 30,000 per day, although testing numbers have surged in recent days, according to state health officials. Overflow hospitals set up in Dallas and Houston were dismantled without ever being used, and the rate of new cases in Texas has dropped since April even as testing has expanded, down to a seven-day average of 5.3% as of Thursday, according to data from Abbott’s office. But experts still worry. “They see the decline going in and they pat themselves on the back and say, ‘Look at the good work we’ve done, now we can let this happen and open up things,’” said Dennis Perrotta, a retired state epidemiologist in Texas. “And then we get slammed with a second peak.”  In Austin, restaurants have grumbled over recommendations to log dine-in customers for the purposes of contact tracing, coupled with a warning that health officials otherwise might have to publicly out eateries if outbreaks spread. Some restaurateurs saw that as a threat, but at The Peached Tortilla, owner Eric Silverstein says his industry has to do what it takes to reopen. “We have no choice,” he said. “You kind of have to going back to doing some form of business.” A few blocks away at Brentwood Social House, a neighborhood coffee shop, owner Suzanne Daniels isn’t so sure. Though her competitors have reopened, her indoor seating remains closed, and she doesn’t know when she’ll feel safe to follow them. “It feels early,” Daniels said. “In my gut, it doesn’t feel right or good.” ___ Associated Press writers Sean Murphy in Oklahoma City, Cedar Attanasio in El Paso and Terry Wallace in Dallas contributed to this report. ___ Follow AP coverage of the virus outbreak at https://apnews.com/VirusOutbreak and https://apnews.com/UnderstandingtheOutbreak Claim: Tensions rise as Texas governor readies to lift more rules.
[EX A]:
Two weeks into the reopening of Texas, coronavirus cases are climbing. New outbreaks still crop up. And at Guero’s Taco Bar in Austin, which offers the occasional celebrity sighting, a log of every diner and where they sat is begrudgingly in the works.