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 overall number of religious exemptions in the state climbed by 25%, from the 2017-18 school year to the 2018-19 school year, according to the state’s Department of Public Health. The agency said the increase from 2% of students to 2.5% represents the largest single year upturn in religious exemptions for vaccinations since it began tracking statewide data 10 years ago. While the immunization rate for kindergarten students remains high in Connecticut, the new information shows it has declined from 96.5% to 95.9%. “It does raise concern,” said Public Health Commissioner Renee D. Coleman-Mitchell, adding how the new numbers warrant releasing more data, including county-by-county and school-by-school. The commissioner originally planned not to release the school-by-school data, but Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont on Wednesday overruled that decision, arguing the public should have the information. A Bristol couple on Thursday asked a court to stop the release of the school-by-school vaccination rates, arguing they’ll suffer “irreparable harm” if the information is released. Their unvaccinated son attends a private school where 18% of the students claimed a religious exemption from vaccinations, according to school-by-school data DPH released in May. The couple has another lawsuit pending. “We believe that out of deference and respect for the authority of the court, no new data should be released during the pendency of this litigation,” the couple said in a written statement. “To do otherwise is to move into the dangerous waters of undermining the separation of powers that is so important to our system of government.” Lamont’s office declined to comment on the pending litigation. Coleman-Mitchell said the resurgence of measles in the U.S. is of great concern and the decline in Connecticut’s vaccination rates, coupled with the increase in religious exemptions, validates the need to release both county-by-county and school-by-school data by Oct. 21. There have been three cases so far in Connecticut this year. ___ This story has been corrected to show that the Festas live in Bristol, not Woodstock. Claim: Data show 25% increase in religious exemptions for vaccines.
[EX A]: New data released Thursday show more Connecticut students are being exempted from vaccinations for measles, mumps and rubella for religious reasons.

[EX Q]: Paragraph: A developmental biologist and tissue engineer, Dr. Mironov, 56, is one of only a few scientists worldwide involved in bioengineering “cultured” meat. It’s a product he believes could help solve future global food crises resulting from shrinking amounts of land available for growing meat the old-fashioned way ... on the hoof. Growth of “in-vitro” or cultured meat is also under way in the Netherlands, Mironov told Reuters in an interview, but in the United States, it is science in search of funding and demand. The new National Institute of Food and Agriculture, part of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, won’t fund it, the National Institutes of Health won’t fund it, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration funded it only briefly, Mironov said. “It’s classic disruptive technology,” Mironov said. “Bringing any new technology on the market, average, costs $1 billion. We don’t even have $1 million.”   Director of the Advanced Tissue Biofabrication Center in the Department of Regenerative Medicine and Cell Biology at the medical university, Mironov now primarily conducts research on tissue engineering, or growing, of human organs. “There’s a yuck factor when people find out meat is grown in a lab. They don’t like to associate technology with food,” said Nicholas Genovese, 32, a visiting scholar in cancer cell biology working under a People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals three-year grant to run Dr. Mironov’s meat-growing lab. “But there are a lot of products that we eat today that are considered natural that are produced in a similar manner,” Genovese said. “There’s yogurt, which is cultured yeast. You have wine production and beer production. These were not produced in laboratories. Society has accepted these products.”   If wine is produced in winery, beer in a brewery and bread in a bakery, where are you going to grow cultured meat? In a “carnery,” if Mironov has his way. That is the name he has given future production facilities. He envisions football field-sized buildings filled with large bioreactors, or bioreactors the size of a coffee machine in grocery stores, to manufacture what he calls “charlem” — “Charleston engineered meat.”   “It will be functional, natural, designed food,” Mironov said. “How do you want it to taste? You want a little bit of fat, you want pork, you want lamb? We design exactly what you want. We can design texture. “I believe we can do it without genes. But there is no evidence that if you add genes the quality of food will somehow suffer. Genetically modified food is already normal practice and nobody dies.”   Dr. Mironov has taken myoblasts — embryonic cells that develop into muscle tissue — from turkey and bathed them in a nutrient bath of bovine serum on a scaffold made of chitosan (a common polymer found in nature) to grow animal skeletal muscle tissue. But how do you get that juicy, meaty quality? Genovese said scientists want to add fat. And adding a vascular system so that interior cells can receive oxygen will enable the growth of steak, say, instead of just thin strips of muscle tissue. Cultured meat could eventually become cheaper than what Genovese called the heavily subsidized production of farm meat, he said, and if the public accepts cultured meat, the future holds benefits. “Thirty percent of the earth’s land surface area is associated with producing animal protein on farms,” Genovese said. “Animals require between 3 and 8 pounds of nutrient to make 1 pound of meat. It’s fairly inefficient. Animals consume food and produce waste. Cultured meat doesn’t have a digestive system. “Further out, if we have interplanetary exploration, people will need to produce food in space and you can’t take a cow with you. “We have to look to these ideas in order to progress. Otherwise, we stay static. I mean, 15 years ago who could have imagined the iPhone?” Claim: South Carolina scientist works to grow meat in lab.
[EX A]: In a small laboratory on an upper floor of the basic science building at the Medical University of South Carolina, Vladimir Mironov, M.D., Ph.D., has been working for a decade to grow meat.

[EX Q]: Paragraph: "Florida has long had a poor reputation for spending on social services. Bud Chiles, running as an independent for governor, criticizes the state's spending on mental health care. On his website Chiles said: ""Nearly $3 billion dollars -- 10 percent of our state’s general fund -- is going to pay for Florida’s prisons. Meanwhile, Florida is 49th in per capita spending on mental health care, and 65 percent of inmates need substance abuse treatment and aren’t getting it. The only way to end this cycle is through community solutions. Let’s stop using a prison cell to solve problems when an ankle bracelet and drug counseling is proven to be more effective. Let’s get resources to communities so that they can provide services locally at less taxpayer expense, creating local jobs and real results."" In this Truth-O-Meter item, we wanted to explore Chiles' claim that Florida is 49th in per capita spending on mental health. We spoke to Chiles on Aug. 31, 2010, who directed us to campaign spokeswoman Katie Ottenweller. She said the source of their information was a July 4, 2010, editorial in the Tallahassee Democrat by David L. Miller, a retired senior vice president of Florida Power Corp. who had been chair of the Florida Substance Abuse and Mental Health Corp. The editorial stated that during the 2010 session, Florida legislators cut the $190,000 needed to continue the corporation, which was an independent, nonprofit created by the Legislature. ""The lack of services in Florida is shocking and embarrassing, as well as very costly,"" Miller wrote. ""Our state ranks 49th in per capita spending for mental-health care, an abysmal ranking borne out by the thousands of people who cannot get treatment and end up in our jails, prisons and on the streets."" Miller did not attribute the per capita spending comparison. PolitiFact Texas looked at a similar claim made by a candidate for lieutenant governor earlier this year. Marc Katz said that Texas ranked 50th -- last -- in per capita mental health spending. PolitiFact ranked that claim Mostly  because one state was lower than Texas: New Mexico. That item cited a report by the National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors Research Institute, Inc., posted on a Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation website statehealthfacts.org that compares 50 states' and the District of Columbia per capita mental health spending. The chart ranked Florida 49th with $38.17 per capita followed by Texas at $34.57 and New Mexico in last place at $25.58. That report was based on fiscal year 2006 data, said Ted Lutterman, director of research analysis, in an interview. The 2007 report showed Florida 48th but Hawaii did not report and if it had, Florida would have been 49th, Lutterman said. The report based on 2008 data will be finished soon, said Lutterman, who said he is missing Alaska. But Alaska has always been ahead of Florida so he expects Florida to rank 49th again. ""It's been consistent for several years,"" Lutterman said. We reached out to several other organizations in the mental health field to determine if they had any other information about Florida's mental health spending ranking. The National Alliance on Mental Illness gives states a grade, and in 2009 gave Florida a ""D."" The ""Grading the States 2009"" report evaluates measures such as the number of programs delivering evidence-based practices, emergency room wait-times, and the quantity of psychiatric beds by setting and whether Medicaid reimburses providers for all, or part of evidence-based practices; and more. In 2009, the organization gave six states an ""F"" and 21 states a ""D."" The report card is not based on per capita spending but gives us a general sense of how Florida compares -- somewhere in the bottom half of states. The nonprofit Mental Health America published a report in December 2007 called ""Ranking America's Mental Health: An Analysis of Depression Across the States."" Appendix B, which compares state mental health authority expenditures per capita for 50 states plus the District of Columbia, stated that Florida spent $35.96 while three states were lower: Arkansas $35.96, New Mexico $27.78 and Kansas $23.14. That report was based on 2004 data, said spokesman Steve Vetzner. A Sept. 10, 2009, letter to the editor in the Sun-Sentinel from Bob Sharpe, CEO and president of the Florida Council for Community Mental Health, states that Florida is 49th in per capita mental health spending but does not attribute the source of the ranking. We left a message for Sharpe but did not hear back. So how does Chiles' claim stack up? He said that Florida was 49th in per capita spending on mental health. The campaign cites an editorial that does not provide the source for the 49th figure. The Association of State Mental Health Program Directors Research Institute, Inc., concluded in a 2006 report that Florida ranked 49th and that figure has been quoted several times by mental health experts such as Sharpe. Mental Health America wrote in a 2007 report that Florida was 48th -- but it was based on earlier 2004 data. Based on the information we could find." Claim: Florida is 49th in per capita spending on mental health care.
[EX A]:
Chiles says Florida ranks 49th in per capita mental health spending