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 city of Fort Lauderdale’s latest attempt to regulate outdoor homeless feedings made international news when police nabbed ""Chef Arnold"" -- a 90-year-old caught in the act of such a public feeding. ""One of the police officers said, 'Drop that plate right now,' as if I were carrying a weapon,"" Arnold Abbott said, recalling his early November arrest for the Associated Press. Multiple news reports -- and Comedy Central’s The Colbert Report -- recounted the tale of Abbott’s arrest, which reignited a long-running debate about how the city should handle the homeless population downtown and at the beach. On Nov. 5, Fort Lauderdale Mayor Jack Seiler issued a statement in which he said he wanted to ""set the record straight"" about the city’s services for homeless. He said that the media had misrepresented the facts. ""Contrary to reports,"" Seiler wrote, ""the City of Fort Lauderdale is not banning groups from feeding the homeless."" Seiler said outdoor feeding is legal, but added that a new city law regulates the activity. Then Seiler addressed the situation regarding Abbott: ""At two recent outdoor food distributions, citations were rightly issued for non-compliance with the process enacted to ensure public health and safety. Contrary to what was reported in the media, no one was taken into custody. ..."" As the public-relations crisis escalated, Seiler gave multiple interviews to the media. On CNN Nov. 11, Seiler said Abbott ""was not arrested and taken into custody."" At PolitiFact Florida we agree with Seiler’s goal of setting the record straight. Was Abbott taken into custody? Fort Lauderdale’s laws about the homeless Abbott’s battle with the city has brought notoriety to Seiler, a former state representative who has been mentioned as a future statewide candidate for the Democrats. Seiler faces re-election to a third term in March. So far, no one has filed to run against him. Abbott, who founded an interfaith volunteer organization Love Thy Neighbor to help the homeless, has been battling city leaders for more than a decade. In 1999, the city tried to ban him from holding picnics for the homeless at the beach, offering him an alternative site miles away from downtown. But Abbott prevailed in court when a judge ruled that the city had violated his religious rights and that the city’s new location was too remote. Abbott resumed his feedings and resumed them in visible locations in Stranahan Park in downtown and along the beach. The battle has continued in recent years, with the commission passing a series of laws that attempted to regulate the homeless population, including a ban on soliciting for money at intersections and tougher laws against defecating in public. City officials, including Seiler, have argued that while the homeless should have access to services, including meals, they have heard complaints from some businesses and residents about the homeless population in downtown. Advocates have decried city officials for cracking down on the homeless with a series of laws. At an Oct. 21 meeting, the commission approved the ordinance about outdoor food distribution over the objection of protesters. The ordinance, approved by the Commission 4-1, codified a list of rules for outdoor food distribution, including that sites must be 500 feet away from residential areas, have bathrooms or portable toilets, equipment for hand washing and consent of the owner. The law allows indoor feedings at houses of worship. ""You have to balance the interests of everybody in the community,"" Seiler told PolitiFact Florida. ""What we always try to do is make sure everybody gets to enjoy our parks. Every single thing we have done with the ordinance is a balance."" But while the law itself doesn’t technically ban outdoor feedings, it raises the bar for groups such as Abbott’s in a way that makes it almost impossible to clear. (Abbott argues that the requirement that he get a port-a-potty should be moot since a public restroom is nearby and he says volunteers wash their hands before feedings and use gloves.) At the time of Seiler’s statement, Abbott had three run-ins with law enforcement related to the outdoor feedings: on Oct. 6, Nov. 2 and Nov. 5, police reports show. (The October arrest predated the new ordinance but the city already had a separate law banning social services in the parks.) On the first two occasions, Abbott was given a warning but then continued with the feedings. The third time, Abbott agreed to end the food distribution that day, police reports say. In none of the three instances was he handcuffed or taken to jail. Instead, he was given notices to appear in court. (In one police report, it states that Abbott shook the police officer’s hand before he left.) At least one other person helping with the feedings was also arrested in a similar manner. A city spokesman told PolitiFact Florida that the case stemming from the Nov. 2 arrest has been filed in court. The city has generally avoided referring to Abbott’s case as an ""arrest,"" but his attorney John David said that just because it’s not a ""custodial arrest"" doesn’t mean it’s not an arrest. For minor crimes, police use this type of arrest and give defendants notices to appear as long as the person has a connection to the area and is likely to show up in court. Nonetheless, ""it's an arrest, no doubt about that,"" David said. ""He is charged with a criminal offense."" Fort Lauderdale police Capt. Rick Maglione told PolitiFact Florida that ""It is similar to a misdemeanor arrest, but we do not have to take the person physically into custody and they can just show up in court and let a judge decide the case."" We interviewed a few criminal defense lawyers in South Florida not involved in the case and they agreed that the police did indeed arrest Abbott. ""With all due respect to the mayor, it is an arrest,"" said Brian Tannebaum, a Miami criminal defense lawyer. ""The fact that someone is not taken into custody does not make it something other than an arrest. Misdemeanor cases are handled with promises to appear all the time. The officer has discretion to take someone into custody, but even if they don't it is still considered an arrest."" City spokesman Chaz Adams told PolitiFact that although a notice to appear is technically an arrest, ""the mayor has been consistent in saying that Mr. Abbott was not ""arrested and taken into custody."" Abbott faces up to a $500 fine and 60 days in jail for each offense. However, lawyers say it’s unlikely that a judge will throw him behind bars. ""I can’t imagine anyone putting Arnold in jail,"" said Broward public defender Howard Finkelstein. His office is not handling the case, but he has praised Abbott. Abbott’s lawyer filed a motion in Broward court on Nov. 12 that asked a judge to enforce the injunction from the earlier case that allowed Abbott to continue the feedings. The city offered Abbott two alternative sites -- at the city’s aquatic complex near the beach, and at Church by the Sea, located near the beach -- but he rejected both. ""I plan to continue my feedings at the same site I have used for the past 23 years,"" Abbott told PolitiFact Florida in an email. Seiler says it’s not his call what penalty Abbott faces. ""We have to enforce the laws, we have to be consistent,"" Seiler told PolitiFact Florida. ""What the courts do with Mr. Abbott -- that’s up to the courts."" Seiler has defended his city’s reputation for serving the homeless, which includes working with nonprofits to provide services and allowing the county-run Homeless Assistance center to expand. The city’s police department also has a homeless outreach unit. Fort Lauderdale’s law about feeding the homeless is part of a growing national trend. Since 2007, 71 cities have attempted or enacted some type of rules related to food-sharing activities, according to the National Coalition for the Homeless. ""The best solution to the food-sharing issue is to have indoor meal programs available to the homeless three times a day, seven days a week,"" said Michael Stoops, director of community organizing National Coalition for the Homeless. ""If these locations were located conveniently in Downtown Fort Lauderdale, a good number of the homeless would opt to eat inside vs. outside. However, food-sharing with the homeless in public spaces would still be needed."" Our ruling Seiler said that ""no one was taken into custody"" for feeding the homeless. Seiler is correct that Abbott wasn’t taken into custody -- the activist was not handcuffed or taken to jail but was instead given a notice to appear in court. But his carefully worded claim glosses over the fact that Abbott was indeed arrested on more than one occasion for allegedly feeding the homeless in violation of city ordinances, something that leaves Abbott at least theoretically in peril of being sentenced to jail. Seiler’s claim is accurate but needs clarification or additional information, so" Claim: "No one was taken into custody"" for feeding the homeless."
[EX A]: "Seiler said that ""no one was taken into custody"" for feeding the homeless. Seiler is correct that Abbott wasn’t taken into custody -- the activist was not handcuffed or taken to jail but was instead given a notice to appear in court. But his carefully worded claim glosses over the fact that Abbott was indeed arrested on more than one occasion for allegedly feeding the homeless in violation of city ordinances, something that leaves Abbott at least theoretically in peril of being sentenced to jail. Seiler’s claim is accurate but needs clarification or additional information."

[EX Q]: Paragraph: "India has reported 471 cases of the coronavirus but health experts have warned that a big jump could be imminent, which would overwhelm the underfunded and crumbling public health infrastructure. On Monday, India confirmed two more deaths, bringing the total to nine. One was a 54-year-old man with no history of foreign travel, suggesting the start of community transmission of the virus, officials said. Streets were deserted in the national capital New Delhi and offices shut at the start of a lockdown to run till the end of the month. The government ordered commercial airlines to shut down domestic operations from midnight on Tuesday on top of a ban on international flights to try and contain the coronavirus. About 144 million people traveled on domestic flights last year. Rail travel, the lifeline of India, has already been suspended after thousands of people, mostly migrant workers, swarmed train stations to go home as businesses shut down and jobs dried up. Prime Minister Narendra Modi said many Indians were not taking the lockdown seriously. “Please save yourself, save your family, follow the instructions seriously,” he said on Twitter. The chief minister of the western state of Maharashtra, which has had the highest number of cases in India, ordered a curfew from Tuesday to force people indoors. “Despite multiple requests, people are not following rules. This compelled the government to impose the curfew,” Uddhav Thackeray said. The country’s main stock exchange located in Mumbai, the capital of Maharashtra, will however remain open, an official said. On Monday night, the Indian government said 30 states and union territories, or 548 districts, were under “complete lockdown.”   Newspapers canceled print runs in Mumbai after vendors refused to distribute them due to worries about the coronavirus, which emerged in China late last year and has spread around the world. Globally, cases exceed 325,000 with deaths topping 14,000. The Pakistani army said on Monday night it would help to impose nationwide restrictions to contain the spread of the coronavirus following a request from the government. Major General Babar Iftikhar said schools, malls, restaurants, cinemas, marriage halls, swimming pools and markets would be shut as of Monday with only eateries, pharmaceutical companies and medical stores allowed to remain open. Prime Minister Imran Khan had previously said he opposed such stringent measures because of the economic consequences for the poor. A spokesman did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Nepal ordered all land border crossings with India and China shut until March 29, saying thousands of people, most of them Nepali migrant workers, had crossed into Nepal in recent days from India, believing their homeland to be safer. Nepal reported its second case of the coronavirus on Monday, a citizen who had recently returned from France. “The closing of the border crossings is meant to ensure that no one infected with the virus crosses over to Nepal from India and China,” said Surya Thapa, an aide to Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli. Confirmed COVID-19 cases in South Asia:  *Pakistan   -   875  *India      -   471  *Sri Lanka  -    91   *Afghanistan  -    42  *Bangladesh  -    33  *Maldives     -    13   *Nepal       -     2  *Bhutan      -     2    ———————————-  TOTAL         - 1,529  https://www.mohfw.gov.in  hpb.health.gov.lk/en  http://covid.gov.pk  covid19.health.gov.mv/en" Claim: India shuts down flights, big cities as coronavirus toll rises in region.
[EX A]: India on Monday announced a halt to domestic flights and said the majority of the country was under complete lockdown to stop the spread of coronavirus as the number of people dying of the disease ticked up across densely populated South Asia.

[EX Q]: Paragraph: No mention of the cost of hernia operations, which may play a role in someone opting for watching waiting. The story does not provide enough information on the effect of pain or the limits a hernia might place on daily activities. There is some information on this in the study in JAMA, but little is mentioned in story. 30% of the watchful waiting group decided to have surgery during the 4 years, though reports of pain at 2 years were similar in both groups. More information on why they decided to have surgery and the effect of hernia pain on quality of life would be useful in order to better inform patients who are trying to make a choice. However, overall, this criterion was met. The reporter used absolute numbers, not just relative — always a good idea. The story mentions harms and the frequency of surgical complications in this study, however, the discussion is limited when compared to the discussion of untreated hernias. Does not mention the harm that a hernia can recur even with the surgery (1.4% in this study.) The most significant harm reported may be the one case of nerve injury, which was not mentioned in the story. While the story states 20% had complications, three of them life-threatening, readers could have used more detail. Mentions some evidence from the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) article. Mentions the randomization and an overview of the study design. Provides some appropriate quantitative evidence. This study raises an interesting question for medicine and for journalism: does the failure to demonstrate a significant difference mean that the treatments are equivalent? We think “no.” The story could have also further scrutinized the evidence by asking about the condition of the men in the trial. One of the trial’s inclusion criteria was having no pain or no interference with activities in the previous six weeks. So it’s not clear whether they really had no symptoms or just minimal symptoms. The story does a satisfactory job of explaining that hernia surgery is a common procedure and that this study challenges the conventional wisdom that all hernias should be fixed. Story includes perspective from editorial writer. In comparing treatment options, the possible harms of surgery could have been explored more fully. The story does not mention specific potential surgical or post-operative complications. 22.3% of those who underwent surgery (this included those randomized to the surgery group or those from watchful waiting who crossed over into the surgery group) had complications which included wound infections, urinary tract infections, and in a few cases, serious cardiovascular problems requiring hospitalization. This rating does not apply, as the story focuses on watchful waiting and active surveillance in lieu of preventative surgery for hernias. Hernia operations are a common procedure and available in most hospitals; the new treatment (no intervention, save for monitoring general health or symptoms typical of a hernia) is also now an evidence-based option for treatment. The story provides accurate information that watchful waiting vs. preventive surgery is a newer approach to treating men with mildly symptomatic hernias. Claim: Study: Not Every Hernia Needs to Be Fixed
[EX A]:
Overall, this story does a good job summarizing the results of a recent study on watching waiting vs. preventive surgery for hernias. Hernia operations are a common procedure and the study challenges conventional wisdom that all hernias should be fixed. Watchful waiting, including active monitoring of symptoms, appears appropriate and safe for middle-aged men with asymptomatic hernias; however, neither strategy proved superior over the two-year observation period. The story summarizes the study design, and notes those included were middle-aged men with asymtomactic or mildly symptomatic hernias; however, according to the source article, half of referred patients were ineligible to participate in the study. In order for the authors, and in turn the journalist, to report that the finding is generalizable to real patient populations, this issue of how and why patients were excluded from the trial needs to be explained. The journalist and the authors might need to clarify that this study does not apply to men who have had ANY hernia related pain in previous six weeks (and that’s a lot of people!). Surgical complications are casually mentioned, however, the discussion is limited when compared to that of untreated hernias. There is also no mention that a hernia can recur even with the surgery (1.4% in this study.) 31% of the watchful waiting group decided to have surgery over the four-year duration of the study, though reports of pain at two years were similar in both groups. The journalist could include more information on why so many in the trial crossed over and decided to have surgery. The story could have further developed the effect of hernia pain on quality of life. Secondary pain and function outcomes were better in the surgery group, but this was not mentioned by their authors in conclusion, nor by the journalist. Lastly, there is no mention of the cost of hernia operations, which may be an important factor for someone trying to make this choice.