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.

Q: Paragraph: KTWO-AM reports Carbon County School District No. 2 canceled classes Thursday at the elementary schools in Hanna, Elk Mountain and Medicine Bow, as well as the high school in Hanna. Classes will resume Monday after the campuses are disinfected. Kim Deti, a spokeswoman for the Wyoming Department of Health, says meningitis has not yet been confirmed and there is no public health threat. Superintendent Jim Copeland says student involved attends Hanna Elementary, and the other schools were closed as a precaution. The child has since been hospitalized. Meningitis is an infection of the membranes surrounding the brain and spinal cord. ___ This story has been updated to correct that meningitis has not been confirmed. ___ Information from: KTWO-AM, http://www.k2radio.com/ Claim: 4 Wyoming schools close after possible meningitis case.

A: A school district in southern Wyoming has closed four of its campuses over fears that a fourth-grade student might have contracted bacterial meningitis.
****
Q: Paragraph: A panel of Food and Drug Administration advisers voted unanimously in favor of Amgen’s version of AbbVie’s Humira, a biotech drug that raked in nearly $15 billion last year, according to IMS Health. While not binding, the recommendation likely paves the way for FDA approval of the knockoff drug. For years, biotech drugs faced no competition because there was no regulatory way to approve copycat versions, even after patents had expired. If approved, Amgen’s drug would join a new wave of so-called biosimilars, which have the potential to generate billions in savings for U.S. insurers, doctors and patients. But it could take years for those savings to arrive. Evercore ISI analyst Mark Schoenebaum says the earliest Amgen could launch its product would be March 2017, though that would risk infringing patents which Abbvie says protect its drug until at least 2022. Wall Street analysts expect the patent issue to be fought in court, and then for Amgen’s drug to launch sometime between 2018 and 2022. First approved in 2002, Humira has long been among the most profitable drugs in the world. It accounted for 60 percent of Abbvie’s total revenue last year. The injectable drug, which blocks chemicals linked to inflammation, is approved for multiple uses, including rheumatoid arthritis, Crohn’s disease and psoriasis. Thousand Oaks, Calif-based Amgen is seeking FDA approval to market its version, known only as ABP 501, for seven diseases. Amgen is itself a biotech powerhouse, and it too has medications facing competition from cheaper versions. The company is working to hedge those loses by developing lower-cost versions of competitors’ drugs. Biotech drugs are powerful, injected medicines produced in living cells that are typically much more expensive than traditional, chemical-based drugs. In 2015, six of the 10 top-selling medicines globally were biotech drugs, with more than $56 billion in combined sales. The FDA only approved the first lower-cost biotech drug last March, a Novartis version of the Amgen drug Neupogen. Pfizer won approval to market a second biosimilar in April, a version of Johnson & Johnson’s Remicade, but it is not yet for sale. Questions remain about just how much savings U.S. biosimilars will deliver. Novartis’ Zarxio sells for 15 percent less than the original Neupogen. Experts predict biosimilar discounts of 15 percent to 30 percent in the U.S. In Europe, where governments regulate prices, discounts are higher. Development of lower-cost anti-inflammatory drugs like Humira is considered pivotal in reducing U.S. spending on specialty drugs, which has doubled to $150 billion since 2010, according to IMS Health. On Wednesday, the same panel of FDA advisers will review a Novartis version of Enbrel, which is marketed by Amgen. Claim: Lower-cost biotech drug gets thumbs up from FDA panel.

A: The second-biggest selling drug in the world could get some cheaper competition in the U.S., after a federal panel endorsed an alternative version of the pricey medication used to treat rheumatoid arthritis and other inflammatory diseases.
****
Q: Paragraph: Not applicable. The story didn’t discuss cost, but the story was clear that is a drug that has been slowed in its path to marketing approval so that is understandable. The story adequately reported on the potential benefits. It just didn’t provide the context we applauded in the LA Times story. But it did state: This story – while not quantifying harms – did a better job in discussing harms than the LA Times story, so we’ll give it a satisfactory score. It reported: You have to read the LA Times’ story in order to see how much better a job it did than this CNN.com story in evaluating the evidence. The Times stated: By comparison, CNN.com called it “significant promise” and “a new report.”  We think the Times’ analysis was far more helpful for readers. No disease mongering in the story. The story turned to “Dr. Melina Jampolis,  CNNHealth’s physician nutrition expert, who is not connected with the study.”  We wish the story had given us some background on her expertise. It also stated that “The study was funded by the pharmaceutical company Vivus.” Adequate. The story stated: The story stated that Qnexa was not approved: “The Food and Drug Administration denied the request, asking for more safety data from the company before moving forward.” Again, in comparison with the LA Times’ reporting, we must give the CNN.com story an unsatisfactory score because of how it treated as “new” something that really wasn’t. The story did not rely solely on a news release. Claim: Study: Weight-loss combo pill shows promise

A:
Perhaps if we had not compared the CNN.com story with the LA Times piece, our comments might be more glowing. It covered a lot of the bases – addressing most of our criteria. But the Times story was framed completely differently, delivering healthy skepticism where it appears to be warranted. This story delivered a key summary line from an independent expert:  “”This might be a good tool in the short term to get someone motivated, and that’s great. But unless it’s paired with aggressive lifestyle changes, it may not be great in the long term.”
****