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: "In stark, black-and-white montages of tear-streaked female faces, District 27 state senate hopeful Kevin Rader blasts his Republican opponent in a campaign ad for her anti-abortion views. Rader, a Democrat and state House member, accuses Republican Lizbeth Benacquisto of strongly opposing abortion and having ties to extremist conservative groups that would criminally prosecute rape victims for having abortions. ""Lizbeth Benacquisto strongly opposes a woman's right of choice,"" the ad states. ""The extremist groups who support her would make these women into criminals. She supported an extreme law to require pregnant women to pay for  and view a sonogram before they could exercise their right of choice. Her allies would make choice illegal in all cases, including rape, incest, even to save a woman's life. Vote no on Benacquisto, keep extremism out of our state Senate."" The ad enraged Benacquisto, a city councilwoman in Wellington, who responded with her own ad and the revelation that she was raped 23 years ago as a University of Florida freshman. She underscored her support for an exception to abortion for rape victims, saying she would ""never stand down when any woman has been abused,"" and demanded Rader pull the ad. Rader's camp said the only way that will happen is if Benacquisto renounces the support given to her by far-right, conservative right-to-life groups. With such a high emotion level in this campaign, we thought Rader's claim about Benacquisto's supporters was worth a look. Benacquisto is pro-life, and she makes no secret of it on her website and in questionnaires. Same with her support of the ultrasound legislation, though she has noted in various interviews she has concerns about its impact on rape victims. In a candidate questionnaire from the Christian Coalition of Florida, she added, ""I consistently support this because I am pro-life."" Benacquisto holds support from a handful of conservative, anti-abortion groups. Among those are the Christian Coalition, the Florida Right to Life PAC and the Christian Family Coalition. Though they haven't donated financially, both Florida Right to Life and the former Christian Coalition executive director have offered endorsements, and she headlined at least one event, a breakfast for the Christian Family Coalition on Oct. 16. Florida Right to Life believes life begins at conception and ends at natural death, and all points in between are to be defended. It labels abortion ""infanticide,"" which is a crime. And the Christian Coalition of Florida states, ""Although legal in the United States, we believe abortion is no less than murder of an innocent human life."" Using this logic, abortion equals murder and murder is a crime. Therefore, those who have abortions would be criminals. The Christian Family Coalition, based in Miami, says it ""works to introduce pro-family legislation at the state and local levels of government. It informs and educates citizens on where candidates stand on the issues that affect the traditional family unit."" The group’s website includes a link to ""abortion,"" but contains just news articles and press releases in which it is mentioned. Each of those three organizations also closely follows abortion-related legislation. They post opinions on everything from parental notice to making the violent death of any fetus -- viable or otherwise -- cause for a first-degree murder charge. But none appear to flat-out say they would support abortion regardless of whether a woman was raped, abused by a family member or faced with death. They skirt the issue. For example, Florida Right to Life says, ""We promote, uphold and support reverence and respect for human life without regard to condition, quality, age, race, religion, color or whether born or unborn."" On the National Right to Life page, the only reference to exceptions is a 2005 survey indicating only 0.5 percent of women have abortions due to rape, while 4 percent undergo it for the mother's health. Rader's campaign manager, Michael McCall, said, ""The problem with something like that is if you take an organization like Florida Right to Life, their very core is making abortion illegal. They won't list every case in which they support banning abortions, because they support banning abortions in all cases."" It's clear that groups supporting Benacquisto have firm stands against abortion, but they're not spelled out precisely. What is clear, though, is that the groups don't offer up any exceptions. So we don't expect Rader's campaign to find any." Claim: "Lizbeth Benacquisto's supporters ""would make (abortion) illegal in all cases, including rape, incest, even to save a woman's life."
[EX A]: "Kevin Rader says ""extremist"" supporters of his opponent would make abortion illegal in all cases"

[EX Q]: Paragraph: There’s no discussion of cost, even to mention that statins are relatively inexpensive these days and are mostly generically available. To its credit, the article does mention the cost of a calcium scan. We learn that “anywhere from 50 to 200 healthy people need to take a statin daily to prevent a single heart attack for five years.” That’s helpful information. It also notes that the observed benefit is less for older patients. The story could have added that even those numbers might disputed by some experts who perceive no meaningful benefit. For example, one review found being on a statin does not help people with low risk for heart disease live longer. The story does a service by highlighting the harms of statins. It explains: “The most common side effect of these drugs is muscle pain, which usually goes away if patients stop taking the medicines. People taking statins are also at a higher risk of developing diabetes, which is harder to reverse.” It also mentions the potential for overtreatment with the use of coronary calcium scans. However, we wish it had included absolute numbers. The story says harms are “uncommon,” but provides no data to back that up. Rates of adverse effects with statins have been measured at 1 to 10%, which makes them “common” in the definition of the European Medicines Agency. Also noteworthy is that some contend that adverse effects of statins have not been reliably reported. The story doesn’t explain the quality of the study, or of studies on which current guidelines are based. We don’t explicitly learn that this is a modelling study. In other words, this study consisted mostly of reinterpretations of math, not re-evaluations of real-life patients. The researchers said they were unable to obtain enough data on all possible harms and age-specific data on some harm outcomes, “so the risk thresholds we determined may still be too low.” There is no disease-mongering here. This story includes sources that weren’t involved in the study. The study’s authors reported no conflicts of interest. The story could have acknowledged the influence of pharmaceutical companies in creating guidelines for statin use. The alternative of not taking a statin was the key message here, and that’s laudable. However, we have a couple of concerns. First, we learn that “some statins were more effective than others, with atorvastatin (the generic name for Lipitor) being the best of the bunch.”  However, the story doesn’t explain on what basis some statins are “more effective.” In fact, some statins may be more effective at lower cholesterol, but the study found that no statin rises above others when it comes to the outcomes that counts most to patients — reducing cardiovascular deaths. Also, the story doesn’t mention lifestyle interventions — diet and exercise. The story makes it clear that statins are widely prescribed. The story states this an attempt to better weigh the benefits and harms of statin use. There was a good range of interviewees with no reliance on a news release Claim: Before Starting A Statin, Talk It Over With Your Doctor
[EX A]: The story reports on a study that re-assessed who benefits from taking a statin to prevent heart disease, with different risk thresholds based on sex, age group, and statin type. It reports the view that current guidelines “haven’t adequately considered” the harms from taking these widely used drugs. The story laudably focuses attention on potential adverse events and a need for balanced decision-making. It also incorporated a variety of sources. In our view, the story could done a better job in discussing costs, the quality of evidence, and alternative strategies to prevent heart disease. Statins are among the most widely prescribed drugs, with their use encouraged under guidelines such as those of the American Heart Association of the American College of Cardiology. However, data isn’t crystal clear on the benefits and harms of statins for people who don’t already have heart disease. As a result, there’s concern that they are being overused. It’s laudable that some news organizations — including CNN as well as NPR — highlighted research that explores these complexities and points out the need for patients and physicians to weigh benefits and harms. The headline of this story is, in our view, a winner.

[EX Q]: Paragraph: The Casper Star-Tribune reported Monday (http://bit.ly/2oUz0aa ) that a press release by the Wyoming Health Department said while the rates for other sexual transmitted diseases such as chlamydia and syphilis have risen, gonorrhea has affected young people the most. The department says there were 44 reported gonorrhea cases in Wyoming in 2012. The number of gonorrhea cases rose to 279 in 2016. Communicable Disease Surveillance Program Manager Courtney Smith says two-thirds of the gonorrhea cases and half of chlamydia cases were reported by people between 15 and 24 years old. Smith says that Natrona County has the highest gonorrhea infection rate in the state in 2016. It’s followed by Laramie and Fremont counties. ___ Information from: Casper (Wyo.) Star-Tribune, http://www.trib.com Claim: Wyoming health officials report rise in STDs.
[EX A]:
Wyoming health officials say there were six times as many gonorrhea cases in 2016 than in 2012.