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 Input:
Paragraph: WisCorps has hired someone with a visual impairment and another person with a physical disability to work on erosion control and planting in neighborhood parks, and building accessible gardens this summer, Wisconsin Public Radio (http://bit.ly/2s8XH2P) reported. WisCorps Executive Director Matthew Brantner said the group is being called the Inclusive Crew. “Whether it’s a physical barrier or just a barrier to entry into the workforce, we want to be able to remove that and get young people into the workforce and have young people of all abilities come in and conserve our state’s natural resources and revitalize our communities,” he said. The goal is to expand the concept to all of the program’s work crews by next summer, he said. More than 40 percent of people with disabilities in the state are unemployed, according to 2016 statistics. Inclusive Crew program coordinator Andrea Frisch says she hopes to make nature available to everyone. “Scientifically, there are studies that say spending time in nature you have better outcomes for stress management,” she said. “Some individuals with different disabilities, for example autism, being outdoors and doing nature activities helps people focus and helps people experience things that they wouldn’t typically experience.” ___ Information from: Wisconsin Public Radio, http://www.wpr.org Claim: Conservation program hopes to help people of all abilities.

Ex Output:
An environmental conservation program based in western Wisconsin plans to expand its work opportunities and environmental education program to people of all abilities.


Ex Input:
Paragraph: Frates is fighting back from a summer health scare that landed him in the hospital while still trying to be a public face of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, or ALS, a degenerative disease that destroys nerve cells, impairs physical functions and so far has no cure. The former Boston College baseball star, who can no longer speak or move, spent most of July in the hospital battling pneumonia and other infections. In July, a tweet erroneously reporting his demise led to worldwide headlines. Frates wryly countered by posting a short video of himself lying in a hospital bed with Pearl Jam’s “Alive” playing in the background. Using a computer system that lets him type out words through eye movements, Frates has been tweeting about his progress to his nearly 30,000 followers, along with regular musings about his family and friends, living with ALS and Boston sports. “lots of down days as you can imagine with als, sometimes you don’t feel human,” he tweeted Sept. 23. “Today I am definitely feeling sorry for myself, sukxx. but I will bounce back. Eff! you als.. Friggin a hole! !” In the weeks since his July health scare, the 32-year-old has re-emerged to accept honors and accolades across his home state of Massachusetts. Last month, he joined Boston Mayor Marty Walsh, Red Sox officials and the Boston College baseball team on the steps of City Hall to declare Sept. 5 “Pete Frates Day” in Boston. And former Red Sox slugger David Ortiz and other Boston sports legends feted Frates at Fenway Park to mark the release of a new book on his life, “The Ice Bucket Challenge: Pete Frates and the Fight Against ALS.” Half the proceeds benefit Frates and his family. Frates’ wife, Julie, said it’s been a difficult and busy few months, but she couldn’t persuade her husband to slow things down even if she wanted to. “He’s the one pushing to be out there,” she said. “We take all the lead from him.” The ice bucket challenge had been around for almost a year to benefit various causes. But Frates is credited with helping focus it on ALS specifically and taking it global using his wide network of supporters as an established ALS advocate. The challenge raised roughly $220 million in 2014, of which $115 million went to the ALS Association. A sequel campaign the next summer raised just over $1 million, according to the association. The ALS Association says it has committed more than $89 million of the 2014 windfall to research. “New, exciting research is just starting to pan out, and that’s drawing new talent to ALS research, and a lot of companies are now interested in ALS,” said Dr. Nazem Atassi, a Massachusetts General Hospital neurologist whose ALS research benefited from ice bucket challenge money. “It’s the perfect environment for drug discovery.” Among the most promising developments to come out of research funded by the challenge has been the identification of at least four genes that contribute to the disease, a critical step toward developing new treatments, said Kevin Eggan, a professor at Harvard University who specializes in ALS. Another development that gives the Frates family hope is Radicava, a drug approved in May by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration following testimony from the Frates and other advocates. It’s the first new treatment approved specifically for ALS in 22 years. Frates’ mother, Nancy, said they’re applying to get her son on the drug, even though it’s not clear how it might help, given his advanced condition. The medication, which was developed in Japan without funding from the ice bucket challenge, has been shown to slow the disease in recently diagnosed patients. “You just want it to stop,” Nancy said. “You want someone to say this disease is not tearing through your loved one’s body anymore.” ALS is still finding new ways to attack Frates, said his father, John, a city councilor in Beverly who quit his financial services job to help care for his son after he was diagnosed in 2012. Frates’ bladder stopped working last year, requiring his urine now to be drained with a catheter every three hours, John Frates said. “It’s amazing he’s tolerating all of it. It just shows the courage, will and determination he has to be with us,” Frates’ father said. “He’s as incapacitated as a human being can be. That’s his quality of life.” ___ Follow Philip Marcelo at twitter.com/philmarcelo. His work can be found at https://www.apnews.com/search/philip%20marcelo Claim: ALS patient behind ice bucket challenge: I will bounce back.

Ex Output:
Pete Frates was mistakenly written off as dead this summer. Turns out, the man who helped spark the ice bucket challenge that raised millions of dollars for research on Lou Gehrig’s disease hasn’t gone anywhere yet.


Ex Input:
Paragraph: "As a matter of course, stories about the increased use of drugs should report the drugs’ prices. A change in guidelines based on the study would increase the number of patients eligible for treatment by several hundred thousand in the US. The annualized cost of drug treatment is $12,000-$24,000 depending on the regimen, leading to potential new expenditures of $24 to $48 billion. While there are significant offsets, the potential for this level of additional costs should have been included in the story The story states that delaying treatment ""nearly doubles the risk of dying over the next several years"" and yields a ""70 percent improvement in survival."" This reporting is vague. The story should have compared absolute risks, not relative risks. See our primer on this issue. The story should have included the time span studied. These numbers should have stated the two death rates directly so readers can understand the magnitude of the benefit–whether the risk of death went from [say] 2 percent to 1 percent or from 30 percent to 15 percent. The story places the recommended treatment of earlier drug intervention in the context of the treatments’ known side effects, which can be very serious. The story should have described the severity of those side effects. We give this a satisfactory score, but barely. The report is based on a study presented at a major medical meeting. The story should have mentioned the fact that it has not been published or peer-reviewed. It should also have pointed out that it was a retrospective cohort study, which is considered to be less conclusive than prospective, double-blind studies. It should also have pointed out, as the NIH press release does, that a clinical trial is needed to validate the results in a way that would call for changing the current guidelines. These failures to provide caveats and context earn the story an ""unsatisfactory"" rating under this criterion. The story does not exaggerate the gravity or prevalance of AIDS. The story quotes Anthony Fauci, one of the best-known and -respected experts in the field of HIV/AIDS. The story also quotes the study’s lead investigator, and the author of AIDS treatment guidelines. That source’s link to companies that make AIDS drugs is properly noted. The story also quotes an independent clinician familiar with the guidelines and the current research. The story plainly compares the current guidelines with the regimen tested. The story explains that the drug combinations used by AIDS patients have been widely used since the mid-1990s. No claims are made for the novelty of the drug treatment. The recommendation to treat earlier is presented not as novel, but as a plan under consideration and study for quite some time. The story does not draw excessively on the NIH press release." Claim: AIDS treatment should be started sooner, study says

Ex Output:

"This is a Columbus Dispatch version of a story reported by the Associated Press. Since the Columbus paper changed the original article substantially, we send our comments to the Columbus paper. Taking the big view, this story about the benefits of starting the standard multi-drug AIDS treatment sooner than current guidelines suggest accomplishes its mission. It fairly describes important new research that verifies earlier work suggesting the same thing. It says, correctly, that the continuing research could drive changes in treatment. The story is well-sourced and provides a lucid description of the disease process and detailed definition of ""early"" treatment. Having said that, the report falls short of two key best practices:  It fails to quantify the benefits of early treatment in a meaningful way. It uses ""relative risk"" [a percent reduction in mortality] instead of ""absolute risk"" [which would allow readers to understand the gravity of the risk and the size of the benefit. It fails to describe the limitations of the study with caveats and context. If the story had mentioned those limitations, its predictions of imminent clinical use and eventual changes to the guidelines would have been properly tempered. As presented, the story fails to check the sources’ consistent enthusiasm with journalistic disinterest. Given the credibility of the study, the opinions of multiple high-quality sources and the previous research record, the predictions seem justifiable. But the history of AIDS science, treatment and politics recommends a bit more reporting distance and care."