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: The mosquito-borne viral infection has spread across the country, with 61 out of 64 districts reporting dengue cases by late Tuesday. The government has confirmed 15,369 dengue cases since Jan. 1. Of those, 9,683 patients were diagnosed between July 1 and July 30. As of Tuesday, about 4,400 patients, including many children, were undergoing hospital treatment. There have been 14 deaths. Officials from Dhaka, the overcrowded capital and the epicenter of the outbreak, have struggled to contain it, drawing criticism and spreading panic among some residents. Dengue is found in tropical areas around the world and is spread by a type of mosquito that mainly lives in urban areas. The virus causes severe flu-like symptoms, and while there is no specific treatment for the illness, medical care to maintain a person’s fluid levels is seen as critical. There are fears that the situation in the countryside will worsen as many residents of the city travel to villages to celebrate Eid-ul-Adha next month. Infected humans can serve as a source of the virus for uninfected mosquitoes. Ayesha Akhter, assistant director at the Directorate General of Health Services under the Ministry of Health, said an outbreak of dengue has accompanied every monsoon since 2000, but this year’s situation is the worst. A DGHS study identified a six-fold increase in the Aedes aegypti mosquito population in four months in Dhaka as the primary cause of the larger-than-average outbreak. Earlier this month, the World Health Organization said the dengue situation in Bangladesh was “alarming but not out of control.” Other countries in Asia are also facing a surge in dengue cases this year, including Thailand, where 53,699 cases and 65 deaths were reported as of July 23. Nevertheless, with dengue cases soaring in recent weeks, Dhaka hospitals have been running out of room and manpower to treat new patients. Prof. Abul Kalam Azad, director general of DGHS, said they had asked the hospitals to increase beds for dengue patients and to open dengue wards. The government also halved the charges for diagnosing dengue and directed public and private hospitals, clinics and diagnostic centers to do the same. Dhaka Medical College Hospital, the largest hospital in the country, opened a special ward for dengue patients, said A.K.M. Nasir Uddin, its director general. Prof. Uttam Kumar Barua, director of Shaheed Suhrawardy Medical College and Hospital, another major public hospital in Dhaka, said they were relying on senior medical students to assist doctors in the face of so many patients. “We don’t have manpower, logistic support and technicians as much as needed. That’s why we are having too much pressure. We have three times more patients than our bed capacity,” Barua said. He said they were admitting every dengue patient who entered the hospital but could not provide beds or even seats for everyone, adding that many had been asked to wait in hospital corridors and verandas. Champa Begum took her 8-month-old to Shaheed hospital on Wednesday. “I have other kids. I go to work leaving this one to another child. I have no way but to work,” she said. “I can’t take care of this child properly. This child is laid down anywhere. My home is above dirty water. That how this one was bitten and got dengue.” On Tuesday, Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina called for concerted efforts to fight the illness. “The government is working to tackle dengue,” she told an emergency meeting of her ruling Awami League party via teleconference from London, where she was on an official visit. “I urge everyone to keep their houses and surrounding areas clean. That will save us from the disease,” she said. The country’s opposition parties and urban planning experts blamed the central and local government’s lack of preparedness for the rise in dengue cases. People have taken to Facebook to vent their anger about city authorities’ failure to control dengue-carrying mosquitoes. Claim: Bangladesh grapples with country’s worst dengue outbreak.

Ex Output:
Bangladesh is facing its worst-ever dengue fever outbreak as hospitals are flooded with patients, putting a severe strain on the country’s already overwhelmed medical system.


Ex Input:
Paragraph: Although Pfizer continues to test the drug, called dacomitinib, in another Phase III study, hopes for its success have now largely faded, according to ISI Group analyst Mark Schoenebaum. “We believe consensus expectations (for the drug) will be close to zero given today’s readout” of unsuccessful trial results, Schoenebaum said in a research note. In one of the failed trials, called ARCHER 1009, patients given Pfizer’s once-daily pill did not show improved survival without the cancer worsening, compared with Roche Holding AG’s widely used Tarceva (erlotinib). Tarceva is the current standard of care in patients with mutated forms of a protein called Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR). The protein plays a role in normal regulation of cell growth, but when mutated is believed to cause cells to proliferate and thereby help spur various types of cancer. Dacomitinib is designed to block several types of Epidermal Growth Factor receptors, while Tarceva and similar treatments for lung cancer target only one type of receptor. Cowen and Co had forecast annual sales of $500 million by 2020 for dacomitinib, if it were approved for lung cancer. That would make it a moderate-sized product for Pfizer, the largest U.S. drugmaker, which has annual revenue of $50 billion. Schoenebaum said there has been little investor interest in the drug and that Wall Street had expected it to generate annual sales of only $300 million by 2018. The second failed trial, named BR.26, involved patients that previously had failed to benefit from chemotherapy as well as from treatment with an EGFR inhibitor. Overall survival of patients taking the Pfizer drug was not prolonged in the study, compared with patients given a placebo. Pfizer said adverse events seen with dacomitinib were consistent with those seen in smaller earlier studies. In the meantime, Pfizer said dacomitinib is also being tested in a third late-stage trial, called ARCHER 1050, among patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer who have not received prior treatment. The study will compare dacomitinib with Iressa (gefitinib), an EGFR inhibitor sold by AstraZeneca Plc. Results from that study are expected in 2015. Pfizer shares were little changed in morning trading on the New York Stock Exchange. Claim: Pfizer lung cancer drug fails in two large studies.

Ex Output:
Pfizer Inc on Monday said one of its experimental drugs had failed to meet its goals in two late-stage studies among patients who had received prior treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer, the most common form of the disease.


Ex Input:
Paragraph: "The article provides costs of ""regular"" colonoscopy and that of CT colography. The article does state that ""about the same number of advanced polyps"" were found in each group (comparing virtual to regular colonoscopy). It then goes on to give absolute numbers of people with an advanced polyp (the total number of people within groups is also given so that an absolute percentage could be calculated). The story also describes how many people required a regular colonoscopy after virtual colonoscopy and how many people decided to have their polyps watched. The story provides harms of ""regular"" colonscopy, including the number of people in the study who experienced a perforated bowel and those who also required surgery to repair it. Less objective harms, like embarrassment or inconvenience, are not reported, but are also harder to measure. For virtual colonoscopy, the story includes a reference to a concern that radiation from the CT scanner might be a harm. It also implies that because virtual colonoscopy did not measure smaller growths, this could be a harm if that growth somehow went on to develop into cancer. The story also mentions that a bowel prep is needed for the virtual test, which is often a drawback for people. The story does not mention that it’s quite possible and even likely that if a regular colonoscopy is needed, it will probably be done on a different day requiring the prep to be repeated. While the study arranged to have these performed on the same day, this is not likely in the real world. The article doesn’t mention the type of study that the findings are based on. This study was not a randomized trial, which is important, and is not discussed. Readers don’t know how strong these findings are or are not. The information provided by the article about the condition in general is correct and not exaggerated. However, the article could have been improved if a discussion about how much colon cancer screening could benefit an average person was included. While it’s true that colon cancer screening can reduce the chance of getting or dying from colon cancer, most people aren’t aware that the absolute reduction in risk is quite small. For some, this relatively small benefit may not be worth the risks or inconvenience of the procedure. As above. Multiple sources are used, at least two of whom don’t appear to be affiliated with the research. The story also cites potential conflicts of interest of the researchers. No other screening options are discussed (like FOBT, sigmoidoscopy, or a combination of the two). Additionally, the option of not screening is always valid when describing a screening program and was not mentioned. The article states virtual colonoscopy (or CT colography) is currently available at some hospitals and centers. The article also describes that many, if not most, insurers don’t currently pay for this. The story doesn’t provide information on when virtual colonoscopy started to be used. But, perhaps more importantly, it does make it clear that virtual colonoscopy would be a new option for colon cancer screening with new evidence. Since there a sources of information not affiliated with the research, it appears this story does not rely on a press release." Claim: Studies endorse ‘virtual colonoscopy’

Ex Output:

The article describes a new study that supports similar accuracy of virtual colonoscopy (or CT colography) cused to screen for colon cancer compared to traditional colonoscopy. The article does a nice job of describing benefits (providing absolute numbers), costs, availability, novelty, a range of harms, and sources. The article could have been improved by describing the strength of the evidence. For instance, the results are not based on a randomized trial, yet without this information or any other information about study design, readers don’t know how strong these results are. The article also could have included a discussion about absolute risks and benefits of colon cancer screening. While there is no obvious disease mongering, the absolute reduction in risk of dying from colon cancer due to screening is relatively small and some may find the risk or inconvenience of the procedure not worth the benefit. Similarly, presenting the option of not screening is always valid when discussing any screening program.