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.
--------
Question: Paragraph: In research looking at how much babies around the world cry in their first three months, psychologists from Britain have created the first universal charts for normal amounts of crying during that period. WATCH: Child-sized robot helps autistic kids learn social skills  “Babies are already very different in how much they cry in the first weeks of life,” said Dieter Wolker, who led the study at Warwick University. “We may learn more from looking at cultures where there is less crying — (including) whether this may be due to parenting or other factors relating to pregnancy experiences or genetics.”   The highest levels of colic – defined as crying more than three hours a day for at least three days a week – were found in babies in Britain, Canada and Italy, while the lowest colic rates were found in Denmark and Germany. WATCH: Brain implant lets paralysed man feed himself using his thoughts  On average, the study found, babies cry for around two hours a day in the first two weeks. They then cry a little more in the following few weeks until they peak at around two hours 15 minutes a day at six weeks. This then reduces to an average of one hour 10 minutes by the time they are 12 weeks old. But there are wide variations, with some babies crying as little as 30 minutes a day, and others more than five hours. The research, published in the Journal of Pediatrics, was a meta-analysis of studies covering some 8,700 babies in countries including Germany, Denmark, Japan, Canada, Italy, the Netherlands and Britain. Wolker said the new crying chart would help health workers reassure parents whether their baby is crying within a normal range in the first three months, or may need extra support. Claim: Babies cry more in UK, Canada and Italy, less in Germany, study finds.

Answer: Babies cry more in Britain, Canada, Italy and Netherlands than in other countries, while newborns in Denmark, Germany and Japan cry and fuss the least, researchers said on Monday.


Question: Paragraph: According to Simon and Schuster’s website, it’s the truth. The game is called “Panty Raider: From Here to Immaturity.”  The publicity says, “Gamers will Seek Out Supermodels to Strip Them Down to Their Bra and Panties.” Here are some other tidbits from the Simon and Schuster publicity:  PANTY RAIDER takes gamers to Model Isle where a supermodel photo shoot is taking place. The player is on a mission to photograph specific styles and colors of panties worn by supermodels to satisfy three testosterone-driven aliens and keep them from blowing up the Earth.One day on a planet far, far away, a catalog from a famous lingerie store inexplicably showed up in the mailbox at one horny alien’s home. Some time later, he and his two buddies had worn out the catalog and they needed more! So they hijacked a flying saucer for a joy ride across the universe in search of supermodels in their underwear.The player assumes the role of “Nelson,” an innocent bystander who is forced to help the aliens in their perverted quest. Nelson’s job is to photograph specific models, wearing specific types and colors of underwear (as specified by the aliens). If Nelson does not get the photos that the aliens are asking for, in the amount of time given, the aliens will destroy Earth.Once on the island, Nelson can use all the tools available to him: * Pick up lines – Use cheesy pickup lines to lure models out of the woods. * X-Ray glasses – You know the ones seen in the back of comic books? These actually work – allowing the player to see what kind of underwear each girl is wearing, before they go through the process of undressing her. Keep in mind if you waste too much time undressing a supermodel Earth will be destroyed can you control yourself? * Lures – Items such as tiny mints (lunch!) and credit cards. No self-respecting supermodel can resist these items. * Camera – Once the correct model is found wearing the right panties, and the outer clothing has been removed, it’s time to use the camera to photograph the model. These photos are then added to the player’s inventory. If all the correct models in the correct lingerie are photographed within the given amount of time, Earth is saved. Otherwise, the frustrated aliens are forced to take their hormone driven anger out on the planet. Last updated 11/13/00 For more information:  Simon and Schuster News Release   Comments Claim:   The email says that Simon and Schuster has announced a new CD-ROM computer game where “…to win the game, boys must strip supermodels down to their underwear, then provide photographs of them to aliens who wore out their one lingerie catalog – or else the aliens hormone driven anger will destroy the earth.”   

Answer: New CD-ROM computer game features panty raids


Question: Paragraph: Breastfeeding is not an option for all mothers, whether because of medical/physical limitations or because of socioeconomic ones. However, breastfeeding is also not a medical intervention that one can easily place a price tag on. This is a tough one to call. The release clearly lays out the research findings that breastfeeding is associated with reductions in stroke risk, even breaking it down by subgroups. That’s good. However, the release only tells readers about relative reductions in risk, as opposed to absolute reductions in risk. What does that mean? Well, let’s say that the women in a study have a 0.25% risk of getting Disease X. If the study reports that a specific behavior doubles the risk of Disease X, that sounds like a big deal — a 100% increase in risk! But that’s a 100%  relative increase in risk. The absolute risk would go from 0.25% to 0.5%. The difference between relative and absolute risk is something HealthNewsReview.org has written about, and it is a key distinction that we feel is important. So, when the release tells us that breastfeeding was associated with a 23% decrease in stroke risk, readers still don’t know what that means in terms of absolute risk. And because the baseline absolute risk numbers aren’t mentioned, savvy readers can’t even do the calculation for themselves. Breastfeeding may be “natural,” but it’s not effortless. Breastfeeding can be time-consuming and exhausting, and carries risks of dehydration and breast pain. That said, these are not necessarily medical issues that rise to the level of discussion in a news release about an observational study like this one. As such, we’ll rate this criterion as not applicable. The release does a pretty solid job here, describing the study fairly well and acknowledging its limitations. But there are a couple of things that could have been slightly better. For example, the release describes the study in the fifth paragraph. It is not until the 10th paragraph that the release explicitly tells readers that “Because the study was observational, it couldn’t establish a cause-and-effect relationship between breastfeeding and lower stroke risk, meaning that it is possible some other characteristic that distinguishes between women who breastfeed and those who don’t is the factor changing the stroke risk.” For example, it’s possible that women who did not breastfeed had higher levels of stress than women who did breastfeed, which may be a contributing factor to stroke. And it is not until the 12th paragraph that the release tells readers that “The study was also limited by the relatively small number of strokes that occurred during the follow-up period (just 3.4 percent of the women experienced a stroke during the study period and 1.6 percent reported having had a stroke prior to the study) and by the Women’s Health Initiative’s exclusion of women who had already had severe strokes at the time of recruitment.” To be clear, we are very glad that the release includes these valuable qualifiers. However, we think the release would have been stronger if they had not been buried at the bottom of the piece. No disease mongering here. The release offers context on the incidence of U.S. stroke mortality rates. The release clearly discloses the source of research funding. The release also notes that “author disclosures [regarding potential conflicts of interest] are on the manuscript.” It would have been much better to simply disclose the conflicts on the release itself by saying: “The authors report no potential conflicts of interest.” The release does a nice job here, stating: “Breastfeeding is only one of many factors that could potentially protect against stroke. Others include getting adequate exercise, choosing healthy foods, not smoking and seeking treatment if needed to keep your blood pressure, cholesterol and blood sugar in the normal range.” Not all of the alternatives have been proven to protect against stroke but listing them is a worthwhile reminder that lifestyle changes might reduce their risk. The release requests that pregnant women make breastfeeding part of their “birthing plan” and to breastfeed for at least six months to receive the most benefits. It’s assumed readers know that breastfeeding is an available option unless there are medical or lifestyle barriers. The release notes that “This is among the first studies to examine breastfeeding and a possible relationship to stroke risk for mothers.” It would have been helpful to briefly note what the other studies found and whether the results were different or had similar conclusions. The release uses responsible, cautious language. The recommendation to breastfeed to prevent stroke based on observational research may be an overreach, however. Claim: Breastfeeding may help protect mothers against stroke

Answer:
The release focuses on a prospective cohort study, one of the strongest types of observational studies, that identified a correlation between breastfeeding and stroke. Specifically, the study reported that women who nursed at least one child were less likely to have a stroke later in life. The release notes that this was an observational study and, therefore, could not establish a cause-and-effect relationship between breastfeeding and stroke risk. Although the incidence and mortality from stroke has been in decline, stroke remains a significant health problem in the United States, affecting hundreds of thousands of men and women every year. Therefore, new information that could help people make lifestyle choices that affect their long-term risk of stroke has the potential to significantly affect the health and quality of life for millions of people. That said, it is important for news release to highlight the limitations of new research — something that this release takes pains to do.