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.

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

Paragraph: The study tracked about 20,000 severely obese patients with Type 2 diabetes. Those who had weight loss surgery had a 40 percent lower chance of developing a heart attack or stroke in the five years following surgery compared to those who got usual care with diabetes medicines or insulin. For every 1,000 patients in the study who had surgery there were roughly 20 heart attacks or strokes compared to 40 such events per 1,000 who got regular care. More than 30 million Americans have diabetes, mostly Type 2 where the body loses the ability to produce or use insulin to turn food into energy. Other research has shown obesity surgery can reverse and even prevent diabetes. Taken together, it means doctors should discuss weight loss surgery more often, said study co-author Dr. David Arterburn of Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute in Seattle. Doctors usually mention insulin and pills, “but it’s not always brought up that weight loss surgery is another available treatment option,” Arterburn said. Researchers analyzed records from four U.S. health care systems: HealthPartners in Minnesota and Kaiser Permanente in Washington state, Northern California and Southern California. Results were published Tuesday in the Journal of the American Medical Association. The study can’t prove cause and effect because patients weren’t randomly assigned to get surgery. The researchers tried to match patients for gender, age, blood sugar levels and other factors. But other things they didn’t account for could have contributed to the surgery patients’ better results. Everyone in the study had a BMI, or body mass index, of at least 35. For instance, someone who is 5-foot-8-inches and weighs 230 pounds has a BMI of 35. Of the more than 5,300 who had surgery, most had gastric bypass, the most common type of stomach-shrinking operation. Some had gastric sleeve or gastric band procedures. The rest, nearly 15,000 people, had usual care. Obesity surgery can cost $20,000 to $25,000. Insurers are increasingly covering it, but some impose strict limits. The new findings suggest insurance coverage should be expanded for the right patients, Dr. Sayeed Ikramuddin of the University of Minnesota wrote in an accompanying editorial. Surgery is thought to help by affecting hormones, gut bacteria and other substances that affect how the body handles insulin and blood sugar. Weight loss without surgery also helps, but is difficult for many people to achieve. Most weight loss surgery today is done through small incisions. The dangers are similar to other surgeries, including a small chance of life-threatening complications, and some people need to have their surgeries repeated. ___ Follow AP Medical Writer Carla K. Johnson on Twitter: @CarlaKJohnson ___ The Associated Press Health &amp; Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content. Claim: Obesity surgery may lower heart attack danger in diabetics.
Obesity surgery may dramatically lower the danger of heart attacks and strokes in patients with diabetes, new research suggests, reinforcing evidence that benefits extend beyond weight loss.

Paragraph: There is no mention of costs in the release. Some mention of costs would have been useful and could have taken a number of different forms such as how the cost of these drugs would compare to buying cigarettes on a daily basis, comparing the drug price to other tools for quitting smoking, or providing cost estimates of treating smoking-related diseases. The release may overstate things in the headline which claims, “An FDA-approved Alzheimer’s drug could help smokers quit.” The study didn’t look at quit rates and lasted only 23 days, so the effect on quitting is entirely unknown. We’ll give the benefit of the doubt here though since the release notes that people involved in the trials (there was also an animal trial component) reduced their cigarette use by 2.3 cigarettes a day — a 12% decrease — after being on the drug for two weeks. The volunteers also related that they felt “less satisfied” with smoking after being on the drug, although this benefit was not quantified. The release notes that people may become ill when taking the AD drugs. A source is quoted in the release says, “We know from the literature that upward of 30 percent of patients will report nausea and vomiting [when taking these drugs], and that this will limit their compliance.” The news release gives a fairly clear description of the study parameters. The study, while small with 33 volunteers, involved giving the still-smoking participants either the drug galantamine or a placebo for two weeks and then asked them to refrain from smoking for one week while on either their prescribed galantamine or placebo. The researchers measured cognitive abilities at baseline and after two weeks on the drug to determine if the drug helped reduce side effects people normally encounter while withdrawing off tobacco. The release is clear that much more evidence will be available, including on overall quit rates (the most important and relevant outcome), when the full study is completed. There is really not much of a take-away at this point as the information is so incomplete. It would be difficult to overstate the harms of cigarette smoking. The release does not engage in fear mongering. The release doesn’t explicitly state who funded the study or if there were any conflicts of interest. However, it’s strongly inferred that Penn’s Center for Interdisciplinary Research on Nicotine Addiction is the main sponsor. The study itself states that the research received funding from several government and non-profit research organizations and that there were no conflicts of interest. This is not a major omission but must be rated Not Satisfactory. The release nods briefly to the existence of other medications for smoking cessation and how galantamine would differ. “Our goal in investigating these different repurposed medications is not to replace the medications that are already available,” she said. “We know that they’re effective. Our goal is to target different populations of smokers who may be more likely to experience these cognitive deficits.” Although it doesn’t specifically mention any other smoking cessation tools and techniques by name or discuss how successful galantamine might be in comparison, we’ll give the benefit of the doubt. The story states that galantamine is FDA approved which speaks to its availability. The release responsibly points out that “There’s no data to suggest that a clinician treating a smoker should prescribe one of these AChEIs now,” according to the lead investigator. The news release makes a tepid reference to novelty with the phrase that researchers are “forging a path” with this research. The study itself says, “To the best of our knowledge, this is the first translational study to demonstrate that repeated AChEI administration decreases nicotine taking in both rats and human smokers.” While this may well be the first “translational” study on this question, a look on PubMed shows that quite a lot has been done in rats on nicotine and the cholinesterase inhibitor drugs. There has been much less in humans, although trials have been done, with mixed success, such as this modestly successful one in alcoholics. (A randomized, controlled trial in 114 patients for 12 weeks, it showed those on galantamine smoked 20% fewer cigarettes than those on placebo.) To earn a Satisfactory rating, we think the release should have acknowledged some of this previous research. There was no reliance on unjustifiable language. Claim: Penn research: An FDA-approved Alzheimer's drug could help smokers quit

This news release describes a report on an ongoing trial of the Alzheimer’s drug galantamine as a smoking cessation aid. The release also notes that the study on which it’s based sought to explore whether the drug would have less of an effect on participants’ “executive functions” while going through withdrawal than other methods since many people in the process of giving up tobacco experience forgetfulness and “fuzziness,” according to the release. The release does a good overall job of describing the researchers’ long-range thinking and goals with the study, and the release is clear that this approach could have downsides and side effects. The release would have been stronger had it talked about about costs and discussed how this approach compares with the alternatives. Simply stated, cigarette smoking has been found to have ill effects on almost every organ of the body. Despite decades of research and laws banning cigarette advertising people still have a hard time giving up this habit. Few people who try to quit are successful on the first try, and it’s not uncommon for people to try several different methods before they can quit for good. This study focuses on one of numerous clinical trials that explore interfering with the brain’s response-reward systems as a way to combat addiction. Re-purposing Alzheimer’s disease drugs as a potential new tool in the smoking cessation tool chest is newsworthy.