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 story doesn’t specifically address costs, but it does discuss some of the most common types of fiber-rich food — such as fruits, vegetables, legumes and whole grains. Given the diversity, and widespread availability, of these foods, we’ll give this a Satisfactory rating. However, it would have been nice to see some acknowledgment that many people — people particularly people with limited financial resources — live in so-called “food deserts,” which have little access to fresh produce, etc. The story discusses a wide range of benefits, ranging from reduced risk of heart disease to weight loss. But the focus of the story was on weight loss, so that’s what we’ll focus on here. The story refers to two studies, only one of which appears to have been published. The first study is an analysis of people who have used the MyFitnessPal app in an attempt to lose weight. In that case, users who came within 5 percent of their weight loss goal consumed an average of 29 percent more fiber than users who did not come close to their weight loss goals. The second study was actually published (in 2015), and compared weight loss across two groups of study participants who had metabolic syndrome. One group followed the American Heart Association’s recommended diet, while the other was told only to eat 30 grams of fiber per day. Both groups ended up eating the same amount of fiber per day (19 grams), and both groups lost weight. At the end of a year, the AHA diet group lost more (an average of 5.6 pounds), but the second group still lost 4.6 pounds. Neither of these studies are in the mold of a conventional intervention/health-benefit paradigm. But then neither is specifically looking at either a precisely-defined intervention (such as a pharmaceutical trial) or a disease — they’re looking loosely defined dietary guidelines and weight loss (and while weight can be a risk factor, it is not an illness). Bearing that in mind, the story does a satisfactory job of quantifying the relevant benefits in each instance. In general, eating more fiber carries few potential harms. The primary risks are, as the Mayo Clinic notes, “adding too much fiber too quickly can promote intestinal gas, abdominal bloating and cramping.” To minimize that risk, the Mayo Clinic urges people to “Increase fiber in your diet gradually over a period of a few weeks. This allows the natural bacteria in your digestive system to adjust to the change. Also, drink plenty of water. Fiber works best when it absorbs water.” This story does not outline these harms specifically, which is too bad. But the story does tell readers that they should “add fiber slowly and with plenty of water.” That’s enough to rate this as Satisfactory (though it’s clearly not ideal). The two studies, mentioned above under benefits, have some problems: It’s not clear where the unpublished MyFitnessPal data come from or how they were analyzed; and the 2015 study was of only 240 volunteers. These limitations were not noted. Also, the story would have been much stronger if it had addressed one key question: Were there any differences between groups (in either study) in regard to their age, sex, or physical activity? Any of those factors could play a key role in differences in weight loss, and the story sheds no light there. A side note: As we mentioned above, this story discusses a wide range of other benefits associated with eating enough fiber, ranging from reduced risk of heart disease to reduced risk of diabetes. We mention this because the story links to relevant research supporting each of those claims. We applaud that. There is no overt disease mongering. But we did want to point out two things. The story states: “fiber may play an important role in that ever-elusive health goal, weight loss.” First, while being obese may be a disease, simply being overweight is not. Second, many people who aspire to lose weight do so for reasons other than health (and aren’t overweight in the first place). Those are important distinctions, and ones that this story doesn’t make. The story quotes from a wide variety of sources, and clearly labels each source’s affiliation. One issue that’s not addressed in the story is the utility of fiber supplements. Are they good? Bad? Beneficial? Useless? The story doesn’t offer any insight here. It would be useful for readers to know whether such supplements may be useful tools for meeting daily fiber intake goals. Foods that contain fiber have been around longer than humans have, so we’ll rate this N/A. Dietary fiber isn’t new, and the story doesn’t claim that it is. We’ll rate this N/A. The story doesn’t appear to be based on a news release. (In fact, given that the story doesn’t seem to draw on any particularly new studies, guidelines or other external drivers, we’re kind of curious as to what spurred this story. We’re suspecting a pitch from MyFitnessPal.) Claim: It’s Comical. It’s Critical. It Might Even Help You Lose Weight.

Ex Output:
This story urges people to make sure they’re eating enough dietary fiber, with a focus on fiber’s role in promoting healthy weight loss. And, overall, it does a fairly good job — though giving a high-profile to unpublished data from a privately-owned fitness app (MyFitnessPal) is a little unusual. To draw causal conclusions about a specific food/dietary component, without providing fulsome data is worrisome. Also, we’re unaware of any studies at this point that speak to the veracity of MyFitnessPal dietary record keeping, and the accuracy of its collection is probably worth validating and exploring–or at least noting its limitations. And, on a broader level, focusing on a single ingredient such as “fiber” feeds nutritionism–the notion that the presence or absence of a particular nutrient makes a food healthful or not. We don’t have nutrition drilled down that specifically. This point would have made the story stronger. Fiber–especially from whole fruits and vegetables–is an important part of a healthy diet, with institutions from the Mayo Clinic to Harvard’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health outlining the myriad ways that a fiber-rich diet reduces health risks. And, as this story notes, most people don’t get enough fiber. Recommendations for daily intake of fiber vary, but tend to come in between 25 grams per day to 38 grams per day, depending on age and sex. A 2014 paper from USDA’s Food Surveys Research Group found that Americans consume an average of 16 grams of fiber per day. Given the potential benefit of eating more fiber, this would seem like a conversation worth having. And that appears to be the goal of the story.


Ex Input:
Paragraph: Shelby County Mayor Lee Harris said Tuesday a proposed $11.4 million expansion of the health department includes hiring four epidemiologists and about 140 new employees to work on COVID-19 data analysis and contact tracing. More teams will be formed to focus on nursing homes and jail detainees, Harris said during an online news conference. Nurses also will he hired to work on testing. Shelby County, which includes Memphis, has received nearly $50 million from the federal CARES Act. The city also has received federal money. “Most of these positions will only exist while we have the federal funding to pay for them,” Harris said. The proposal has been presented to the county commission. Also in Shelby County, district attorney Amy Weirich said grand juries could begin meeting next week. Grand juries will be seated starting Monday, Weirich said in a statement. For most people, the new coronavirus causes mild or moderate symptoms. For some, especially older adults and those with existing health problems, it can cause severe illness, or even death. Claim: Tennessee county adding public health jobs with fed funds  .

Ex Output:
The mayor of Tennessee’s largest county says the health department wants to hire scores of employees from funds provided by the federal coronavirus response assistance package.


Ex Input:
Paragraph: "The suspect in the mass shooting at the Fort Lauderdale/Hollywood International Airport told the FBI in Alaska in November that he was hearing voices. Anchorage police confiscated Esteban Santiago’s handgun and took him for a mental health evaluation. Police returned his gun to him in December when he asked for it. On Jan. 6, he flew to Broward County and is the suspected gunman in a rampage at the airport that left five dead and several others injured. Days later, Democratic state legislators held a press conference in Tallahassee to argue for gun control measures and more mental health funding. Rep. Carlos Guillermo Smith, D-Orlando, said that Republican legislators argue that the way to reduce gun violence is not through gun control but mental health care funding. But Florida, he said, has the worst record in the nation in terms of funding mental health care treatment. ""We see once again Florida is ranked 50th in the nation for mental health care funding — 50th,"" he said. ""There is no one that is doing worse than we are when it comes to making sure we that we are providing comprehensive mental health care."" Florida is near the bottom of the pack in mental health funding, and one key ranking cited by many experts places the state at 51st in per capita spending. However, there are some caveats about the ranking. Comparing state mental health funding Smith pointed to news articles about Florida’s low ranking on mental health funding and data from the National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors Research Institute. Mental health funding experts said they consider the institute’s data as the best source. The institute collects annual data on expenditures by state mental health agencies from the states, Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico. The total amount of expenditures is divided by the state population to compare the amount per capita. The most recent data, for fiscal year 2014, showed Florida ranked 51st out of 52 jurisdictions for total state mental health spending — behind 49 states and Washington, D.C. — at $36.05 per capita. The Sunshine State was only ahead of one jurisdiction: Puerto Rico, at $20.22. Florida has consistently been near the bottom of the rankings for years, said Ted Lutterman, senior director of the institute. In general, states in the northeast and northwest spend more, while southern states spend much less, he said. One key caveat about this data: It is based on money spent through Florida’s Substance Abuse and Mental Health Office, managed by the Department of Children and Families, and it doesn’t include services paid from other sources, including Medicaid or local funds, on mental health programs. ""Those additional funding sources aren’t reported to DCF, but they’re still used within the local systems of care to treat individuals,"" said Jessica Sims, DCF spokeswoman. The national research institute asks the state mental health authority in each state to provide information on all the funds used for its public mental health provider system, including state psychiatric hospitals and community providers. If another state agency uses Medicaid funds to pay for services directly and doesn’t work with the state mental health authority, then the state mental health authority will not have that data, Lutterman said. In most states, the state mental health authority helps manage the Medicaid funds. However Florida administers Medicaid differently, Lutterman said, and therefore isn’t able to report the Medicaid data for this report. The National Alliance on Mental Illness uses the per-capita state expenditures to compare rankings, said the alliance’s spokesman Bob Carolla. ""It reflects the relative degree of commitment to mental health by the state,"" he said. ""Medicaid dollars compared to Medicaid dollars could be a separate indicator, except I believe it’s more problematic because of the differences that exist between the state Medicaid programs."" Florida lags behind the majority of states on Medicaid spending per enrollee and the state Legislature rejected Medicaid expansion as part of the Affordable Care Act. Another way to examine mental health funding is to look at whether states are increasing the amount each year. The National Alliance on Mental Illness annual survey of state mental health care legislation doesn’t rank states but shows general budgeting trends. The 2015 report shows Florida maintained funding in 2013 and increased it in 2014 and 2015. Our ruling Smith said, ""Florida is ranked 50th in the nation for mental health care funding."" A key source of data for ranking states on mental health spending is the National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors Research Institute. That data shows that Florida ranked 51st in 2014. However, it is difficult to compare Florida with other states because it administers its Medicaid program differently than most states. Claim: Florida is ranked 50th in the nation for mental health care funding.

Ex Output:

"Smith said, ""Florida is ranked 50th in the nation for mental health care funding."" A key source of data for ranking states on mental health spending is the National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors Research Institute. That data shows that Florida ranked 51st in 2014. However, it is difficult to compare Florida with other states because it administers its Medicaid program differently than most states."