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: After a spate of mass shootings in early August 2019 in the United States, gun violence once again became a major topic of political debate in the country, and many expressed their views on potential solutions to the problem. The left-leaning Facebook page Occupy Democrats suggested that tighter gun-ownership regulations could help to reduce levels of firearms-related fatalities. On Aug. 7, the page posted a meme that claimed: “In Massachusetts, to buy a gun you have to take a four-hour gun safety course, get character references from two people, and have a one-on-one interview with a police officer. Oh, and it has the lowest gun death rate in America. Let’s do this everywhere.”    We received inquiries from readers about the accuracy of that two-part claim. On the whole, the Occupy Democrats meme had a high degree of accuracy. Elements of the meme appeared to have been copied from a Facebook post earlier on Aug. 7 by U.S. Sen. Edward Markey, D-Mass. The meme itself was accompanied by text that read:  “‘Adjusted for age and population, the gun fatality rate in Massachusetts for 2016 was the lowest in the U.S. And that’s how it’s been for most of the last 30 years, although sometimes another state, like Hawaii, which also has very strict gun laws, ends up with a slightly lower rate. '” That text is actually a quotation taken from a May 6, 2018, article published by the Huffington Post, which went on to provide the following disclaimer: “Just how much that low rate has to do with the state’s gun laws is a matter of ongoing debate, even among experts. Pretty much any legitimate study is going to rely on assumptions that will be open to valid criticism; separating out cause and effect can be virtually impossible. But the available research provides a good reason to think Massachusetts laws in general and the permit system in particular have made violence less likely.” This fact check won’t attempt to rule on the validity of any claim that relatively strict gun regulations in Massachusetts are the primary or exclusive cause of that state’s purportedly low rate of firearms-related deaths, merely whether both factors are present there. Massachusetts state law certainly contains comparatively stringent requirements for obtaining and renewing firearms licenses, as well as purchasing and carrying firearms, and the claims made in the Occupy Democrats meme were largely accurate. In Massachusetts, anyone who wishes to purchase or carry a firearm must obtain a firearms license, of which there are two kinds: a license to carry and a firearms identification card (FID), the latter of which relates to rifles and shotguns. Applications for firearms licenses are processed by local police forces, and a 2014 state law gave law-enforcement agencies relatively wide authority and discretion to deny license applications, through a court process, where a license applicant poses a demonstrable risk to public safety. All first-time applicants for a license to carry or an FID must complete a one-day MA Certified Firearms Safety Course or a Basic Hunter Education Course, as part of the application. So the meme’s claim is accurate as regards first-time license applicants, but not for those who already have one, who are not required to undergo training every time they wish to purchase a new gun, for example. Furthermore, all applicants (whether first-time applicants or those applying to renew their firearms license) must provide two character references, as outlined in the state-issued “LTC/FID/Machine gun application,” which can be viewed here. The meme is accurate in this regard. Finally, Massachusetts state law does not oblige a “licensing authority” (typically a police force) to require an in-person interview with license applicants, but many police forces, including the largest in the state, Boston’s, do require such an interview. So that obligation is not prescribed in law, but is a practical necessity for many firearms-license applicants, which partially vindicates the meme’s claim in this regard. This was true in 2016, as the Huffington Post article (which Occupy Democrats indirectly cited as its source) outlined, though not quite accurate in 2017. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) tracks gun deaths (along with many other cause of death) in each state every year. The CDC also calculates gun death rates in each state every year — that is, the number of firearms-related deaths per 100,000 people living in the state, after taking into account and standardizing age distributions across states. In its standard measure of gun deaths, the CDC counts all forms of firearms fatalities including homicides, suicides and accidental discharges. In 2016, Massachusetts had the lowest age-adjusted gun death rate in the country, with 3.4 fatalities per 100,000 people. Rhode Island, New York, Hawaii and Connecticut had the next-lowest death rates, while Alaska, Alabama and Louisiana had the highest rates of gun deaths in the U.S., with 23.3, 21.5 and 21.3 fatalities per 100,000 people, respectively:  Along with New York, Massachusetts had the joint second-lowest gun death rate in 2017, with 3.7 per 100,000 people, behind Hawaii, which had 2.5 such fatalities per 100,000 people:  As the Huffington Post article pointed out, Massachusetts regularly has among the lowest annual rates of gun deaths in the United States. As well as in 2016, it also had the lowest rate in 1999, 2000, 2001, 2009, 2012 and 2015,  The chart below shows the age-adjusted gun death rate of every state, taking into account all gun deaths between 1999 and 2017. Massachusetts had the second-lowest gun death rate over that 19-year period, behind Hawaii. Louisiana, Alaska, the District of Columbia and Mississippi had the highest:  Although the Occupy Democrats Facebook post clearly specified that the basis of the claim in the meme were the figures for 2016, a year in which Massachusetts did indeed have the lowest gun death rate in the country, the meme itself did not make that clear. Taken on its face, the meme was claiming that Massachusetts had the lowest rate of gun deaths in either 2019 (the year in which it was posted) or 2018 (the most recent full year). The state may well ultimately be shown to have the lowest rate of gun deaths in the country during those years, but CDC data for 2019 and 2018 will not be available until 2021 and 2020, respectively. On the whole, the Occupy Democrats meme was highly accurate, though not perfectly so. Claim: Massachusetts has certain strict gun-ownership requirements and the lowest rate of gun deaths in the United States. 

Ex Output:
What's true: Massachusetts requires gun-license applicants to provide character references; first-time applicants must complete a one-day safety training course; and many police departments require an in-person interview before approving license applications. Massachusetts regularly has either the lowest or second-lowest rate of gun deaths in the United States. What's false: In 2017, the most recent year for which data is available, Massachusetts had the second-lowest rate of gun deaths, but data for 2018 and 2019 are not yet available. The gun-license requirements set out in the meme do not necessarily apply to all applicants.


Ex Input:
Paragraph: The deal would resolve alleged violations of civil environmental statutes, including the Clean Water Act, related to the pollution from a company factory in Waynesboro. It would amount to the largest environmental damage settlement in Virginia history and the eighth largest in the nation, officials said. The money would go to projects including wildlife habitat restoration, water quality enhancement and improvements to recreational areas. “In bringing this settlement to a close, we are finally righting a wrong that has impacted the South River and the South Fork of the Shenandoah River for so many decades,” Democratic Gov. Terry McAuliffe said at a news conference announcing the settlement. Wilmington, Delaware-based Dupont Co. used mercury in its process of making synthetic fiber at the plant between 1929 and 1950, according to the state Department of Environmental Quality. Strict storage and disposal regulations weren’t in place at the time, and some of the mercury seeped into the South River and flowed downstream to the South Fork of the Shenandoah River. DuPont discovered the mercury — which accumulates in fish and is especially dangerous to pregnant or breastfeeding women and young children — in the facility’s soil in 1976, officials say. The pollution impacted over 100 miles of river and thousands of acres of floodplain and riparian habitat, affecting fish, mussels, migratory birds and amphibians, the Department of Justice said in a statement. The pollution also has limited some recreational fishing in Waynesboro, a city of about 20,000 in the Shenandoah Valley. The terms of the settlement are outlined in a proposed consent decree that was filed in federal court in Harrisonburg on Thursday. It is subject to a 45-day public comment period and must be approved by the court. The amount of money proposed is “quite impressive,” but mercury is very persistent in the environment and very difficult to remove, said Dr. Thomas Benzing, a professor of integrated science and technology at James Madison University who works with a team of researchers who have been monitoring the mercury levels since 2001. If the settlement goes forward, DuPont would pay slightly more than $42 million toward projects including streamside plantings and erosion control to improve water quality and fish habitat; mussel propagation and restoration; migratory songbird habitat restoration and protection; and recreational fishing access creation or improvement. The company also will pay for renovations at the Front Royal Fish Hatchery to improve production of warm-water fish such as smallmouth bass, at an estimated cost of up to $10 million. “Every dollar is going to be used to clean up the land, the source issues and the water, to where it would have been” if not for the pollution, said Assistant Attorney General John Cruden of the Justice Department’s Environmental and Natural Resources Division. No one from DuPont — which is awaiting final regulatory approval for its merger with Dow Chemical in a deal to create DowDuPont, a $130 billion conglomerate — spoke at the announcement. But Mike Liberati, South River project director for the DuPont Corporate Remediation Group, said in a statement that DuPont “is committed to a long-term presence in the Waynesboro area and to maintaining transparency with its citizens.” The first phase of remediation, involving part of the riverbank in Waynesboro’s Constitution Park could be complete in February. Soil there containing the highest concentrations of mercury is being excavated and hauled away and replaced by clean topsoil, Liberati said. “It’s going to be a long-term project. It’s not something that’s going to happen overnight,” Benzing said. Claim: DuPont to pay $50M over mercury-contaminated Virginia rivers.

Ex Output:
Chemical giant DuPont will pay more than $50 million but admit no fault under a proposed environmental settlement after releasing toxic mercury for decades that made its way into Shenandoah Valley waterways, state and federal officials announced Thursday.


Ex Input:
Paragraph: The story did not talk about the cost of adding a daily dose of ginger to one’s diet. But since that cost can’t be very significant, we’ll rate this Not Applicable. The story did a good job of sharing the limited results of the rodent study. Mice sneezed less (2.1 rather than 15.2 times) in the group that swallowed ginger, and had lower levels of immunoglobulin E, after exposure to an allergen. It was good to see that story used absolute numbers to quantify the benefits rather than stating the results as a percentage decrease. It seems that harms to the mice were not discussed in the research paper (not surprising as the mice were all killed as part of the study) that’s the basis for the story. A brief search didn’t turn up anything overly concerning regarding the harms of ginger, but then again, it’s not clear what the dosage given to the mice would translate to in human terms. A high-enough dose of anything can be dangerous. But while it might have been helpful to mention harms to humans attributed to powdered ginger, this may also have propagated the questionable notion that the findings are applicable to humans. We’ll rate this Not Applicable. To its credit, the story explains high up that the study involved mice, and it includes a closing caveat that ginger has not been tested in humans. But while many people will likely understand that the results have limited application to humans, other readers may not appreciate just how tenuous the link is between animal and human research. (Here’s some background on that issue if you care to read more.) The story falls short of warning that rodent studies frequently do not correlate well with human health. We’ll rule this close call in favor of the story and rate it Satisfactory. There was no disease mongering. The story does not quote any sources, either independent or connected to the scientific paper. We realize that space and length limitations may make it difficult to include such sources in a brief story such as this one. Nevertheless, we wanted to hear more context for this study. Ginger has already been studied for relationships to cardiovascular disease and cancer. A comment from someone in nutritional biochemistry, or an allergist, might have helped readers take better stock of the findings. The story does not talk about existing ways to reduce symptoms of allergies. One could argue that such discussion would be propagating the idea the study might apply to humans — not necessarily a good thing. But then again, the whole underlying point of the story is that there’s some relevance here to people. On balance, we’d rather see the story include this information, which might be more useful for readers than the sneezing rates of mice anyway. The story mentioned that the study used powdered ginger, which it notes is used in cooking. People can deduce from this that powdered ginger is widely available. As the story says, ginger has never been given to human patients for allergic rhinitis. We couldn’t find any news release related to this study. And since the story doesn’t include any independent perspective — which would indicate that it went beyond any such news release — we can’t be sure whether the story meets our standard here or not. We’ll rate it Not Applicable. Claim: Powdered Ginger May Ease Seasonal Allergy Symptoms

Ex Output:

A mouse study from Japan showed that rodents that had been fed powdered ginger responded with fewer sneezes and had a lower level of immune response to an allergen. This short piece about the research earns praise for stating clearly in the subheadline and in the lead sentence that the study was conducted in mice. We wish more stories would take that simple step, so crucial to understanding these results. And while the story fell short of our standards by not including any context or independent sources, it did a pretty good job of explaining the science of measuring an allergic response and quantifying rodent sneeze rates. Overall, this was a pretty good effort at briefly summarizing rodent research in a way that’s accessible and useful for readers. Allergies strike as many as 10-30 percent of the world population, according to the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology. And this article suggests that a readily available food product may alleviate these irritating symptoms felt by millions around the world, which is great in theory. But a small study of mice is not the basis for a headline implying that ginger will ease symptoms in people. We’re glad this story quickly recovered from that headline to clarify that the study involved mice, and that ginger hasn’t been tested for allergy symptom relief in people.