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: There was no mention of the potential costs of screening women for vitamin D levels (as encouraged in the release in a statement from the principal investigator) or the cost of supplementation. The release does a good job of comparing data and providing explanations for the measurements used. We’ll award a Satisfactory for that precision, but as noted below under “Evidence,” there was no explicit caution regarding the fact that measurements of interleukin-6 (IL-6) are only surrogates for the effects of weight loss and vitamin D on clinical outcomes related to inflammation (e.g. cancer diagnoses). IL-6 levels dropped in both the placebo and vitamin D arms, and it’s not clear whether the statistically significant additional decline in IL-6 observed in the vitamin D group is clinically important. Because some of the participants were vitamin D-deficient and the dose of vitamin D provided was modest (2000 IU/d), this was a tough call. But supplementation is often so misunderstood, overhyped and oversold that some statement cautioning readers to pay attention to the specifics of this study and not apply its recommendations to everyone seems prudent. For the most part, the release provides a cautious and accurate description of what appears to be a well-conducted clinical trial in a well-defined population. For example, it notes that weight loss and vitamin D lowered inflammation LINKED to cancer — not that these things reduced cancer risk itself (something this study couldn’t establish). But as noted above, we would have appreciated an explicit acknowledgment that IL-6 is a surrogate marker for the clinical outcomes that people care about. And more importantly, we’re concerned about the closing comment that women should talk to their doctors about measuring their vitamin D levels to determine the most appropriate dose. The problem is there is no evidence supporting screening or treating to a level — and certainly not from this study. The US Preventive Services Task Force has concluded that evidence is insufficient to recommend routine vitamin D screening and the IOM has said that while there are data supporting the benefits of vitamin D supplementation with bone health and fall prevention, there is no evidence supporting benefits for cancer. While testing may be warranted in those with signs or symptoms of clinical deficiency, the statement made here implies that everyone should be tested so that an appropriate dose of vitamin D can be selected. That goes beyond the available evidence. It’s hard to argue that overweight, vitamin deficiency, chronic inflammation and cancer are not real threats, so no mongering apparent here. Funding sources are well documented. The study didn’t discuss alternative preventive measures or genetic causes of increased cancer risks. But this is such a broad and expansive topic that we don’t think the release should have been expected to address those myriad issues. We’ll rate this Not Applicable. Primary care physicians and other health providers are well positioned to monitor blood levels of vitamin D, along with dietary and exercise regimens. The news release makes that clear, albeit indirectly. As noted above, we think the release goes too far in suggesting that people ask their doctors about having their vitamin D levels checked. But we’ve already docked points for that, so we’ll award a Satisfactory rating here. The release makes a case for this being the first clinical trial of its kind; although it’s always difficult to make that statement absolutely, the writer of the release attributes the statement to the study author. As a general rule, it’s probably best to say “believed to be the first.”  While the release meets our standard here, we also wish it had delved a bit into the background of previous vitamin D research and the conflicting and confusing messages that research has generated. Without that context, the typical reader might wrongly jump to the conclusion, based on the wording of the lede and other parts of the release, that this study of vitamin D supplementation — because it was a controlled clinical trial — has somehow settled the important questions about the role of vitamin D and inflammation in cancer risk. The debate remains alive and well. None detected. Claim: Weight loss plus vitamin D reduces inflammation linked to cancer, chronic disease
This news release describes a randomized, controlled clinical trial designed to learn whether adding vitamin D supplements to substantial weight loss regimens would have a synergistic effect in reducing inflammatory chemicals in the bodies of overweight, older women with levels of vitamin D considered too low. The study, published in Cancer Prevention Research, has potential relevance for cancer prevention because inflammatory cytokines have been implicated in the genesis and progression of some cancers, as well as heart disease and other disorders. The release offers substantial details about the design, metrics and outcomes of the clinical trial and does a pretty good job of defining the possible reasons for the effects of chronic inflammation and weight loss on cancer development. It goes to some lengths to narrowly define the results and avoid overstatement. That said, the release ends on a sour note by encouraging readers to talk to their doctors about vitamin D testing — a recommendation not consistent with U.S. Preventive Services Task Force guidelines and which is not supported by this research. Readers might also have been better informed if the release had offered more context regarding the many conflicting and sometimes confusing studies that have previously looked for links among vitamin D, inflammatory responses, diet, overweight, sun exposure and cancer. News releases that include the words “diet,” “overweight,” “vitamin,” and “cancer” are almost narrative nuclear events, often guaranteeing an explosion of coverage, souped up vitamin sales pitches, and lots of negative fallout whose half-life seems forever. Cancer remains the second biggest killer disease overall of Americans, and some experts believe that it will soon push heart disease and stroke out of first place. Thus cancer prevention is a deservedly hot topic, and it is no surprise that Americans are eager for information about ways to limit their risk. News releases that describe research on these topics have enormous power to inform and misinform.

Paragraph: The tougher regulations, set by the United Nations shipping agency, the International Maritime Organization (IMO), come into force on Jan 1. Costs will rise for ships towards the end of this year and there will be a knock on effect for trucks and other transporters that move goods around the world. For shipping companies it is the biggest shakeup in decades and adds to the pressures of an economic slowdown and the threat of an escalating trade war between the United States and China. While consumers are not expected to pay more for goods, higher transport bills and disruption to company deliveries could further dent economic growth. Ship owners must cut sulphur emissions to 0.5% from 3.5%. They can do this by using low-sulphur fuel, installing exhaust gas cleaning systems or opting for other, more expensive, clean fuels such as liquefied natural gas or traveling more slowly. Jeff Child, president of Berkshire Hathaway’s RC Willey Home Furnishings, moved the delivery of about 450 containers from September and October to July and August. He wants to avoid any disruption in the peak fourth quarter as ships prepare for the changes, including refitting equipment. “We just don’t want to get caught in a situation where it affects our inventory,” he told Reuters. Analysts say the container industry, which transports consumer goods such as sofas, designer clothes and bananas, will be one of the worst hit with extra costs of about $10 billion. The world’s two biggest container shipping lines - Denmark’s Maersk and Swiss headquartered MSC - say they face annual extra costs of over $2 billion each. Twenty-five logistics company executives told Reuters they would pass along any IMO-related costs, such as ship upgrades or more expensive fuel, to customers. “The sulphur cap will further put pressure on ocean freight rates and we... will have to pass those costs on to remain competitive,” Peder Winther, global head of ocean freight with Swiss transportation company Panalpina Group said. Economists say manufacturers are expected to absorb their part of the cost and are unlikely to raise the price of consumer goods, but the hit to companies could be a drag on the world economy. A Nestle S.A. spokesperson said the food group was talking to transport companies about “fuel adjustment methodology” to reflect the impact of the new rules. “Higher fuel prices would result in higher transport costs,” said Peter Nagle, an economist with the World Bank’s Development Prospects Group. “This would have the potential to lead to slower economic growth and trade.”   Trucking companies will also suffer. The IMO rules do not apply to them but they will face new competition from ships for lower sulfur fuel. This is expected to push up the price of diesel fuel for trucks by as much as 100 percent. Small to mid-sized truckers may find it tough as they lack the clout to negotiate fuel deals or to recoup the costs. “I’m at the whim of the market. All I can do is let the customers know what’s going on,” said Mike Baicher, president and chief executive of New Jersey based West End Express, which runs 90 trucks in New York, New Jersey and along the East Coast. “There is only so much that the trucking company can absorb.”   In a letter sent to top U.S. government officials including National Security Advisor John Bolton, transport associations including trucking groups said there was consensus that U.S. transport industries would be “negatively affected by IMO 2020 pricing pressure”. It said there could be market disruptions. “There’s a storm approaching but we don’t know how bad the storm is going to be,” said Glen Kedzie, energy and environmental counsel for the American Trucking Associations. Shipping and freight forwarding companies, who offer a service overseeing the delivery of goods from beginning to end, expect to feel more cost pressure. Bart de Vries, chief operating officer for air & sea with U.S. headquartered Hellmann Worldwide Logistics, expects to pay more for services as shipping companies pass along the costs. Some companies may overhaul their business plans. “It will undoubtedly force many exporters and importers to review their sourcing strategies and vendors,” said Cas Pouderoyen, senior vice president of ocean freight with global logistics company Agility         Richard Fattal, co-founder of digital freight forwarder and logistics provider Zencargo, said there could be as much as a 10 to 20% rise in overall operating costs next year. Allen Clifford, a U.S.-based executive vice president with MSC, said at a recent forum in California that his company was facing huge expenses. “Who’s going to pay for it? You’re going to pay for it. Because I’m tired of paying for it,” he told industry executives, and port and customs officials. Claim: Education Week rates Ohio schools in the top five in the nation.
U.S. furniture company RC Willey Home Furnishings is so concerned that new global clean air rules will cause transport disruption that it brought forward the shipment of arm chairs and sofas from China by two months.

Paragraph: The wheelchair-bound Hawking was diagnosed with motor neurone disease aged 21 and told he had two to three years to live. Now 71, he is one of the world’s leading scientists, known especially for his work on black holes and as author of the international bestseller “A Brief History of Time”. Speaking ahead of the release of a documentary about his life this week, Hawking said he backed the right to die but only if the person involved had chosen that route. He recalled how he was once put on a life support machine after suffering pneumonia and his wife was given the option of switching off the machine but this is not something he wanted. “I think those who have a terminal illness and are in great pain should have the right to choose to end their lives, and those who help them should be free from prosecution,” Hawking told the BBC. “There must be safeguards that the person concerned genuinely wants to end their life and are not being pressurized into it or have it done without their knowledge and consent as would have been the case with me.”  Assisted suicide is illegal in Britain and the issue of whether or not to decriminalize it for people whose lives are unbearable is a matter of debate in many countries. Right-to-die advocates say people capable of making that decision should be allowed to die with dignity. Opponents say liberalizing the law could leave vulnerable people at risk. Switzerland and several U.S. states are among places where some forms of euthanasia or assisted suicide are legal under certain circumstances. Hawking, who has made guest appearances in TV shows such as The Simpsons and Star Trek, says his active mind and sense of humor are key to his survival. Hawking communicates via a cheek muscle linked to a sensor and computerized voice system. He urged anyone with a disability to focus on what they can do and not regret what they cannot do. “Theoretical physics is one field where being disabled is not a handicap. It is all in the mind,” said the scientist, who works at Cambridge University. The documentary “Hawking” by Vertigo Films is due to be released in Britain on September 20. Claim: British cosmologist Hawking backs right to assisted suicide.

British cosmologist Stephen Hawking has backed the right for people who are terminally ill to choose to end their lives and to receive help to do so as long as safeguards are in place.