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: The organization is a national nonprofit that works to improve rural health care. Program director Shelley Stingley tells the Casper Star-Tribune (http://bit.ly/2veibqx ) that more than $10 million of its contributions in Wyoming has gone to better care in cancer treatment centers. That includes putting eight new digital mammography machines in towns like Torrington and Wheatland. Some of the machines were new equipment to a facility, while others replaced a hospital’s aging machine. Additionally, Stingley says the program sought to provide cancer patients with better radiation treatment. New machines were purchased in Cody, Sheridan and Rock Springs. ___ Information from: Casper (Wyo.) Star-Tribune, http://www.trib.com Claim: Nonprofit has given $25M to Wyoming health care.
The Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust has given more than $25 million for mammogram machines and other medical equipment to Wyoming hospitals and clinics since 2010.

Paragraph: Given that this is an illegal substance banned by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency, cost as a therapeutic would be difficult to ascertain. We liked that the story took pains to explain that approval of this drug faces many hurdles. This is a tough one. While the story tells us what percentage of patients benefited from treatment, it does not, in fact, quantify the extent of those benefits–which is precisely what this category is designed to assess. However, the story does do a good–and thorough–job of describing the benefits in qualitative terms. That said, if the story had only chosen one or two examples of changes in the standardized measures of depression or anxiety, this would have received an enthusiastic “Satisfactory” rating. One strong word of caution though: The story cites one source as saying that psilocybin may one day be used to treat a wide range of mental health issues ranging from drug addiction to obsessive-compulsive disorder. The story offers no evidence to support these claims, which were made by a source associated with an organization that exists specifically to promote research on hallucinogens. Substantial claims require substantial evidence. The story would have been much stronger if it had eliminated the unsubstantiated remarks from the source — particularly since they had no bearing on the subject of the story. The story addresses this issue thoroughly. Well done. The story does a good job of both describing the design of the studies and explaining why the study design is relevant. For example, the story notes: “But both [studies] were considered to be double-blind placebo trials — the gold-standard of medical research in which subjects are left to guess whether they have gotten the active study drug or an inactive lookalike.” This is the sort of thing we like to see. However, we did want to note that in the NYU study, researchers did state in the limitations section that there was “limited blinding” — how did that possibly affect the outcomes? No disease mongering here. However, the story should have been more cautious about claims of benefit for conditions ranging far beyond the scope of the research at hand, which focused on mental health problems among people with advanced cancer. The story clearly states who funded the studies, and what that organization’s long-term goals are. Further, the story clearly identified individuals quoted in the story who have ties to the studies or the funding organization. Lastly, the story incorporates input from an independent expert. However, the story would have been stronger if there had been a skeptical take on the research, which saw in some other coverage, such as this New York Times piece. The story does not address other treatment options for anxiety or depression, such as talk therapy or other pharmaceutical interventions. The story does a good job here. For example, the story notes: “[F]inding drugs like psilocybin effective is by no means the final hurdle to their widespread availability. None are currently in production, and no for-profit pharmaceutical company would likely invest millions of dollars to bring to market a pill intended effectively for one-time use.” Well done. This is a close call. The story does do a good job of placing the work in context in regard to overall research involving hallucinogens. That’s enough to earn it a “Satisfactory” rating. However, the story doesn’t mention any of the work done in the past 10 years on the use of psilocybin specifically to address anxiety in cancer patients, such as this 2007 study, this one from 2011, or this one from 2013. Are the results from the two new studies consistent with these earlier findings? Do they differ in a meaningful way? That would be good to know. The story does not appear to rely on a news release. Claim: Ingredient in magic mushrooms is shown to ease anxiety and depression in cancer patients in one dose
The story focuses on two recent studies that find a single application of the hallucinogen psilocybin is effective at providing meaningful relief to cancer patients suffering from severe depression or anxiety. The studies were published in the Journal of Psychopharmacology, and can be found here and here. In some ways, the story is thorough, addressing potential side effects and conflicts of interest very well. The story discusses the potential benefits in depth, which is good, but fails to quantify those benefits — which is problematic. The story also does a good job of placing the work in context, highlighting the increasing profile of research into the use of hallucinogens as therapeutic tools for mental health problems. However, the story would have been even stronger if it had discussed the existing literature on the use of psilocybin to address anxiety in cancer patients. We also reviewed two news releases related to the research:   Depression and other mental health struggles are common and significant among people with cancer, especially terminal cancer. This makes it especially important for reporters to write responsibly about studies like those discussed in this story. You want to give readers enough information to help them make informed decisions. You don’t want to raise false hopes, or sensationalize the work. Overall, this story does a nice job of handling a delicate subject well.

Paragraph: Herbal, vitamin and mineral pill products in a file photo. REUTERS/File In an undercover probe, investigators at the Government Accountability Office also found that labels for some supplements claim to prevent or cure ailments like diabetes or heart disease — a clear violation of U.S. law. GAO staff targeted supplements most popular with older consumers and posed as elderly buyers in stores or over the telephone. “The most egregious practices included suspect marketing claims that a dietary supplement prevented or cured extremely serious diseases, such as cancer and cardiovascular disease,” the GAO said in a report released on Wednesday at a Senate hearing. For example, one shopper at a supplement specialty store was told that a garlic supplement could be taken instead of prescribed blood pressure drugs. Another staffer posing as a forgetful, elderly consumer was told by a salesperson that he could take aspirin and ginkgo biloba together with no harm. The Food and Drug Administration has said that combination can cause internal bleeding. The GAO, which conducts investigations for Congress, also said it found trace amounts of potentially harmful contaminants such as lead and arsenic, but at levels that do not exceed federal guidelines. Findings of pesticides, however, did exceed the FDA’s advisory levels, the GAO said, and 16 of 40 supplements tested would violate the FDA’s tolerance. Manufacturers told the GAO that they were concerned about the contamination findings but “that the levels identified were too low to raise any issues” during their own testing. “Given the expected generally small consumption of the supplements, we do not believe these levels represent a significant risk to health,” FDA Deputy Commissioner Joshua Sharfstein said in remarks prepared for the Senate Committee on Aging. Unlike prescription drugs, the FDA does not approve dietary supplements before they can be sold. The Federal Trade Commission regulates the marketing of herbal supplements, which are not allowed to claim that they treat medical conditions. But calls for stronger oversight have been growing. Experts at the Institute of Medicine have said the FDA needs to use the same strict standards to regulate supplements as it uses for medications, and earlier this week the GAO said the FDA should ask Congress for more power to regulate supplements. Some lawmakers, including Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona, have proposed legislation to beef up the agency’s oversight of supplements. Sharfstein said the FDA is obliged to look for problems only after a product is sold by reviewing medical literature and analyzing complaints. The agency has taken action to help recall dozens of tainted supplements and alert consumers to hazardous products, he said. Claim: Herbs, supplements often sold deceptively: U.S. report.

Sellers of ginseng, echinacea and other herbal and dietary supplements often cross the line in marketing their products, going as far as telling consumers the pills can cure cancer or replace prescription medications, a U.S. government probe found.