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.

[Q]: Paragraph: The Supreme Judicial Court said MIT cannot be blamed for the death of 25-year-old Han Nguyen, who jumped from the top of a campus building minutes after a professor confronted him about an offensive email. But it found that schools can be liable if they fail to act after they become aware that a student has attempted suicide while enrolled, or shortly before entering, or learn that the student had threatened to commit suicide. Gary Pavela, a consultant on law and policy issues in higher education, said he’s unaware of another state appellate court that has explicitly found that universities have a duty to prevent suicide in limited cases and defines those circumstances. “This will be very newsworthy to colleges around the country,” said Pavela, who has written a book about the legal questions surrounding student suicides. Jeffrey Beeler, an attorney for Nguyen’s estate, said they were disappointed the court sided with MIT, but believe its ruling will nonetheless “save student lives going forward.” An MIT spokeswoman said in a statement that Nguyen’s death was a tragedy and students’ well-being is of “paramount importance to the school.” Spokeswoman Kimberly Allen said the school already offers a “robust network” of services for students and “continually considers ways to enhance those resources.” The court noted that Nguyen never told anyone at MIT that he planned to kill himself or tried to kill himself while enrolled at the school. Furthermore, he was living off campus instead of a dormitory under “daily observation,” the court said. But the judges said schools must take “reasonable measures” to help students they know have attempted suicide while at the school or have threatened to kill themselves. That would include initiating a suicide prevention protocol, getting the student in the care of a medical professional, or contacting police, fire or emergency medical personnel. “It requires the school to really have a lot of information that the suicide is likely and the reasonable measures that the school needs to take are not extremely onerous,” said Naomi Shatz, an attorney who’s not involved in the case. A group of 18 colleges and universities — including Harvard University and Boston College — told the court that holding MIT responsible for Nguyen’s death would have far-reaching consequences by causing officials with no medical expertise to overreact to concerns out of fear of liability. Nguyen’s professors shared concerns about his mental health in the months leading up to his death, and one encouraged his colleagues to pass him or they might have “blood on their hands.” In a telephone call 11 minutes before he killed himself, a professor “read him the riot act” over an email Nguyen sent to another MIT official that they believed was inappropriate, court records said. The family said that the school should have known that “mishandling this fragile student” would result in his suicide. But MIT said the school wasn’t aware of the severity of his condition, noting that he was treated by outside professionals and refused on-campus resources. None of the professionals who treated Nguyen while he was at MIT believed he was an imminent risk of killing himself, the school said. ___ Follow Alanna Durkin Richer at http://twitter.com/aedurkinricher . Read more of her work at http://bit.ly/2hIhzDb . Claim: Court says schools can be liable for suicides but clears MIT.
[A]: Schools can be held liable for student suicides in certain circumstances, Massachusetts’ highest court said Monday in a ruling that also cleared the Massachusetts Institute of Technology of responsibility for the death of a graduate student who killed himself on campus in 2009.


[Q]: Paragraph: The Food and Drug Administration will allow 22nd Century Group to begin selling the first low-nicotine cigarettes reviewed by federal health regulators. The products contain roughly 95% less nicotine than standard cigarettes, according to the FDA. Nicotine, which occurs naturally in tobacco plants, is the addictive chemical that makes cigarettes, chew and related products so hard to quit. Past efforts to sell similar low-nicotine products have fallen flat. Regulators stressed that their ruling does not mean the new products are safer than regular cigarettes. The agency noted there are no safe tobacco products. Cigarettes cause cancer, lung disease, stroke and a number of other deadly diseases. But the agency’s tobacco chief, Mitch Zeller, noted in a statement that 22nd Century Group’s products are the first cigarettes to show the potential “to help reduce nicotine dependence among addicted smokers.” The FDA is continuing to review a separate application from the company on whether the cigarettes present a reduced risk to smokers. The U.S. smoking rate has fallen to an all-time low of 14% of adults, or roughly 34 million Americans. But smoking remains the leading cause of preventable disease and death in the U.S., responsible for some 480,000 deaths annually Low-nicotine cigarettes are not a new idea. Philip Morris experimented with selling a line of them in the U.S. in the late 1980s, without much success. Since then, most low-nicotine cigarettes have been used for research purposes to study addiction in smokers. Kenneth Warner, a tobacco expert at the University of Michigan’s school of public health, called the idea “good in concept,” but said he would be “astonished if there’s much of a market for this.” There are several techniques for reducing nicotine, including chemical extraction and cross-breeding plants. Williamsville, New York-based 22nd Century Group plans to sell its cigarettes under the brand name Moonlight, in regular and menthol flavor. Last year, the FDA began the process for regulating nicotine in cigarettes to make them minimally or non-addictive. But the agency recently dropped the nicotine plan from its list of regulatory priorities. And tobacco companies have signaled their opposition. The FDA has sponsored several studies showing that when smokers switch to low-nicotine cigarettes they smoke less and are more likely to try quitting. The research was considered pivotal to establishing that smokers won’t compensate by smoking more cigarettes or inhaling more deeply if nicotine levels are low. That was sometimes the case with “light” and “low tar” cigarettes marketed in decades past. Those products were banned as misleading. ___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content. Claim: US permits sale of cigarettes with 95% less nicotine.
[A]: U.S. health officials on Tuesday endorsed a type of cigarette that could help ease the addictive grip of smoking by delivering very low levels of nicotine.


[Q]: Paragraph: New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren and former Obama Cabinet member Julián Castro laid out their plans Tuesday. Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar released hers over the weekend. The release of the competing plans comes as issues of climate and the environment have become a central focus of the Democratic primary. On Wednesday, 10 Democrats seeking the White House will participate in back-to-back climate town halls hosted by CNN in New York. A second set of climate-focused town halls will be televised by MSNBC later in the month. Liberals had demanded that the Democratic Party focus at least one debate on climate change, but a climate debate resolution was defeated at the Democratic National Committee’s summer meeting last month. The issue is so urgent among Democratic voters that Washington Gov. Jay Inslee made action to limit the worst extremes of climate change the core of his presidential bid. But Inslee dropped out of the presidential race in August after failing to earn a spot in the September primary debate. Warren says Inslee’s ideas “should remain at the center of the agenda,” and she met with him in Seattle when she visited the state for a rally before Labor Day, according to two people familiar with the meeting who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss a private meeting. Warren’s clean-energy proposal builds on Inslee’s 10-year clean-energy plan in seeking to implement 100% clean-energy standards in three key sectors of the American economy. Warren says she will increase her planned spending on research and investment to cut carbon emissions to $3 trillion. She embraces tough deadlines for sharply cutting or eliminating the use of fossil fuels by the U.S. electrical grid, highways and air transit systems, and by cities and towns. That includes making sure that new cars, buses and many trucks run on clean energy — instead of gasoline or diesel — by 2030 and that all the country’s electricity comes from solar, wind and other renewable, carbon-free sources by 2035. Booker’s $3 trillion plan includes nearly a dozen executive actions to reverse Trump administration moves. He says that by no later than 2045, he wants to get the U.S. economy to carbon neutral — a point at which carbon emissions are supposedly canceled out by carbon-cutting measures, such as planting new forests to suck up carbon from the atmosphere. Booker also urges massive restoration of forests and coastal wetlands as carbon sponges and as buffers against rising seas. He sets a 2030 deadline for getting natural gas and coal out of the electrical grid. He would get there partly by scrapping all subsidies for fossil fuels, banning new oil and gas leases, phasing out fracking and introducing a carbon fee. If elected, Booker says, he will propose legislation creating a “United States Environmental Justice Fund,” which — among its areas of focus — will replace all home, school and day care drinking water lines by the end of his second term. Castro’s $10 trillion plan aims to have all electricity in the United States be clean and renewable by 2035. He wants to achieve net-zero emissions by 2045 and at least a 50% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 2030. And, like Booker, he focuses on environmental racism, in which people of color are disproportionately affected by environmental hazards. Castro says that within the first 100 days of his presidency he would propose new legislation to address the impact of environmental discrimination. Among Democrats seeking the presidency, there is little disagreement that climate change is a building disaster. Candidates’ primary differences are over how aggressively the U.S. should move now to cut fossil fuel emissions to stave off the worst of the coming climate extremes. Last month, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders toured a California mobile home park ravaged by wildfires as he introduced his $16 trillion plan to fight global warming, the costliest among the Democratic field. His plan declares climate change a national emergency, calls for the United States to eliminate fossil fuel use by 2050 and commits $200 billion to help poorer nations reckon with climate change. Former Vice President Joe Biden has proposed $1.7 trillion in spending over 10 years, on clean energy and other initiatives with the goal of eliminating the country’s net carbon emissions by 2050. Biden has been less absolute than some other Democratic candidates on stamping out consumption of oil, natural gas and coal, calling for eliminating subsidies for the fossil fuels rather than pledging to eliminate all use of them. The relatively minor differences among Democrats on climate change come in sharp contrast to President Donald Trump, who has dismissed and mocked the science of climate change and has reversed course on U.S. climate policy. Trump made pulling the country out of the Paris climate accord one of his administration’s first priorities, and his wholehearted support of the petroleum and coal industries has been one of the enduring themes of his presidency. Nationally, 72% of Democratic midterm voters said they were very concerned about the effects of climate change, and 20% were somewhat concerned. That’s according to AP VoteCast, a survey of more than 115,000 midterm voters nationwide. ___ Associated Press writer Michelle L. Price in Las Vegas contributed to this report. Claim: Democrats release climate plans ahead of town hall spotlight.
[A]:
Democratic presidential candidates are releasing their plans to address climate change ahead of a series of town halls on the issue as the party’s base increasingly demands aggressive action.