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.

Example Input: Paragraph: The jury in a Philadelphia court awarded the $8 billion to a man who previously won $680,000 over his claims that it failed to warn that young men using Risperdal could grow breasts. J&J called the sum “grossly disproportionate with the initial compensatory award” and said it was confident it would be overturned. Legal experts agreed that the penalty was likely to be slashed. But the verdict, which helped drive J&J’s shares down 2% on Wednesday, is an example of how public outrage at the pharmaceutical industry for high drug prices has contributed to harsher verdicts against drugmakers accused of wrongdoing in recent years, legal experts said. Outsized penalties awarded by some juries highlight risks in a longstanding strategy by drugmakers such as J&J of taking their chances at trial rather then settle product liability lawsuits brought by patients. “Every pharmaceutical company needs to seriously consider if they want to litigate to verdict in the present environment, but with the settlement demands so incredibly high it’s not always clear what their alternative is,” said Barry Thompson, a partner at Baker McKenzie law firm who was not involved in the case. Drugmakers often prefer to litigate rather than settle in hopes of protecting their brands and discouraging future patient lawsuits, Thompson said. Companies also may use a series of early trial verdicts to gauge the size of any settlement it might eventually offer, as Merck & Co (MRK.N) did with its withdrawn Vioxx arthritis pain drug when facing thousands of lawsuits by patients who claimed harm from the drug. A 2003 U.S. Supreme Court decision suggests that the upper limit of a fair punitive penalty in the Risperdal case would be about $6 million based on the earlier compensatory award. J&J could still get a favorable ruling on appeal that would give the company leverage in dealing with the remaining cases, said Benjamin McMichael, a professor at the Alabama School of Law who has researched punitive damage awards. “With such a large punitive damages award at issue, appellate courts may be more willing to come down hard on the plaintiffs,” McMichael said. J&J faces more than 13,000 lawsuits tied to Risperdal alleging that it caused a condition called gynecomastia in boys, in which breast tissue becomes enlarged. The company is also facing lawsuits involving its baby powder, opioids, medical devices and other products. “We’re operating within a very litigious environment, and we must at times be willing to go to trial when the science, facts and law are on our side,” J&J spokesman Ernie Knewitz said in an email. “We also have to remain open to resolving cases through settlement when and where that’s appropriate to do. We have a proven track record of being able to successfully and appropriately manage this balance,” Knewitz added. The company has had its share of legal wins, losses and settlements. An Oklahoma judge in August ordered J&J to pay $572.1 million to that state for its part in fueling the opioid crisis by deceptively marketing addictive painkillers, although the sum was substantially less than investors had expected. Johnson & Johnson has said it plans to appeal the ruling. Earlier this month, the company agreed to pay $20.4 million to settle claims by two Ohio counties, avoiding a federal opioid trial. In 2013, J&J paid more than $2.2 billion to resolve civil and criminal investigations by the U.S. Department of Justice into its marketing of Risperdal and other drugs. Claim: Massive jury award against J&J highlights risks of its legal strategy.
Example Output: A jury award that hit Johnson & Johnson (JNJ.N) with $8 billion in punitive damages for a case involving its anti-psychotic drug Risperdal highlights the risks of the drugmaker’s all-or-nothing legal strategy, several legal experts told Reuters on Wednesday.

Example Input: Paragraph: A 38-year-old man from Zunyi city died last Thursday, Xinhua said, citing health authorities in Guizhou. Xinhua said it was the first human case of H7N9 in Guizhou this year. Last Friday, China said a 38-year-old man in eastern Fujian province died from H7N9. The World Health Organisation (WHO) said last week that seven more people in China had been found to be infected with the H7N9 strain of bird flu in the previous week, taking to around 150 the total number of cases so far. The H7N9 bird flu emerged last year in China and has infected around 150 people there and in Taiwan and Hong Kong, killing at least 45 of them. Experts say there is no evidence as yet of any easy or sustained person-to person transmission of the strain. But an early scientific analysis of probable transmission of the new flu from person to person, published last August, gave the strongest proof yet that it can at times jump between people and so could cause a human pandemic. The WHO said the source of the human infections was still being investigated. It stressed that it does not advise any special screening for people going in and out of China, nor does it recommend any travel or trade curbs. Claim: China reports second H7N9 bird flu death in a week.
Example Output: China reported one more death from the H7N9 strain of bird flu in southwestern Guizhou province, state news agency Xinhua said on Monday, in the second death from the virus in the past week.

Example Input: Paragraph: Knox County’s proposed ordinance hasn’t been drafted yet, but County Attorney Yvette Kirchoff said the ordinance wouldn’t be retroactive so homeowners won’t have to remove existing plants. If the measure is approved, Knox County would be the first in Indiana to move forward with such an ordinance, Kirchoff told the Vincennes Sun-Commercial . Invasive species can take over and alter environments, said Will Drews, a natural resource specialist with the Knox County Soil and Water Conservation District. They can also disrupt pasture lands and agriculture. “We’ve introduced most of them, unfortunately, over time,” he said. “They’re mostly from other parts of the world, such as Europe or Asia, and the problem is that they have no natural predators, so they just kind of get out of control.” One major issue is that some invasive species — such as wintercreeper, Japanese honeysuckle and burning bush — can be found in local nurseries and are used by landscapers, Drews said. “These are plants that are literally destroying our forests,” Drews said. “That’s frustrating to a lot of the folks that I work with and those who are aware of the problem.” The state Department of Natural Resources and state lawmakers have been working on legislation that would attempt to regulate the spread of invasive species, but the process has been slow, Drews said. Drews and Kirchoff are drafting the ordinance and will present it to the county commissioners soon. ___ Information from: Vincennes Sun-Commercial, http://www.vincennes.com Claim: Indiana county working on invasive plants ordinance.
Example Output:
A southwestern Indiana county is continuing work on an ordinance that would combat invasive plants.