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: Honor, a 10-month-old colt with Gentle Carousel Miniature Therapy Horses, trotted into the hearts of dozens of children and teens being treated at the Manhattan hospital. Just a handful of young patients were well enough to secure their doctors' permission to meet Honor in person in a hospital playroom, while others watched him from their beds, viewing an internal television broadcast in their rooms and isolation units. Maria Benitez, who is 19 but looks much younger, broke into a smile when Honor pranced into the playroom. The hospital declined to elaborate on details of Benitez's medical condition, saying only she is currently being treated as an outpatient. While Maria said her favorite animal is a horse, this one was quite different from what she expected. "He's smaller," Maria whispered, staring at the chestnut horse with black eyes. "They are little horses, but they have big jobs," said Jorge Garcia-Bengochea, co-founder of Gentle Carousel. Miniature horses have comforted trauma victims after such tragedies as the 2012 mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut, the 2013 tornadoes that devastated Oklahoma and the 2015 church shooting in Charleston, South Carolina. They also work with families of police officers who have died in the line of duty. "They are herd animals, so they are very intuitive of what other horses are doing, needing. And they treat people that same way. They sense different emotions, different feelings that children have," Garcia-Bengochea said. "Children have been through very traumatic situations and they've shut down. Just being around the animal, they get animated, they start talking and they actually sometimes tell the horse things that they haven't told other people," he said. In the hospital, the tiny equines serve as a symbol of hope and beauty, conjuring up an image of outdoor activities, running and strength, said Diane Rode, who heads up the hospital's child creative arts therapy unit. "When you're in the hospital, you're dealing with pain, anxiety, isolation, and it's easy to get stuck in that. Focusing on the miniature horses creates a relationship back to the world and an interest and pleasure in the world we are working to foster," she said. "Children need more than medicine to get better," Rode added. (This version of the story corrects the last name in paragraph four to Benitez) Claim: For New York hospital's patients, miniature horses are a strong medicine.

A: Some of the most powerful medicine delivered to young patients at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York on Wednesday came in a package less than 32 inches tall and with a tail.
****
Q: Paragraph: The Apostles' Creed is a statement of Christian belief commonly recited during services in a number of Christian denominations. The text of the creed varies with translation and denomination, but the English Language Liturgical Consultation version, for example, reads as follows: I believe in God, the Father almighty, creator of heaven and earth. I believe in Jesus Christ, God's only Son, our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried; he descended to the dead. On the third day he rose again; he ascended into heaven, he is seated at the right hand of the Father, and he will come to judge the living and the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. Amen. The sincerity of President Trump's religious beliefs was called into question on 5 December 2018 as many viewers noticed that he apparently did not recite the Apostles' Creed during President George H.W. Bush's funeral at the Washington National Cathedral. Columnist John Ziegler, for instance, noted how "weird" it was that President Obama, who was often wrongly identified as Muslim, fully recited all the words of that statement of faith, while President Trump, who courted and won support from the Evangelical community, did not: Ziegler was hardly the only one to levy this criticism at President Trump: Similarly, the Washington Post reported on the issue that: The Apostles' Creed is one of the prayers most core to Christianity. It states in a few lines the basic narrative of Jesus's life, is the statement of faith in one God and is said daily by Christians across the globe. [O]ne Christian didn't say it. And Twitter noticed. Video from the funeral of George H.W. Bush showed a front row of presidents at Washington National Cathedral, standing and reciting it along with the program, as the voice of Episcopal Bishop Michael Curry boomed through the speakers to the thousands of mourners. Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and their wives glanced up and down from the programs they held in front of them and spoke the prayer, along with everyone else visible in the video. The program, as is typical, calls for the Creed to be said in unison. President Trump stood, with his hands folded in front of him, waist-high, the program in his left hand, his lips not moving. Melania Trump also did not speak, nor did she hold a program. While we can't speak the sincerity of President Trump's faith, we can confirm that these criticisms were backed up by video from George H.W. Bush's funeral. President Trump only appeared on screen for a short time during the recitation, but when he did he could be seen standing silently with his hands clasped and his program unopened, while other attendees, including former president Barack Obama, former first lady Michelle Obama, former president Bill Clinton, and former secretary of state Hillary Clinton, all held their programs open as they recited the Apostles' Creed from them. Here's a video from C-SPAN of the relevant portion of George H.W. Bush's state funeral: We examined other broadcasts of the funeral to see if they captured President Trump reciting any part of the Apostle's Creed. While we couldn't find video capturing President Trump during the entirety of the creed recitation, we did find video from Time magazine showing him in the same posture as above (silently holding his program at his waist) for about 15 seconds while others around him recited the statement of faith: We can only speak to what the video record shows, however, and not its significance. It's possible that either or both of the Trumps had religious or other personal reasons for declining to participate in that aspect of the service. Indeed, in a Washington Post opinion piece, Patrick Nugent defended President Trump's actions, regardless of what might have motivated them: The Apostles' Creed is not just a prayer one can or should recite out of courtesy for the sake of show, good manners or good taste. The Creed or any Christian creed is a statement of belief and a public commitment to very specific, carefully enumerated theological doctrines. It is not a bland, generic greeting-card prayer addressing an impersonal creator, a "force," "the universe" or "the spirit of goodness" that could conceivably be uttered by anybody of any religious perspective or none at all. I admit entirely that the Trumps' abstention could well have been motivated by cluelessness, inattention, bad taste, bad manners, unfamiliarity, distraction or any number of other things. But the bottom line is that they abstained from reciting aloud, in public, a personal commitment to the truth of very specific, classic, ancient Christian doctrines. The president participated in a public ceremony in his capacity as head of state, not as a Presbyterian (which is how he has identified himself). As such, he has no obligation to declare those theological truths, or any others, aloud in public. In fact, I'd suggest, he has an obligation not to do so if he disagrees with any of them, or all of them, or doesn't especially care, or isn't sure, or doesn't understand or just thinks the president should be theologically neutral in public. Claim: President Trump did not recite the Apostles' Creed as other attendees did during George H.W. Bush's funeral.

A: This wasn't the only criticism levied at President Trump over something he allegedly did (or didn't do) at George H.W. Bush's funeral. Many social media users also accused him of disrespecting the deceased by failing to place his hand over his heart while the former president's casket was carried into Washington National Cathedral. We investigated this rumor, too, and found that the accusation was largely inaccurate.
****
Q: Paragraph: In this very narrow discussion of a small study in mice, the suggestion is that someday maybe walnuts (or some nutritional element of walnuts) could help people by slowing the growth of colon cancer. But while the study doesn't mention how much (or how little) such a therapy might cost, we think this criterion is Not Applicable here for two reasons: 1. the cost of walnuts is generally well known, and 2. the research is at early enough stage and the release establishes the preliminary nature of the study that it's hard to know what any walnut-related therapy might cost. Furthermore, while the criteria of cost is integral to what we all agree is good reporting about health outcomes, incorporating information about the potential cost of walnuts or any other foodstuffs in a release about a study that's so preliminary might actually reinforce the suggestion of a useful therapy. Including that info wouldn't improve anyone's understanding of the importance of the research. The research on a small group of mice showed slowing of the growth of colon cancer tumors. The research proved that tumors in mice fed walnuts had "10 times the amount of total omega-3 fatty acids, including plant-based alpha-linolenic acid (ALA), in the tissue compared to the mice fed the control diet." Although the quantification here is limited, we'll give the story credit for accurately reporting the outcomes in broad strokes. The detailed results of what happened in a mouse study have limited use for the average human reader anyway. But while the release does not state that the mouse study could lead to prevention for humans, we're worried that a normal reader may see the suggested effects of an enhanced walnut diet increased anti-inflammatory activity, reduced angiogenesis, increased protective lipid content and assume that these affect actual cancer outcomes. Set aside the major caveat that it is an animal study for a moment the release says that walnuts "may" slow the growth of colon cancer. It also equally may not. The limited study did not appear to investigate potential harms, and the release didn't comment on them. For humans, consumption of too many calorie-dense walnuts could precipitate weight gain. But the equivalent of two ounces a day doesn't sound like it could be very harmful. We'll rate this Not Applicable. While the main headline was not upfront about the fact that the study involved mice, the body of the release itself was carefully worded and did a fair job of describing the evidence. It's always helpful to see "animal" in the very first sentence of a study involving mice. microRNAs are a complicated topic, asare changes in gene expression, which is at the root of the questions that the study addressed. The release adequately describes the evidence drawn from the work but does so sparsely. The eight-page paper is reduced to an eight-paragraph release, only three paragraphs of which actually convey an explanation of the work. What the release offers is acceptable by our standards but more information, properly couched, could aid readers in assessing the study's true value. There was no disease mongering. Funding sources were identified, netting this release a Satisfactory rating, but when a fundor is integrally related to the substance of the research, that mention belongs higher up in the story or release, rather than tagged onto the end, allowing readers to consider the context of the funding early in their reading of the material. The release discusses the chemistry of inflammation and the growth of tumors in the mice. It briefly mentions "diet and lifestyle changes" as means to reduce risk, but does not discuss what specific changes are shown to be helpful. It also does not discuss screening and polyp removal, arguably the best-supported intervention for catching colon cancer before it spreads. We accept that walnuts are widely available. There has already been research on the potential protective influence of omega-3 fatty acids for inflammation. The release clearly explained the novelty of this specific mouse study investigating underlying chemistry and how it may work. While we aren't happy with the headline, we think this release squeaks by because the main text is accurate and we applaud the first sentence clearly labeling it an "animal study." The release clearly avoids any sensationalized verbiage, a feat to be lauded in cases like this when an inference of a simple activity like eating nuts might lead a reader to jump to wrong conclusions. Claim: New Harvard research finds walnuts may help slow colon cancer growth A walnut-enriched diet may cause beneficial genetic changes in animal cancer cells, affecting inflammation, blood supply and growth of tumors

A:
Mice are not people. Yet many medical research headlines about mouse studies extend the implicit promise that whatever is discovered may cure diseases in humans. This release tries to correct that by mentioning "animal study" in the sub-headline and in its first sentence. That's more than many releases would do, but the main headline (not the subhead) is what appears in search results about this release, and we still worry most people will assume the wrong implicit promise. The study discussed here is about the biochemistry surrounding certain genetic changes in mice fed walnuts while growing colon cancer tumors. It appears the mouse tumors grew more slowly in the mice fed the equivalent of a human diet of two ounces of walnuts per day. The study is trying to unpack the mechanism of that impact. And apart from the headline, it mostly does a satisfactory job of communicating the results of the study in a responsible, measured way. But let's remember that these findings in mice are many years away from any human application. And yet a public relations company connected to the California Walnut Commission is very eager to make sure you probably not a cancer scientist, but definitely a human potential walnut consumer are aware of what happened in these mice. Yes, the study carries tantalizing information about the way the walnut diet appears to influence the genetics of colon tumors in the mice but it will take much more investigation before it yields the kind of results that warrant a headline, "New Harvard research finds walnuts may help slow colon cancer growth." According to the National Cancer Institute, colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer worldwide and the second leading cause of cancer deaths in the United States. If something as simple as eating walnuts could reduce that risk or slow down cancer progression, it would matter quite a bit.
****