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: Paragraph: "Although the story didn't cite the cost of appendectomy emergency or urgent surgery and we wish it had, we nonetheless will give it a satisfactory score because it at least cited what the editorial writer wrote, ""A secondary benefit is the savings to the hospital generated by minimizing staff and anesthesiologist presence late in the evening and during the wee hours of the morning."" As with our harms score above, although the story didn't give absolute numbers, in this case we think it was sufficient for it to report that ""The scientists found no significant difference among the groups in the patients' condition 30 days after surgery or in the length of their operation or hospital stay."" Although the story didn't give absolute numbers, in this case we think it was sufficient for it to report that ""The scientists found no significant difference among the groups in the patients' condition 30 days after surgery or in the length of their operation or hospital stay."" Despite running less than 300 words, this story did an adequate job in explaining the quality of the evidence, including pointing out limitations. No disease-mongering here. The story meets the bare minimum requirement for this criterion in that it at least cited what an editorial stated. The focus of the story was on a study comparing emergency appendectomy with surgery done up to 12 hours later or beyond. This is the whole focus of the story and one we applaud when it begins: ""Appendectomy is the most common emergency surgery in the world, but it doesn't have to be."" There were no claims made about the novelty of this research, and we may have wished for a bit more context on this. Nonetheless, the potential for guiding future care decisions was made clear. Not applicable. Given that the story only pulled excerpts from the journal article and the accompanying editorial, and didn't include any fresh quotes from interviews, we can't be sure of the extent to which it may have been influenced by a news release.". Claim: Some appendicitis cases may not require 'emergency' surgery
Example solution: We really don't understand why only a handful of mainstream news organizations reported this story. (At least in what we found.) The most common emergency surgery in the world. Rushing to emergency surgery may not carry any benefit. Waiting a few hours may be safer and less expensive. Why is that not a story? We applaud USA Today for finding time and space and clearly it didn't need to free up much space to do a good job telling the story. The story explains that as many as 300,0 appendectomies are done each year in the US. That figure alone explains why this is an important study to report.
Example explanation: The output is an analysis of the claim while considering the paragraph as a reference. The output highlights the key features presented in the paragraph and explains the claim accordingly.

Problem: Paragraph: A drunk man lies in the hallway of a housing estate outside the Siberian city of Tomsk some 3500 km (2175 miles) east of Moscow June 5, 2008. REUTERS/Thomas Peter A survey by the Association of International Pharmaceutical Manufacturers (AIPM) and the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Associations (IFPMA) found that about 95 percent of Russians think they are in good or fair health, while only 44 percent saw a doctor last year. This could be one of the main reasons why diagnosis of chronic illnesses such as heart disease, cancers and diabetes is low, the researchers said. Such illnesses are also known as non-communicable diseases, or NCDs, and are the cause of the majority of deaths across the world. "Heart disease, strokes, diabetes, cancers and chronic respiratory disease together are responsible for 80 percent of all deaths in Russia," said Vladimir Shipkov, AIPM's executive director. "There is a significant gap between what people think is their state of health and the negative impact of their actual behavior." The survey also found that most Russians know about links between the incidence of chronic disease and risk factors such as smoking, harmful drinking, unhealthy diets and low levels of physical activity. But respondents to the survey tended to perceive these risks as a part of their regular lifestyle, the researchers said. The survey found that between one and three key risk factors feature in the everyday life of 82 percent of respondents, and only 9 percent could say that they had no risk factors. The survey also found that doctors could be an important factor in changing these unhealthy habits with more than 50 percent of respondents saying they were ready to give up risk factors if a doctor told them their health was at risk. "This study is very important in terms of preventing NCDs from spreading further, because the fight against non-communicable diseases starts on a personal level. Half of deaths and disability cases caused by NCDs can be prevented," said Mario Ottiglio of IFPMA. He said the survey showed how it "makes sense to put considerable efforts into prevention programs." "The benefits reaped would not limit themselves to improved health for individuals...There would also be relief from the mounting pressure on health care systems and the economic burden of such diseases on society as a whole," he added. Claim: Unhealthy Russians think they're in good shape.
Solution: Most Russians overestimate how healthy they are and many run high health risks by smoking, abusing alcohol, being obese and failing to take enough exercise, according to a report published on Tuesday.