instruction:
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.
question:
Paragraph: Strong point. The story said, "There's one other thing, the CDC says. Make sure patients understand that warding off HIV isn't cheap. Each pill currently costs around $36, which adds up to more than $13,000 a year. Some insurers might pay, but some might balk" The story stated the benefits clearly albeit only in relative risk reduction terms. We would have preferred absolute numbers. But it did such a good job in telling the updated story about proper use of the drug in question that we give it a satisfactory score. Several clear points were made about harms: The story did a great job of communicating the read-between-the-lines reality of the evidence for the use of this drug. NO disease-mongering here. The story is based on the CDC's evaluation and warnings about proper use of the drug. We would have liked to have seen a clinician-researcher's perspective someone not affiliated with the CDC analysis. Not applicable. Because of the nature of this drug, no comparison is really necessary. As the story stated, "It's the first time anybody's shown that taking a pill can prevent HIV and it was the first new weapon against HIV unveiled in many years." The story is clear that Truvada is already on the market. The story stated, "It's the first time anybody's shown that taking a pill can prevent HIV and it was the first new weapon against HIV unveiled in many years." We have no evidence that the story relied on a news release. Claim: CDC To Doctors: Anti-HIV Pill No Magic Bullet Against Virus
answer:
Clear, succinct, and important reporting that tones down some of the celebratory tone that greeted a drug's "landmark study" from a few months ago. The story notes that there was a lot of celebrating when news came out in November that taking a pill can reduce the risk of getting HIV. But the story delivered a clear dose of evidence and caution important journalism.

question:
Paragraph: Raluca Alexandru, spokeswoman for Giulesti Maternity hospital, closed Nov. 30 due to the outbreak, said tests have confirmed the latest figure. It is triple the number of newborns diagnosed with antibiotic-resistant Staphylococcus aureus last month. Health Minister Sorina Pintea said she will decide later this week whether to keep the hospital closed. The infants are hospitalized in three children's facilities in Bucharest. No deaths have been reported. The bacteria often live on the skin or in the nostrils without causing symptoms but they can become dangerous if they enter the bloodstream, destroying heart valves or causing other damage. Microbiologists say up to 30 percent of humans are long-term carriers. It is not clear how this outbreak began. Health authorities have suggested that the hospital does too many C-sections and that hygiene standards are not respected. Eleven staff members have tested positive for the superbug. They have been suspended from work and face treatment. In a related development, the National Authority of Quality Health Management said only 23 of 147 hospitals it had checked respected all of the approximately 500 requirements to function. It said 106 facilities partially respected the requirements. The requirements include issues such as hygiene, patient confidentiality, personnel structure, budget, fire risk and data protection. A statement said the results explained the poor public image of Romania's health care system. Claim: Romania hospital says 39 babies now diagnosed with superbug.
answer:
The number of babies diagnosed with a drug-resistant superbug at a maternity hospital in Romania's capital has risen to 39, authorities said Monday.

question:
Paragraph: Lawyers for the 85-year-old fugitive director petitioned Los Angeles Superior Court to compel the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences to make him a member in good standing again. In May, the academy made the rare move of expelling Polanski and Bill Cosby, months after ending the membership of disgraced movie mogul Harvey Weinstein. Polanski appealed the decision, and in January the academy rejected his appeal. Friday's five-page filing states that by not giving Polanski sufficient notice of his expulsion, and not giving he or his lawyer to argue his case in person during the appeal, the academy "failed to comply with its own rules, policies and regulations." The academy responded with a brief statement saying, "The procedures taken to expel Mr. Polanski were fair and reasonable. The Academy stands behind its decision as appropriate." The filing also alleges that the expulsion violated a California law that requires corporations to give a fair hearing before removing a member, calling it a "prejudicial abuse of discretion." Polanski's attorney Harland Braun said at the time that Polanski was "blindsided" by his removal, and learned of it through media reports. The filing says that the academy's decision is final and the director has no recourse for reconsideration outside of the courts. Polanski, who won a best director Oscar for "The Pianist" in 2003, remains a fugitive after pleading guilty to unlawful sex with a minor in 1977 and fleeing the United States the following year. He has been living in Europe since. He had been an academy member for nearly 50 years at the time of his expulsion, and his films had been nominated for 28 Oscars. But he had long been one of the organization's more divisive members. At the 2003 ceremony, Polanski's win his first received a standing ovation. He was not in attendance. He'd previously been nominated for writing his adaptation of "Rosemary's Baby," and directing "Chinatown" and "Tess." Polanski's ouster from the group means he can no longer vote for nominees and winners, but he and his films can still win Oscars. After expelling Weinstein, the academy implemented revised standards of conduct for its over 8,400 members. The standards said the organization is no place for "people who abuse their status, power or influence in a manner that violates standards of decency." The code allowed the academy's board to suspend or expel those who violate the code of conduct or who "compromise the integrity" of the academy. There have been no reports of Weinstein or Cosby appealing their expulsions from the academy. Before Weinstein, only one person is thought to have been expelled from the academy: Carmine Caridi, a character actor who had his membership revoked in 2004 for lending DVD screeners of films in contention for Oscars. ___ AP Film Writer Jake Coyle contributed to this report from New York. ___ Follow AP Entertainment Writer Andrew Dalton on Twitter: https://twitter.com/andyjamesdalton . Claim: Polanski asks court to restore his film academy membership.
answer:
Roman Polanski asked a judge Friday to restore his membership in the organization that bestows the Academy Awards nearly a year after he was expelled from it for sexual misconduct.