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: Mays, speaking to a TV critics' meeting Friday, pointed to several bottles she had filled with her tap water and challenged the room to taste or even smell it. There were no immediate takers. The activist, who said the battle over water safety continues, is among the residents portrayed in Lifetime's movie titled "Flint," debuting Oct. 28. Mays is played by Marin Ireland, who co-stars with Betsy Brandt, Jill Scott and Queen Latifah. Executive producer Neil Meron said the film is intended to spotlight what happened in Flint, including how a united community and "the voice of the people" can force officials to act. Mays said there have been successes, including the outcome of a lawsuit to get half of the service lines replaced, although not the main lines or interior plumbing. "So one of the things we hope come out of this is to let people know it's still not over. It's not even close to over," she said. The movie is intended to honor Flint victims by telling the story "that even in a poor, broken, poisoned town, we banded together, and we fought. We fought, and we win." In 2014, a switch of Flint's water source and failure to add corrosion-reducing phosphates allowed lead from old pipes to leach into the water. Elevated levels of lead, a neurotoxin, were detected in children, and 12 people died in a Legionnaires' disease outbreak that experts suspect was linked to the improperly treated water. An ongoing investigation has led to charges against 13 current or former government officials, including two managers who Republican Gov. Rick Snyder appointed to run the city. Last January, state officials said Flint's water system no longer has lead levels exceeding the federal limit. The announcement was promptly met by skepticism from some residents, Mays among them, maintaining the system still contains lead and continues to cause illness. Brandt, the former "Breaking Bad" star who's a native of Bay City, Michigan, not far from Flint, said the person she portrays, LeeAnne Walters, was among those driven to act when authorities failed to heed complaints about their children becoming ill. "As a mom, it just shakes you, because there's some things that we just should be able to count on," Brandt said. Claim: Lifetime movie 'Flint' dramatizes city's water crisis.
answer:
Melissa Mays, a resident of Flint, Michigan, came armed to discuss the city's tainted water crisis and a new Lifetime TV movie dramatizing it.

question:
Paragraph: The story does not mention the cost of mammography (or of follow up tests and treatments) to the individual, or, collectively, to society. And these costs are substantial. Based on the results of this study, 2,500 women would have to be screened every other year for a decade in order to prevent one death from breast cancer. As the story points out, during that same time 1,000 of those women would have at least one false alarm and 500 would undergo an unnecessary biopsy, thus adding to the price tag. On balance, this story does a fair job of describing the benefits of screening mammography as seen in this study. It reports the apparent 10 percent reduction in breast cancer deaths, while also pointing out that because relatively few women in the 50-69 age group die of breast cancer, that reduction can also be described as cutting the 10-year risk of death from 4.4 per 1,000 women to 4 per 1,000. The second statistic helps counteract popular assumptions about how many middle-aged women die from breast cancer. However, the framing of a story and who gets the last word sometimes overwhelms evidence-based explanations earlier in the story. That almost happened with this story, which gives the final word to an advocate of annual breast cancer screening for all women beginning by age 40, which is just the sort of blanket recommendation this latest study calls into question. The story includes a comment that because mammograms detect lumps that would not have become life-threatening, five to 15 women may be treated for every one whose life is saved by treatment. The story oversimplifies the methods used by researchers, saying they compared "women who were similar in most ways, except that one group received mammograms and the other didn't," without explaining that this was not a randomized trial where some women were assigned to screening and others weren't, but rather an observational study that looked at data on women during a 9-year period when Norway phased in mammography region by region. The story does alert readers to some of the limitations of the study: one, that a longer follow-up period might have shown more benefit to screening and, two, that the researchers had no information on whether any of the women received mammograms outside of the national screening program. It's a tossup for us to grade and, as we do in most such cases, we'll give the story the benefit of the doubt. Claim: Mammogram benefits more modest than doctors thought
answer:
However, it does not explain to readers what is new or different about this study compared to earlier reports. Also, the final word in the story goes to an expert who touts benefits of mammography screening that clash with what was seen in this study. By comparing this story with, for example, the Philadelphia Inquirer and WebMD stories, you see how some of the gaps we've identified were addressed by competitors, giving readers a more complete and helpful story.

question:
Paragraph: Dr. David Hager is a part of the teaching staff of the University of Kentucky College of Medicine and has developed a reputation as an expert on gynecologic infections. This eRumor was circulated before Dr. Hager actually became a member of the committee. He is now a part of the panel, although he did not become the chairman of it. He is a conservatively oriented physician and is a speaker and author in the Christian community who describes himself as pro-life. He objected to this eRumor saying that he does not know who wrote it and that no one had interviewed him for it and that some of it is not accurate. He says that he does not refuse to prescribe birth control for unmarried patients. He is an advocate of abstinence but for patients who do not make that choice, he is not opposed to birth control prescription. He also says that his opposition to RU-486 was based on his concerns about the safety of the drug. He says RU-486 was approved under an "Accelerated Approval Process" reserved exclusively for anti-AIDS and anti-cancer drugs and an antihypertensive agent. He says that normally the FDA requires one or more than one randomized, controlled trials before approving a drug, which was not done for RU-486. He also says that he does not believe that standard birth control pills are abortifacient and has never written it. He says he co-edited a book that referenced various views about birth control pills but that not all of those views were his own. Regarding his views of how to deal with stress-related disorders in women, he says "I have always offered a holistic approach to therapy. I suggest diet/exercise changes, medications as needed, counseling when required, and meditation/prayer." Last updated 11/30/03 Comments Claim: The eRumor is a protest of the choice of Dr. David Hager to lead the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee. It says he is a religious pro-life physician who refuses to prescribe contraceptives to unmarried women and opposes the use of RU-486, the pill that ends a pregnancy.
answer:
Dr. David Hager nominated for FDA panel.