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: Not applicable. The cost of olive oil is not in question. The story only cited a 41% lower risk of stroke but didn't give the actual numbers of how many versus how many in the different groups. That may give an inflated sense of benefit or risk reduction. Not applicable. Unlike the LA Times piece, WebMD rurns to an editorial writer and two other independent experts to evaluate the evidence. It mentioned that this was an observational study but didn't explicitly define that or why that's a potential limitation. No disease-mongering of stroke in the story. Great sourcing with 3 independent voices besides the study authors. The story ends, appropriately, with this: "Keeping blood pressure controlled, not smoking, exercising regularly, and eating a healthy diet that is low in salt and rich in fruits and vegetables can also help reduce stroke risk." Not applicable. The availability of olive oil is not in question. The relative novelty of the study's focus was clear in the story. It's clear that the story did not rely on a news release. Claim: Olive Oil Linked to Reduced Stroke Risk
[A]: An added nice touch was the discussion of the possible etiology of the olive oil effect (e.g., inflammation). Overall, a solid summary. When an observational study points to a statistical association between one factor and one outcome, it is important to explain why that doesn't necessarily mean that one factor caused that one outcome. This story did a better job of that than its LA Times competition.

[Q]: Paragraph: Hampden County Sheriff Nick Cocchi has designated a wing of his jail for the treatment of men civilly committed for substance abuse reasons. It's the only facility in western Massachusetts housing the men, and just one of three in the entire state for men. While some are trying to end the practice, Cocchi and his supporters including local mayors and lawmakers say the jail's year-old Stonybrook Stabilization and Treatment Centers is key to curbing the opioid problem in the county, which includes the former manufacturing cities of Springfield and Holyoke. Fatal overdoses surged more than 80% in Hampden County from 2017 to 2018 even as they declined statewide for the second straight year in 2018, according to state data. "People coming into our program are angry, violent and sick," Cocchi said as he and other officials celebrated the program's anniversary earlier this week. "They are at the end of the road, and their families have recognized that if they don't intervene, they might not survive." But the civil rights group Prisoners' Legal Services of Massachusetts has sued the state in an effort to end the use of jails and prisons for forcibly treating men with addiction. The class action lawsuit was filed in March on behalf of 10 men who complained of poor conditions and mistreatment at another civil commitment program run out of a state Department of Corrections prison. A state commission has also recently recommended ending the practice of sending civilly committed men to jails and prisons, as the state did for women three years ago, following a similar lawsuit. Women are now sent to substance abuse treatment facilities run or contracted by public health agencies, as most civilly committed persons are in other states. "This should not be a choice between prison or nothing," said Bonnie Tenneriello, a staff attorney with Prisoners' Legal Services. "Why are we giving money to a sheriff to run treatment programs rather than funding civilian treatment?" Under state law, family members can ask a judge to order their relatives into treatment if they're unwilling to go voluntarily and are deemed a danger to themselves or others. At least 35 states have such civil commitment laws, but Massachusetts is just one of a handful where it's widely used, The Associated Press found last year. About 9,950 civil commitments requests were filed in state courts in the budget year that ended June 30. That's down from more than 10,770 the prior year but up significantly from the 6,105 in fiscal year 2016 and the under 3,000 in fiscal year 2006, according to state data. Tenneriello and other opponents say forcing people into jails and prisons for treatment only reinforces the stigma around addiction. And studies, including the state's own research , also suggest forced treatment largely doesn't work and could raise the danger of overdose for those who relapse after treatment. Like the state corrections-run civil commitment facility, Hampden County's program takes place, at least initially, behind the razor wire of its secure jail campus. Civilly committed men are also similarly segregated from the regular inmate population but required to wear corrections-issued uniforms and follow certain corrections protocols. But, in an effort to make the program feel less institutional, cell doors remain largely unlocked and program participants aren't handcuffed, Cocchi and some recently released patients said. "Yes, it's a jail setting. There are corrections officers walking around," said Keith Molyneux, a 40-year-old recovering from heroin addiction who was among the first to complete the program last year. "But they're more committed to helping you here than to actually being a correctional officer. You definitely feel like they're there to help." After a few weeks of detoxing at the jail, most are eventually transferred to a less secure facility located off-campus in a converted nursing home. There, the men can wear civilian clothes and are housed in rooms that are larger and more dorm-like. Early results of the approach which also includes health care professionals administering addiction treatment medications and leading counselling sessions are encouraging, Cocchi said. Since opening last May, more than 850 men have gone through the program, staying 47 days, on average weeks longer than they do at the state's other two facilities. The longer stays increase the odds that the men will stay sober, Cocchi said. So far, less than 5% have had to be recommitted, though two fatally overdosed after leaving the program. Lawmakers, meanwhile, have committed $1 million to the program in the current state budget, proving the effort has strong support, despite its detractors, he said. "Let us continue doing what we're doing," Cocchi said. "No one else is doing this work out here, but we're doing it, and we're doing it well. Why shouldn't we be applauded and supported?" ___ Follow Philip Marcelo at twitter.com/philmarcelo. ___ This story has been corrected to identify the Hampden County sheriff as Nick Cocchi, not Thomas Cocchi. Claim: Region hit hard by opioids embraces jail-based treatment.
[A]: As western Massachusetts struggles with a dramatic spike in fatal overdoses, officials are embracing a controversial solution: sending men who have not committed any crimes to jails and prisons for court-ordered addiction treatment.

[Q]: Paragraph: "Fox started its wall-to-wall coverage of Super Bowl XLVIII on Fox News Sunday, with host Chris Wallace interviewing NFL commissioner Roger Goodell live from MetLife Stadium. Goodell talked about the weather, and how it appears conditions will be fine for the Denver Broncos and the Seattle Seahawks. He addressed a proposal to eliminate extra points, saying they're almost automatic (as we previously reported, they are). And he discussed the health of NFL players amid concern that the sport is too violent. Goodell offered a defense that we hadn't heard before. ""Our players are living, on average, longer than the average male,"" Goodell said. After serious talk about concussions in the NFL and some prominent suicides in the sport, we wondered about Goodell's claim. It's accurate, it turns out, but requires some additional explanation. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), a governmentresearch agency within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, studied the mortality rates of former NFL football players in a report released in 2012. The study included nearly all NFL players who played in the league for five or more years from 1959 to 1988 -- a pool of 3,439 men. Researchers said based on current mortality rates, they expected 625 players to be deceased. But by the end of 2007, only 334 were. ""We found the players in our study had a much lower rate of death overall compared to men in the general population,"" researchers wrote to the NFL players in a March 2012 letter. ""This means that, on average, NFL players are actually living longer than men in the general population."" The former NFL players also had lower rates of heart disease and cancer compared to average males, the report found. There are a few important caveats to point out. NFL players aren't like your average male in a number of ways. They are professional athletes, many of whom might be wealthy, and they are likely tohave access to quality health care. The report also raised red flags. Researchers found that men who were considered obese, those with a Body Mass Index of 30 or more when they played, had twice the risk of death from heart disease than other players. African-American players also had a higher heart disease risk than Caucasian players, the report found. Another important note: Because the study excludes modern-day players, it fails to account for the changing physique of today's football player. Of the 3,439 men in the NIOSH study, only 1 percent had a Body Mass Index of 35 or more when they played, and 33 percent had a Body Mass Index between 30 and 35. Today's NFL players are much bigger. To create an example, we looked at the current 53-man roster of the Denver Broncos and calculated each player's Body Mass Index using a calculator from the National Institutes of Health. Of 53 Broncos players, 13 have a Body Index above 35 (24.5 percent) and another 14 have a Body Mass Index between 30 and 35 (26.4 percent). That's an important distinction that may affect the results of future studies. Our ruling Goodell said that NFL ""players are living, on average, longer than the average male."" His claim is backed up by a government study that examined former NFL players who played from 1959 to 1988. But the study, which was released in 2012, did conclude that bigger players had an increased risk of dying from heart disease and did not evaluate more modern-day players. Modern-day players are bigger." Claim: "NFL ""players are living, on average, longer than the average male."
[A]:
Goodell said that NFL "players are living, on average, longer than the average male." His claim is backed up by a government study that examined former NFL players who played from 1959 to 1988. But the study, which was released in 2012, did conclude that bigger players had an increased risk of dying from heart disease and did not evaluate more modern-day players. Modern-day players are bigger.