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.
One 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
Solution is here: 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.
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.

Now, solve this: Paragraph: The Coast Guard prohibits vessels from getting closer than 984 feet (300 meters) from where Kilauea volcano's lava oozes into the sea. The agency had been allowing experienced boat operators to apply for a special license to get closer up to 164 feet (50 meters), but it stopped allowing those exceptions Monday morning. A woman in her 20s was transported to Honolulu in serious condition with a broken thigh bone. The other 22 people injured were treated for minor burns and scrapes, including 12 who were treated at a hospital in Hilo. Moku Nui Lava Tours Captain Kanoa Jones, whose boat was not involved in Monday's incident at Kilauea volcano, said not running the tours would only withhold income from local restaurants and other businesses dependent on tourism, he said. "If we stop operating, it not only hurts us, it hurts the community," Jones said. The Coast Guard, state and local officials were investigating what happened. Coast Guard spokesman Petty Officer 3rd Class Matthew West said the agency can't say whether it will change its safety zone rules until it finishes its investigation. The county strictly limits access to the lava on land for safety reasons, making boat and helicopter tours the only options people have to witness volcanic spectacle in person. The ocean and aerial tours each cost about $250. The restrictions have deterred many travelers from visiting the Big Island in general, and Puna near the volcano in particular. Shane Turpin, the owner and captain of the vessel that was hit, said he never saw the explosion. He and his tour group had been in the area for about 20 minutes making passes of the ocean entry about 500 yards which is the length of five football fields offshore, Turpin said. He didn't observe "any major explosions," so he navigated his vessel closer, to about 250 yards (228 meters) away from the lava. "As we were exiting the zone, all of a sudden everything around us exploded," he said. "It was everywhere." The U.S. Geological Survey says explosions of varying sizes occur whenever 2,000-degree (1,093-degree Celsius) lava enters much colder seawater. Monday's large blast may have been amplified by the relatively shallow water at the point where the lava entered the sea. That's because explosions occur much closer to the surface in such spots. In contrast, lava that entered the ocean in 2016 hit a steep slope and quickly fell to deeper parts of the sea, said Janet Babb, a geologist with the U.S. Geological Survey. The volcano has also been pumping more lava into the water now compared to past years, Babb said. Kilauea is sending to the sea as much as 26 times the amount of lava per second than it did during the 2016-17 eruption. Officials have warned of the danger of getting close to lava entering the ocean, saying the interaction can create clouds of acid and fine glass. Despite the hazards, several companies operate such tours. The Coast Guard said tour vessels have operated in the area going back at least 20 years. The molten rock is coming from the Kilauea volcano, which has been erupting continuously for the past 35 years. In May, its eruption entered a new phase when it began spurting lava through newly formed fissures in a residential neighborhood. It has destroyed more than 700 homes since then. But the only serious injury over the past two months was to a man who was hit by flying lava that broke his leg. Captain Jones said an evening boat tour left for the ocean-entry site and it was business as usual. "It is Mother Nature," Jones said. "You never know." Claim: Hawaii lava boat tours continue after explosion, injuries.
Solution:
Hawaii tour boat operators plan to continue taking visitors to see lava, but will follow the Coast Guard's revised policy and stay farther away after an explosion caused molten rock to barrel through the roof of a vessel, injuring 23 people.