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: Muskegon resident Pamela Anderson said that after hearing about numerous cases, she started a Facebook group about cancer deaths among people who live or have lived near the Butterworth landfill site in Grand Rapids. They plan to bring up the issue at a city commission meeting this week, the Grand Rapids Press reported . The group recently met with Kent County Health Department epidemiologist Brian Hartl, who advised them to collect more information on cancer rates in the area. "If there are rare forms of cancer, or cancers we're seeing affect a young population, it might trigger further investigation," Hartl said. But he cautioned that cancer is difficult to study, and that it can take years and multiple triggers to emerge. "Especially in small areas like a neighborhood or a block, it makes it challenging to connect it to environmental exposure," Hartl said. "Most cancers are due to lifestyle choices, not environmental factors." The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that theoretical cancer and health risks from the landfill exist, but that they're limited to regular direct contact with the waste over several decades. The agency conducted a site cleanup in 1999, and removed material contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyl and chromium. The EPA said there is no current exposure at the site. "A lot of those kids in the '60s and '70s used to play in the dump," said Shane Smith, who grew up down the street from Anderson in the Indiana Avenue neighborhood. "It was just starting to alarm to us, because my dad's entire generation passed away from cancer." Anderson said she's having the soil tested for contaminants at a home in the same neighborhood. ___ Information from: The Grand Rapids Press, http://www.mlive.com/grand-rapids Claim: Residents investigate cancer rates near Michigan landfill.

Answer: A group of residents is investigating cancer rates in a western Michigan neighborhood that's near a contaminated landfill classified as a Superfund site.

Question: Paragraph: "This is the only of the five stories to actually put a dollar figure on the classes. ""Even the cost of a class, which can top $50 a month, is modest compared with the cost of many medications. And unlike drugs, tai chi had no harmful side effects, she says."" Unlike the AP story, which made the mistake of saying that ""symptoms improved significantly for the tai chi group and little for the others,"" this story, at least, presents some numbers. The trouble is, those numbers are in relative terms. So, instead of saying that three months after the classes ended, 27 patients who took tai chi classes felt better and 17 who tried other therapies also felt better, it presents the difference as 82% versus 53%. That seems more dramatic. Absolute data would be more meaningful. Why make the reader do the math? The story is one of the few stories that covered this study to actually point out that""unlike drugs, tai chi had no harmful side effects."" In the end, because of the comments from Gloria Yeh, the story puts the appropriate caveats on the findings. This sentence does a great job of summarizing some of the problems with the study: ""Yeh notes that researchers don't know which aspects of tai chi were most helpful: the exercise, deep breathing, relaxation exercise, meeting new friends or learning from a charismatic teacher."" This story actually spends too little time talking about the condition itself. The AP devoted a whole paragraph in an eight paragaph story to the condition, and the LA Times led its piece by describing the disease. USAToday instead went with a very nice description of tai chi, putting the emphasis on the beauty and simiplicity of the therapy rather than the difficulty clinicians have had correctly diagnosing and treating fibromyalgia. This is the only story to include the phrase ""white crane spreads its wings"" or anything like that. The story doesn't actually quote any of the authors and instead quotes two outside experts, one of whom wrote an accompanying editorial. It fails to fully attribute the comments made by ""Callahan."" It appears that the writer meansLeigh F. Callahan, who just completed a study of tai chi for arthritis and was quoted by other reporters. (How did this slip through copy editing? Was this a slip-up only in the online version?) But we can't give credit to an independent source that the story doesn't adequately identify. The story does not compare the therapy to existing alternatives or even discuss existing alternatives, aside from a passingreference at the very end to medications. This is the only one of the five stories to note that ""A study in 2007 from the National Institutes of Health found that 2.3 million American adults had used tai chi in the past year."" This doesn't tell you whether tai chi classes areas readilyavailable in Oklahoma as they are in New Mexico, but it does give you a sense of how popular they are. It is unclear from this story whether tai chi has been studied before for other conditions. It has. It also is unclear what fibromyalgia patients now do for therapy. The LATimes, for example, pointed out that patients in the study stopped taking drugs for treatment, for example. The story does not rely on a news release." Claim: Tai chi may ease fibromyalgia pain

Answer: "The story does two things better than all the other stories. It puts a dollar figure to the cost of tai chi therapy, and it gives people a better sense of how popular tai chi is. It could have done a better job evaluating the evidence and providing some absolute numbers to help readers decide how seriously to take these results. Why not just give the absolute numbers? How many out of how many? Why make the reader do the math? ""79% of tai chi participants said their symptoms had improved, compared with 39% of those in the educational classEven three months after the classes ended, 82% of tai chi students still felt better, compared with 53% of the comparison group."" Sure, the denominators are in the story but we shouldn't need to pull out the calculator to figure out 79% of x, vs. 39% of x."

Question: Paragraph: Officials in energy-friendly Weld County say the law gives the county complete control over the location of new wells in unincorporated areas. That could challenge the state's attempts to tighten regulations. Just across the county line in Longmont, environmental activists are trying to use the same statute to revive the city's ban on hydraulic fracturing, which the courts threw out under the previous laws. Because fracking is standard practice in the area, the ban would essentially prohibit all drilling. Democratic Gov. Jared Polis signed the bill into law on April 16. In addition to switching the state's top priority to public health and the environment, it gives cities and counties new powers to regulate the drilling locations. The Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission is in the early stages of rewriting its rules to comply with the law referred to as Senate Bill 181 and several counties are looking at drafting their own regulations. It's too early to measure the impacts, but the industry is clearly concerned. The Colorado Oil and Gas Association invited Polis to speak Wednesday at a session titled "Can You Still Drill for Oil in a Blue State?" Polis told the audience that was a silly question. He said international markets and overseas instability have more impact on the industry than state regulations. "Energy is not inherently political, it's inherently economic," he said. Dan Haley, president of the Oil and Gas Association, asked Polis several times to respond to industry concerns about its standing in the state. The governor eventually replied he values industry jobs but added that they're part of a diverse state economy. Colorado ranks fifth in the nation for crude oil production and sixth in natural gas, and much of that is concentrated in Weld County northeast of Denver. Weld County Commissioner Barbara Kirkmeyer, a fierce defender of the industry, argued hard against the new bill and led a short-lived campaign to overturn it after it became law. Now she maintains the bill, coupled with older statutes on local government powers, gives counties like hers the final word on land-use decisions that affect the industry in areas outside cities. "Basically what S.B. 181 said is the state no longer has land use authority," she said in an interview. Weld County established an oil and gas department and adopted its own rules, but Kirkmeyer said energy companies won't have free rein to drill wherever they want. The county rules are similar to ones the state had before the new law was passed, she said. The goal is to ensure a common-sense approach to regulating oil and gas companies, Kirkmeyer said. "We are willing to work with them for responsible energy development in our county," she said. Democratic Senate Majority Leader Stephen Fenberg, a sponsor of Senate Bill 181, disputed Kirkmeyer's interpretation of the law. The intent was to give both the state and local governments a say in regulating the surface impacts of oil and gas, and to allow cities and counties to enact stricter rules than the state's, but not more lenient ones, he said. "I would argue that the Weld County commissioners know this," he said, accusing them of "political theater." Polis said Wednesday that state officials are working on a written agreement with Weld County officials but offered no details. Environmental groups Colorado Rising and Our Longmont say the new law clears the way for Longmont and other local governments to ban oil and gas drilling. Longmont voters approved a fracking ban in 2012, but the Colorado Supreme Court overturned it in 2016, saying only the state could regulate the industry under the laws in force at the time. Senate Bill 181 "flips the script" on state and local control, said Democratic state Rep. Jonathan Singer of Longmont, who supports the ban. "The state does not take precedence over what local governments want to do when it comes to protecting our health and safety," he said. The two environmental groups asked the courts to restore the ban earlier this month. The case is pending. Fenberg said the law doesn't specifically allow or prohibit local drilling bans. But he said they could open a city or a county to damage claims from mineral rights owners who can't access their underground oil and gas reserves. If the goal is to protect public health and safety, strong local regulations are a better option than a ban, he said. ___ Follow Dan Elliott at http://twitter.com/DanElliottAP . Claim: Oil and gas defenders, critics test Colorado's new law.

Answer:
The petroleum industry's defenders and critics are testing the limits of a new Colorado law that flips the state's priorities from producing energy to protecting the public.