Detailed Instructions: 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.
See one example below:
Problem: 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: 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.

Problem: Paragraph: Airlines and hotel chains say it is too early to tell if the Zika epidemic is affecting bookings. But some "babymooners" - parents-to-be taking last-hurrah vacations - have backed out of trips and changed itineraries. "There's been a lot of cancellations," said Lauren Machowsky, a travel advisor at New York-based SmartFlyer. "Some people are freaked out." Machowsky, who is herself expecting a child and called off a planned vacation to Anguilla, said she is redirecting a lot of people to Florida and pointing clients to travel warnings issued by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). "I refer them to the CDC website and say, 'Listen, this is my experience. I was going away and had to cancel,'" Machowsky said. On Monday, the World Health Organization declared the Zika outbreak an emergency because of evidence that the mosquito-borne virus is linked to a spike in birth defects in Brazil. The current outbreak has spread to at least 25 countries and territories, most of them in the Americas. The CDC has advised pregnant women to avoid travel to areas with an active Zika outbreak. Parenting website babycenter.com asked pregnant readers with plans to travel to Zika-affected areas if they would change course. About half of 1,118 respondents said they planned to cancel, and 27 percent said they were keeping their plans. The rest were undecided. New Hampshire-based travel agent Darcy Allen, of Travel by Darcy, said she's had a handful of cancellations and estimated 80 percent of her babymoon clients are avoiding Mexico. "It's certainly a factor in deciding where they want to go," said Allen. In another sign of Zika's impact on travelers, sales of trip cancellation insurance have surged among people booking Latin American vacations, RoamRight, a top U.S. provider, told Reuters on Monday. Newlyweds hoping to start a family also are cautiously evaluating honeymoon options, said New Jersey-based Mindy Gilbert of My Vacation Lady. "I have been asking personal questions like, 'Are you pregnant? Do you plan on conceiving,' - something I've never asked before," she said. One couple that had hoped to spend their honeymoon in Mexico's Riviera Maya is now waiting to see how the virus situation develops, she said. Several travel agents said they were steering clients toward Europe and Hawaii. Ilonka Molijn, founder of Netherlands-based BabyMoon Travel, said visiting Mexico and the Caribbean was not a huge draw for her clients before the Zika outbreak, but now "there isn't any interest in it at all." Concerns are extending beyond babymooners and honeymooners. Florida-based Travel Planners Inc owner Marieanne Syverson said 70 percent of her clients in January - only a small portion of whom were honeymooners - had asked about Zika. A few are rethinking their plans, she said, but she's had no cancellations. "People are considering different destinations, absolutely," she said. "Those who were thinking of Puerto Rico or Brazil for Carnival and the Olympics are thinking maybe they shouldn't go there." Claim: Expectant couples avoiding Latin America, other Zika hotspots.
Solution:
Expectant couples planning "babymoon" vacations are increasingly steering clear of Latin America and the Caribbean amid warnings about a suspected link between a Zika virus outbreak in the region and birth defects, travel agents say.