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: "Of more than 300 men and women who had the surgery, a third stopped playing sports entirely and 68 who were still active said they didn't play as well as before, researchers reported in the American Journal of Sports Medicine. The anterior cruciate ligament, or ACL, is the ligament inside the knee that helps keep the joint stable. About 150,000 ACL injuries occur each year in the United States. "Less than 50 percent of the study sample had returned to playing sport at their preinjury level or returned to participating in competitive sport when surveyed at 2 to 7 years after ACL reconstruction surgery," wrote Clare Ardern at La Trobe University in Victoria, Australia, who led the study. Ardern and her colleagues followed more than 300 men and women for two to seven years. Participants had either played Australian-rules football, basketball, netball or soccer before their surgeries. At 39 months post-surgery, 208 out of the 314 people who had the operation were still playing a sport, the researchers said. Of those 208, 68 said they played at a lower level than before their injury and 140 said they played about the same as before their injury. The remaining 106 participants either were not playing sports or did not complete the entire study. "Although almost all people returned to playing some form of sport, they did not play continuously for many years after their surgery," Ardern told Reuters Health in an email. She also noted there may be other reasons why people stopped playing sports, such as fear of getting injured again or less confidence in performing. Of the 196 people who played competitive sports before their injury, 91 returned to their competitive sport. "This is a big injury," said Edward McDevitt, a spokesman for the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, who was not part of the study. "Many athletes who choose surgery have a long and difficult road to face. If you're not willing to go through it, then you might be better off just getting a brace." He added that while knee surgery does allow people to return to their sport, they couldn't perform as well as doctors might wish. People who tear the ACL can either opt for physical therapy and surgery or just physical therapy alone. "Some people find that they are able to function well without surgery, provided they have adequate leg strength to support the injured knee," Ardern said. "Other alternatives may be to avoid sports involving direction changes, jumping and landing or activities that make the knee feel unstable, or use knee braces and supports." McDevitt speculates that after surgery, some athletes may not have the same range of motion, preventing them from playing as before. ""I tell my patients, 'I can't make you like before, I'm not God. But I'll do the best I can to restore you back to the way you were,'"" he added. SOURCE: bit.ly/pWId18" Claim: After knee repair, half can't play sports the same.

Answer: After knee reconstruction surgery, half of people who played sports both competitively and just for fun don't perform as well as they used to, according to an Australian study.

Question: Paragraph: The Texas woman's name is Cathy Flanders and she has been on a crusade to bring the problem of indoor pollution from candles to the forefront. She has filed a lawsuit against the store that sold her candles which she says resulted in toxic levels of lead in her home and with serious medical consequences on her family. Regardless of the merits of her case, it is true that indoor pollution from certain kinds of candles is becoming a focus of research and is one of the hot topics right now among professionals concerned with health issues in the home. Not all the researchers are focused on lead and there are some who say they feel the danger from lead is reduced by the fact that U.S. candle makers have not used lead in candles for more than 25 years. There is increased focus on what researchers say is a significant contribution of candles to soot residue in buildings, more than has previously been realized, and to what extent that soot can contribute to health problems. While that is being studied, pollution experts recommend choosing candles from U.S. manufacturers that are made of hard wax, have low aromatic properties, burn with a low, even flame and with wicks that burn down evenly with the rest of the candle. They also recommend keeping burning candles out of drafts and not allowing an extinguished candle to continue emitting smoke. For more information: CNN Article about Cathy Flanders Article about Black Soot in the Home from the Environmental Illness Society of Canada Comments Claim: An email is making the rounds that talks about a woman in Texas whose family has experienced a variety of health problems which she says are due to the lead content of some candles. The email warns that burning candles in the home can lead to health problems.

Answer: Beware of potential pollution from certain candles

Question: Paragraph: Hooray! Unlike the WebMD story, this story includes cost information. "The price for IBS treatment hasn't been determined, he said. But the price listed at Drugstore.com suggests it's not cheap, with a two-week supply of the dosage used in the study costing $910, or about $21 a pill." By providing the price and actually showing readers (and other reporters) the source for the price, the story puts the antibiotic treatment into perspective and goes part of the way toward helping readers judge how cost-effective this treatment may be. Unlike the WebMD story, which took too long to present any of the data, this story attempts to quantify the benefits in the second sentence. "In two large studies, 41 percent of the patients who took the antibiotic rifaximin said their symptoms substantially improved, compared to 32 percent of those who got fake pills. Their relief lasted for up to 10 weeks." The story makes no mention of harms other than antibiotic resistance. Instead, the story says the drug "also been safely used elsewhere for more than two decades." But readers should be told explicitly what side effects were found in the study. The story adequately addresses the number of patients studied, the duration of study and the study endpoints. The story does not engage in disease-mongering. It says that IBS is "a poorly understood and painful condition that especially afflicts younger women" and says that IBS affect as many as 1 in 5 Americans." Better than the WebMD story on this count as well, AP explains that the non-constipation form of IBS is "the most common form." The only researchers quoted in the story are researchers who do drug-company-funded research on IBS drugs. The lead author is identified this way: "Dr. Mark Pimentel, of Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles," and only much later does it say, "The studies were paid for by the Salix, based in Raleigh, N.C. Some of the researchers were Salix employees and others had received consulting and other fees from the company. Cedars-Sinai holds a patent on the use of rifaximin for irritable bowel syndrome." The story should have said clearly, as the WebMD story did, that Pimentel serves as a Salix consultant and sits on its scientific advisory board. The story also quotes Dr. Jan Tack, "ofthe University of Leuven in Belgium." It makes no mention of the detail noted in the WebMD story: that Tack has worked as a scientific advisor to companies evaluating IBS treatments. The final quarter of the story is devoted toAmy McMahon, "who developed the disorder about four years ago." It says, "She tried a variety of treatments, changed her diet, and saw a number of specialists before Pimentel prescribed the antibiotic about a year later. "I felt remarkably better" after one treatment, said McMahon. So here you have a drug-company funded researcher providing a success-story-patient for a quote. The story could have included other patients who saw no relief or no patients at all. This skews the entire perspective of the story. A more representative picture would have been presented by including one of the vast majority who saw no improvement from the antibiotic. Slightly better than the WebMD story. It says, "What causes the disorder has been a mystery; sensitivity to certain foods or stress are among the theories. Patients are typically told to change their diet, reduce stress and take medicines or fiber supplements to ease symptoms." There is no quantitative statement about relative effectiveness of the existing approaches, but they are mentioned and it is clear that symptom reduction is the best that can be offered. The story explains that: "In the U.S., rifaximin is approved for traveler's diarrhea and for a complication of liver disease. Salix Pharmaceuticals, which markets rifaximin under the name Xifaxan in the U.S., is seeking to expand its use to IBS. A decision from the Food and Drug Administration is expected in March, said William Forbes, executive vice president and chief development officer for Salix." Taking predictions from a company exec about when the FDA might act would not result in a good batting average over time. This story, at least, quoted the author of an accompanying editorial saying that he thought the treatment was novel. The story does not rely on a news release. Claim: Antibiotic eases common stomach pain, studies find

Answer:
AP included cost information, and this is a significant factor that should not have been ignored by other stories. At the same time, the lack of independent experts was a flaw. This is underscored byan unrepresentative anecdote from a glowing patient success story, even though the study itself showed that the vast majority of people did not get adequate relief. And the placebo effect alone was significant. Because IBS treatment has been a frustrating experience for so many, even a modest improvement in symptoms that lasts a few months may be worthwhile for some. This appears to be a novel way of treating IBS, and the fact that symptoms improved at all is of interest, even if the duration of the study was short. At $21 a pill, though, one could ask hard questions about how many people are actually going to benefit and whether the treatment is a cost-effective alternative.