You will be given a definition of a task first, then an example. Follow the example to solve a new instance of the task.
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.

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.
Why? 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.

New input: Paragraph: The commission released its second report to lawmakers Friday, 10 months after an initial report urged immediate improvements to school safety following killings of 17 people at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School last year. Lawmakers responded to the commission's first set of recommendations by enacting a package of school-safety measures, including raising the legal age for gun purchases, requiring armed security officers on every campus and adopting a "red flag" law. "The needle has moved. We're in a better place than we were 20 months ago," Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri, who chairs the commission, said in an interview. "But we're still not in the place where we want to be in many places in Florida, and there's more work to be done." The 389-page document released Friday by the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Commission advocates new laws that would allow authorities to act more quickly against threats of violence, including making it a felony to verbally threaten a mass shooting. While the commission's first report, released in January, focused on the suspect, Nikolas Cruz, and some of the specifics that led to the massacre, this one provides a broader analysis of systemic issues that the commission wants addressed. Key among them, according to the commission, is mental health. Among its findings: Florida's mental health system is inadequately funded. The commission, noting Florida's rank among the lowest of any state in per-capita mental health funding, recommended that the Legislature authorize more spending on mental health programs. The commission, however, did not suggest a specific amount and instead recommended an assessment of how mental health resources are being deployed. Gualtieri said the mishmash of mental health services, limited as they currently are, may sometimes prevent children with behavioral problems from getting the help they need. The commission wants better coordination of services, including better information sharing, to help identify trouble before exploding into harmful situations. The commission also wants to empower judges to intervene whenever they identify a child who might benefit from mental health treatment. In his message prefacing the report, Gualtieri said complacency and noncompliance even resistance to the new laws undermine the work being done to make schools safer. "Complacency is driven, at least in part, by the erroneous notion that a school shooting will not 'happen here'," he wrote. "Everyone needs to proceed with a sense of urgency to make Florida's schools as safe as possible because there will be another K-12 active assailant attack in this country," Gualtieri said. "The only questions are when and where." Claim: Parkland commission urges boost in mental health funding.
Solution:
A commission investigating the Parkland school shooting is calling for improved mental health services, including more funding, to help schoolchildren deal with the stresses in their lives a strategy the commission hopes will help prevent more violence from erupting at other Florida campuses.