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: "The story states that US sales for the product hit $99 million in 2008. But it never explained the cost to the individual. The study ""found no effect,"" the story states succinctly. The story said the researchers found the product to be safe. But it could have mentioned that the National Center for Complementary & Alternative Medicine states ""Side effects of ginkgo may include headache, nausea, gastrointestinal upset, diarrhea, dizziness, or allergic skin reactions. More severe allergic reactions have occasionally been reported."" Although the discussion was brief, it did refer to the study as ""properly designed"" and ""placebo controlled."" There was no disease-mongering of dementia or cognitive decline. 3 short quotes with different perspectives, presented in balance. In a story based on a study that pokes holes in some peoples' beliefs about a product to prevent cognitive decline, there could have been at least one line about other research into cognitive decline. The widespread use of the product is clear in the story. The story states that the product has been in use for more than 500 years. We can't be sure of the extent to which the story was influenced by a news release. it apparently did lift one quote from a news release/statement." Claim: Study: Ginkgo biloba has no effect on Alzheimer's, dementia
In fewer words than its HealthDay competitor (404 words vs. 740), this story did a slightly better job on providing context and balance. Americans spend about $100 million a year on this stuff.

Paragraph: Modi has repeatedly called for greater use of India's health remedies and exercises, part of a push to promote traditional learning. During his first address at the United Nations in September, he encouraged more people to take up yoga and called for an International Yoga Day. "This is our system and it has not received enough prominence. We will take it to the masses," said Shripad Naik, who took charge of the ministry on Tuesday. The formation of the ministry comes days after the government unveiled plans to set up a regulator for traditional drugs. India wants to expand its presence in the estimated $100 billion global market for alternative medicine. Ayurvedic and other types of traditional medicine, called unani and siddha, are popular in smaller towns, and yoga has a huge following across India and in the West. Homeopathy also finds wide acceptance in India. Use of traditional medicines is also promoted by country's most popular yoga guru, Swami Ramdev. He sells ayurvedic medicines and holds yoga camps attended by thousands in India and abroad. But critics often question the effectiveness of traditional remedies over modern medicine. Modi said on Sunday ayurveda and mainstream drugs were not mutually exclusive. "There is a need for larger awareness in ayurveda. It can't be limited to a doctor only. Our ancestors made good health a part of life," he said. The success of the new ministry would depend on additional budgetary allocation, a government official told Reuters. The government allocated 10.69 billion rupees ($174 million) to develop and promote traditional health systems in the 2014-15 financial year. "We have not got the attention ... We are looking for a steep rise in our funding for next year," said the official, who declined to be identified because of the sensitivity of the matter. Claim: India gets minister for yoga and traditional medicine.
India has set up a ministry to promote alternative therapies such as yoga and traditional ayurveda medicine, as Prime Minister Narendra Modi embarks on a mission to raise awareness and the appeal of home-grown health treatments.

Paragraph: "When President Obama announced that Central Intelligence Agency Director Leon Panetta would replace Robert Gates as Defense secretary, Rep. Marcy Kaptur took the the pages of ""Politico"" to offer him advice. In suggesting that the Defense Department needs to cut back on its use of petroleum products, the Toledo Democrat said: ""Even before the oil companies and Wall Street speculators drove up the price of gasoline close to $4 a gallon, the landed cost of a gallon delivered to the front lines for our troops in Afghanistan cost more than $400."" PolitiFact Ohio already thought gas prices in Ohio were outrageous, but the idea of spending $400 per gallon boggles the mind. So we decided to look into the claim by Kaptur, a member of the House Appropriations subcommittee that funds the Pentagon. We started with Kaptur's office. Her staff said she gleaned her information from testimony delivered to her subcommittee. A 2009 report in The Hill, a Washington publication, recounted some of that testimony. The Pentagon comptroller's office gave appropriators that statistic to explain the high cost of keeping troops in Afghanistan. It factors in the transportation and security costs of transporting the fuel into areas with a lack of infrastructure, challenging geography and increased roadside bomb attacks. ""It turns out that when you factor in the cost of transportation to a coastal facility in Pakistan, or airlifting it to Kandahar - and then you add the cost of putting it in a truck, guarding it, delivering it to the battlefield, and then transferring that one gallon into a piece of equipment that needs it - in extreme cases that gallon of gasoline could cost up to $400,"" Navy Secretary Ray Mabus told a 2009 Naval Energy Forumin Virginia. One U.S. Army official has said the ""fully burdened"" cost of transporting fuel into remote areas can be as high as $1,000 per gallon. ""In some places you have to fly it in by plane or by helicopter and drop off bladders of fuel,"" Kevin T. Geiss, program director for energy and partnerships in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Installations and Environment told Army News Service. ""Those costs can be an additional $20, $40 or even $200 a gallon."" High fuel costs in military battlegrounds predate U.S. military actions in Iraq and Afghanistan. A May 2001 Defense Science Board report cites the true cost of military fuel at ""$17.50 per gallon for USAF worldwide tanker-delivered fuel, and hundreds of dollars per gallon for Army forces deep into the battlespace."" Retired Army Brigadier General Steven M. Anderson, who handled military logistics operations for Gen. David Petraeus in Iraq during 2006 and 2007, offers a slightly different picture -- that the cost of bringing gasoline to troops in Afghanistan actually works out to be at least $30 per gallon, and is possibly as high in the mid-40s. He told a Capitol Hill Briefing on fuel convoys in Afghanistan and Iraq that it cost about $13.88 per gallon to transport a gallon of gas to troops in Iraq when he worked there in 2007, and the amount has risen since then to $17.44 cents per gallon. He explained that it's more expensive to bring gas to Afghanistan because ""Iraq is a land of six lane highways from one end to the other"" while ""Afghanistan is perhaps the most isolated country in the entire world."" He said the $400 per gallon figure for gas that others have cited for Afghanistan applies only when fuel must be brought by aircraft to the most remote areas. ""If we're flying water up there, it's $400 per gallon, or toothpaste or whatever,"" Anderson said. ""Anything that flies is expensive."" Retired Air Force Lt. General Norman R. Seip, who spoke at the same event, described the $400 per gallon cost as a ""worst case scenario,"" that accounts for a tanker providing airborne refueling to a cargo plane. He said the lower figures are more reasonable. So where does that leave Kaptur's statement? Numerous sources have said it can cost as much as $400 per gallon to provide gas for troops in Afghanistan. That the statistic seems to be a high end number is a piece of information that provides clarification." Claim: A gallon (of gasoline) delivered to the front lines for our troops in Afghanistan cost more than $400.
Rep. Marcy Kaptur says gasoline for troops in Afghanistan costs $400 a gallon