TASK DEFINITION: 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.
PROBLEM: Paragraph: The Illinois Department of Veterans Affairs and the Illinois Department of Public Health are reviewing the case of the resident with the flu-like illness. Officials say the resident of the home 312 miles (500 kilometers) southwest of Chicago has received medical treatment and is recovering. Officials say no other cases of the illness contracted by breathing infected water vapor have been identified. Staff members are monitoring residents for respiratory illnesses. Officials have notified residents, staff members, and relations and representatives of residents. The last case of Legionnaires' at Quincy was in 2018. An outbreak that began in 2015 caused the deaths of 13 residents and sickened dozens more. Then-Gov. Bruce Rauner faced withering criticism for not doing enough in response to the crisis. Claim: Legionnaires' case identified at Quincy veterans' home.

SOLUTION: Gov. J.B. Pritzker's administration is investigating a case of Legionnaires' diseases at the veterans' home in Quincy, the site of 13 deaths from the malady starting with a 2015 outbreak.

PROBLEM: Paragraph: There's no discussion of cost, even to mention that statins are relatively inexpensive these days and are mostly generically available. To its credit, the article does mention the cost of a calcium scan. We learn that "anywhere from 50 to 200 healthy people need to take a statin daily to prevent a single heart attack for five years." That's helpful information. It also notes that the observed benefit is less for older patients. The story could have added that even those numbers might disputed by some experts who perceive no meaningful benefit. For example, one review found being on a statin does not help people with low risk for heart disease live longer. The story does a service by highlighting the harms of statins. It explains: "The most common side effect of these drugs is muscle pain, which usually goes away if patients stop taking the medicines. People taking statins are also at a higher risk of developing diabetes, which is harder to reverse." It also mentions the potential for overtreatment with the use of coronary calcium scans. However, we wish it had included absolute numbers. The story says harms are "uncommon," but provides no data to back that up. Rates of adverse effects with statins have been measured at 1 to 10%, which makes them "common" in the definition of the European Medicines Agency. Also noteworthy is that some contend that adverse effects of statins have not been reliably reported. The story doesn't explain the quality of the study, or of studies on which current guidelines are based. We don't explicitly learn that this is a modelling study. In other words, this study consisted mostly of reinterpretations of math, not re-evaluations of real-life patients. The researchers said they were unable to obtain enough data on all possible harms and age-specific data on some harm outcomes, "so the risk thresholds we determined may still be too low." There is no disease-mongering here. This story includes sources that weren't involved in the study. The study's authors reported no conflicts of interest. The story could have acknowledged the influence of pharmaceutical companies in creating guidelines for statin use. The alternative of not taking a statin was the key message here, and that's laudable. However, we have a couple of concerns. First, we learn that "some statins were more effective than others, with atorvastatin (the generic name for Lipitor) being the best of the bunch." However, the story doesn't explain on what basis some statins are "more effective." In fact, some statins may be more effective at lower cholesterol, but the study found that no statin rises above others when it comes to the outcomes that counts most to patients reducing cardiovascular deaths. Also, the story doesn't mention lifestyle interventions diet and exercise. The story makes it clear that statins are widely prescribed. The story states this an attempt to better weigh the benefits and harms of statin use. There was a good range of interviewees with no reliance on a news release Claim: Before Starting A Statin, Talk It Over With Your Doctor

SOLUTION: The story reports on a study that re-assessed who benefits from taking a statin to prevent heart disease, with different risk thresholds based on sex, age group, and statin type. It reports the view that current guidelines "haven't adequately considered" the harms from taking these widely used drugs. The story laudably focuses attention on potential adverse events and a need for balanced decision-making. It also incorporated a variety of sources. In our view, the story could done a better job in discussing costs, the quality of evidence, and alternative strategies to prevent heart disease. Statins are among the most widely prescribed drugs, with their use encouraged under guidelines such as those of the American Heart Association of the American College of Cardiology. However, data isn't crystal clear on the benefits and harms of statins for people who don't already have heart disease. As a result, there's concern that they are being overused. It's laudable that some news organizations including CNN as well as NPR highlighted research that explores these complexities and points out the need for patients and physicians to weigh benefits and harms. The headline of this story is, in our view, a winner.

PROBLEM: Paragraph: Today, gene testing mostly focuses on rare mutations in one or a few genes, like those that cause cystic fibrosis or sickle cell disease, or the BRCA gene responsible for a small fraction of breast cancer. It is less useful for some of the most common diseases, such as heart disease or diabetes, because they are influenced by vast numbers of genes-gone-wrong working together in complicated ways. Monday, researchers reported a new way to measure millions of small genetic variations that add up to cause harm, letting them calculate someone's inherited risk for the most common form of heart disease and four other serious disorders. The potential cardiac impact: They estimated that up to 25 million Americans may have triple the average person's risk for coronary artery disease even if they haven't yet developed warning signs like high cholesterol. "What I foresee is in five years, each person will know this risk number, this 'polygenic risk score,' similar to the way each person knows his or her cholesterol," said Dr. Sekar Kathiresan who led the research team from the Broad Institute, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School. If the approach pans out and doctors adopt it, a bad score wouldn't mean you'd get a disease, just that your genetic makeup increases the chance one more piece of information in deciding care. For example, when the researchers tested the system using a DNA database from Britain, less than 1 percent of people with the lowest risk scores were diagnosed with coronary artery disease, compared to 11 percent of people with the highest risk score. "There are things you can do to lower the risk," Kathiresan said the usual advice about diet, exercise, cholesterol medication and not smoking helps. On the flip side, a low-risk score "doesn't give you a free pass," he added. An unhealthy lifestyle could overwhelm the protection of good genes. The scoring system also can predict an increased risk of Type 2 diabetes, inflammatory bowel disease, breast cancer and an irregular heartbeat called atrial fibrillation, the team reported in the journal Nature Genetics noting that next steps include learning what might likewise lower those risks. It doesn't require the most sophisticated type of genetic testing. Instead, Kathiresan can calculate risk scores for those five diseases eventually maybe more simply by reanalyzing the kind of raw data people receive after sending a cheek swab to companies like 23andMe. A geneticist who specializes in cardiovascular disease, he hopes to open a website where people can send in such data to learn their heart risk, as part of continuing research. Kathiresan and co-author Dr. Amit Khera, a Mass General cardiologist, are co-inventors on a patent application for the system. Other scientists and companies have long sought ways to measure risk from multiple, additive gene effects the "poly" in polygenic and Myriad Genetics has begun selling a type of polygenic test for breast cancer risk. But specialists in heart disease and genetics who weren't involved with the research called the new findings exciting because of their scope. "The results should be eye-opening for cardiologists," said Dr. Charles C. Hong, director of cardiovascular research at the University of Maryland School of Medicine. "The only disappointment is that this score applies only to those with European ancestry, so I wonder if similar scores are in the works for the large majority of the world population that is not white." Hong pointed to a friend who recently died of a massive heart attack despite being a super-fit marathon runner who'd never smoked, the kind of puzzling death that doctors have long hoped that a better understanding of genetics could help to prevent. "Most of the variation in disease risk comes from an enormous number of very tiny effects" in genes, agreed Stanford University genetics professor Jonathan Pritchard. "This is the first time polygenic scores have really been shown to reach the level of precision where they can have an impact" on patient health. First, the Boston-based team combed previous studies that mapped the DNA of large numbers of people, looking for links to the five diseases not outright mutations but minor misspellings in the genetic code. Each variation alone would have only a tiny effect on health. They developed a computerized system that analyzed how those effects add up, and tested it using DNA and medical records from 400,000 people stored in Britain's UK Biobank. Scores more than three times the average person's risk were deemed high. ___ The Associated Press Health & Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content. Claim: Multi-gene test may find risk for heart disease and more.

SOLUTION:
You know your cholesterol, your blood pressure ... your heart gene score? Researchers say a new way of analyzing genetic test data may one day help identify people at high risk of a youthful heart attack in time to help.