Teacher: 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.
Teacher: Now, understand the problem? If you are still confused, see the following example:
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.
Reason: 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.

Now, solve this instance: Paragraph: The four-page letter, the contents of which were confirmed by U.S. officials to Reuters on Tuesday, described a bleak situation onboard the nuclear-powered carrier as more sailors test positive for the virus. The Navy puts the ship's complement at 5,000, the equivalent of a small American town. The letter was first reported by the San Francisco Chronicle. Captain Brett Crozier, the ship's commanding officer, wrote that the carrier lacked enough quarantine and isolation facilities and warned the current strategy would slow but fail to eradicate the highly contagious respiratory virus. In the letter dated Monday, he called for "decisive action" and removing over 4,000 sailors from the ship and isolating them. Along with the ship's crew, naval aviators and others serve aboard the Roosevelt. "We are not at war. Sailors do not need to die. If we do not act now, we are failing to properly take care of our most trusted asset - our sailors," Crozier wrote. U.S. officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, told Reuters that nearly 80 people aboard the ship had tested positive for the coronavirus, a number likely to increase as all personnel on the ship are tested. Still, the Navy declined to confirm exactly how many people aboard the Roosevelt had been infected The carrier was in the Pacific when the Navy reported its first coronavirus case a week ago. It has since pulled into port in Guam, a U.S. island territory in the western Pacific. U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper said on Tuesday it was not time to evacuate the carrier, adding he had not read the letter in detail. In an interview with CBS News, Esper did not comment directly on Crozier's proposal, at least in the portions that aired. Asked if it was time to evacuate the carrier, Esper said: "I don't think we're at that point." Admiral John Aquilino, head of the U.S. Navy's Pacific Fleet, told reporters that the plan was to take some sailors off the ship, test and quarantine them, clean the ship and then rotate them with those on the carrier. He said that there would be some sailors who would be in quarantine and isolation on the vessel. Asked if he was following what the ship's captain wanted to do, but was not able to do it at the pace the commanding officer wanted, Aquilino said: "That is absolutely the case." Acting U.S. Navy Secretary Thomas Modly said he had heard about the letter on Tuesday morning and that the Navy had been working for several days to get the sailors off the ship in Guam. Modly said Guam did not have enough beds and the Navy was in talks with the local government to use hotels and set up tents. "We don't disagree with the (commanding officer) on that ship, and we're doing it in a very methodical way because it's not the same as a cruise ship ... that ship has armaments on it, it has aircraft on it," he said on CNN. Reuters reported last week that the U.S. military had decided it would stop providing some of the more mission-specific data about coronavirus infections within its ranks, citing concern the information might be used by adversaries as the virus spreads. The Roosevelt is just the latest example of the spread of the virus within the U.S. military. Navy officials say that sailors onboard a number of ships have tested positive, including an amphibious assault ship at port in San Diego. The first U.S. military service member, a New Jersey Army National Guardsman, died on Saturday from COVID-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus, the Pentagon said on Monday. As of Tuesday, 673 active-duty service members had tested positive for the coronavirus, an increase of more than 100 from the previous day, the Pentagon said in a statement. Claim: 'Sailors do not need to die,' warns captain of coronavirus-hit U.S. aircraft carrier.
Student:
The captain of the U.S. aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt, in a blunt letter, has called on Navy leadership for stronger measures to save the lives of his sailors and stop the spread of the coronavirus aboard the huge ship.