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.

Ex Input:
Paragraph: "This is the only of the five stories to actually put a dollar figure on the classes. ""Even the cost of a class, which can top $50 a month, is modest compared with the cost of many medications. And unlike drugs, tai chi had no harmful side effects, she says."" Unlike the AP story, which made the mistake of saying that ""symptoms improved significantly for the tai chi group and little for the others,"" this story, at least, presents some numbers. The trouble is, those numbers are in relative terms. So, instead of saying that three months after the classes ended, 27 patients who took tai chi classes felt better and 17 who tried other therapies also felt better, it presents the difference as 82% versus 53%. That seems more dramatic. Absolute data would be more meaningful. Why make the reader do the math? The story is one of the few stories that covered this study to actually point out that""unlike drugs, tai chi had no harmful side effects."" In the end, because of the comments from Gloria Yeh, the story puts the appropriate caveats on the findings. This sentence does a great job of summarizing some of the problems with the study: ""Yeh notes that researchers don't know which aspects of tai chi were most helpful: the exercise, deep breathing, relaxation exercise, meeting new friends or learning from a charismatic teacher."" This story actually spends too little time talking about the condition itself. The AP devoted a whole paragraph in an eight paragaph story to the condition, and the LA Times led its piece by describing the disease. USAToday instead went with a very nice description of tai chi, putting the emphasis on the beauty and simiplicity of the therapy rather than the difficulty clinicians have had correctly diagnosing and treating fibromyalgia. This is the only story to include the phrase ""white crane spreads its wings"" or anything like that. The story doesn't actually quote any of the authors and instead quotes two outside experts, one of whom wrote an accompanying editorial. It fails to fully attribute the comments made by ""Callahan."" It appears that the writer meansLeigh F. Callahan, who just completed a study of tai chi for arthritis and was quoted by other reporters. (How did this slip through copy editing? Was this a slip-up only in the online version?) But we can't give credit to an independent source that the story doesn't adequately identify. The story does not compare the therapy to existing alternatives or even discuss existing alternatives, aside from a passingreference at the very end to medications. This is the only one of the five stories to note that ""A study in 2007 from the National Institutes of Health found that 2.3 million American adults had used tai chi in the past year."" This doesn't tell you whether tai chi classes areas readilyavailable in Oklahoma as they are in New Mexico, but it does give you a sense of how popular they are. It is unclear from this story whether tai chi has been studied before for other conditions. It has. It also is unclear what fibromyalgia patients now do for therapy. The LATimes, for example, pointed out that patients in the study stopped taking drugs for treatment, for example. The story does not rely on a news release." Claim: Tai chi may ease fibromyalgia pain

Ex Output:
"The story does two things better than all the other stories. It puts a dollar figure to the cost of tai chi therapy, and it gives people a better sense of how popular tai chi is. It could have done a better job evaluating the evidence and providing some absolute numbers to help readers decide how seriously to take these results. Why not just give the absolute numbers? How many out of how many? Why make the reader do the math? ""79% of tai chi participants said their symptoms had improved, compared with 39% of those in the educational classEven three months after the classes ended, 82% of tai chi students still felt better, compared with 53% of the comparison group."" Sure, the denominators are in the story but we shouldn't need to pull out the calculator to figure out 79% of x, vs. 39% of x."

Ex Input:
Paragraph: The baby died in November after being hospitalized for three months, the Department of Health said Wednesday. The last pediatric death related to pertussis, or whooping cough, was in 2013. The department's preliminary data shows that in 2019 there were 25 cases of pertussis in babies less than 6 months. Of those, eight were hospitalized, and two of the hospitalized cases were severe. Anyone can get pertussis, but it is most severe in infants, according to health officials. They are emphasizing the importance of vaccination, especially during pregnancy, to help prevent pertussis. Kristen Ehresmann, the department's director of infectious disease, said the tetanus, diphtheria and acellular pertussis, or Tdap, vaccine is recommended during the third trimester of each pregnancy. When the Tdap vaccine is given during pregnancy, the mother's body creates antibodies to fight off the pertussis bacteria, Ehresmann said. Some of those antibodies are passed to the baby before birth and offer short-term protection until the baby can be vaccinated. Claim: Infant death related to whooping cough in Minnesota.

Ex Output:
Minnesota health officials say the death of an infant has been linked to whooping cough.

Ex Input:
Paragraph: "The story did not mention specific costs of the CMA test; however, it did indicate that not all insurance will cover this test. Since the story stated that ""both Children's Hospital Boston and Montefiore have offered CMA testing for several years,"" some cost estimate could have easily been found. The story adequately presents the efficacy of three different genetic tests in identifying abnormalities that may be associated with autismkaryotype: 2%; fragile X: 0.5%; CMA: 7%. It would have been helpful to let readers know that not all 933 people included in the study were tested with each of the three tests. According to the results, the CMA tests performed best in females with autistic disorder, but this was not reported. There was no discussion regarding the emotional or social ramifications associated with receiving genetic testing results. More information on who was included in this test would have been useful. The majority of the patients were diagnosed with autistic disorder (n=447) and Pervasive Developmental Disorder, Not Otherwise Specified (PDD-NOS) (n=454). A small number of participants had Asberger disorder (n=31). This story did not exaggerate the prevalence or seriousness of autism. This story included perspective from a pediatric geneticist unaffiliated with the research. The story provided data comparing the two standard genetic tests to the newer CMA test. The story clearly states that not all hospitals offer the newer chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) test. It could have also mentioned that genetic counseling services are not widely available in some geographic areas. The story clearly points out that genetic tests for autism are often performed, but the CMA test is relatively new." Claim: Newer Genetic Test for Autism More Effective

Ex Output:
Thispiece reports on a study, which found that a newer genetic test is better at detecting abnormalities linked to autism when compared to the standard tests. This was a well-referenced piece that met many of our criteria, but it would have been improved had it included: a clearer discussion of why children with autism receive genetic testing; information about the patients in the study, including their specific diagnoses; a discussion of the spectrum of autism disorders; information on the nuances of genetic testing, including potential psychological harms; and a discussion of the cost of these tests. This is a story about an emerging diagnostic test for a childhood disorder that appears to have increasing prevalence. Knowledge of genetic predisposition to this disease is important.