Part 1. 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.
Part 2. 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
Answer: 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.
Explanation: 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.
Part 3. Exercise
Paragraph: Lawmakers "should engage, enable and appropriately regulate" the choice of how and when to die for people who are close to death, the 86-year-old Nobel laureate said. He has previously said he would like the option of choosing an assisted death and does not want to be kept alive at whatever cost. "Just as I have argued for compassion and fairness in life, I believe that terminally ill people should be treated with compassion and fairness when it comes to their death," Tutu said in a statement after the arrest this week of Sean Davison, who founded DignitySA, a right-to-die group. "This should include affording people who have reached the end-stages of life the right to choose how and when to leave Mother Earth." Davison, who was released on bail, is accused of assisting in the 2013 suicide of friend Anrich Burger, who was left quadriplegic after a car crash. Medically assisted suicide or voluntary euthanasia is illegal in South Africa, but in recent years there have been growing calls for it to be legalized. DignitySA said it was awaiting more information about the accusations against Davison. The group does "not assist individuals with dying (assisted suicide or voluntary euthanasia) however wrong we believe it is that some people die in conditions of intractable and unbearable suffering," it said, adding that Davison "has a private and professional life outside DignitySA and, like any good citizen, he takes responsibility for his choices." Davison is a professor in the biotechnology department and head of the forensic DNA laboratory at the University of the Western Cape, DignitySA says on its website. He served five months under house arrest in New Zealand after pleading guilty to assisted suicide following the death of his terminally ill mother there, according to the group. An earlier charge of attempted murder was dropped. Tutu, an anti-apartheid campaigner who has spoken out on human rights long after the 1994 end of white minority rule in South Africa, has been hospitalized several times in recent years because of infections linked to past treatment for prostate cancer. "I believe in the sanctity of life, and that death is part of life," he said. "Alongside the wonderful palliative care that exists, the choices available to the terminally ill should include dignified assisted death." ___ Follow Christopher Torchia on Twitter at www.twitter.com/torchiachris Claim: Tutu urges regulated euthanasia after campaigner's arrest.
Answer:
Terminally ill people should have the right to a "dignified assisted death," former South African archbishop Desmond Tutu said Friday, following a murder charge against a local campaigner for the legalization of euthanasia.