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.
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
Example 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.
Example 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.

Problem: Paragraph: The Soyuz TMA-19M capsule carrying NASA's Tim Kopra, Tim Peake of the European Space Agency and the Russian agency Roscosmos' Yuri Malenchenko touched down as scheduled at 3:15 p.m. local time (0915 GMT) about 90 miles (145 kilometers) southeast of Zhezkazgan in Kazakhstan. All descent maneuvers were performed without any hitches and the crew reported feeling fine as their ship slid off the orbit and headed down to Earth. Helicopters carrying recovery teams were circling the area as the capsule was descending slowly under a massive orange-and-white parachute. Support crew helped the trio get out of the capsule, charred by a fiery descent through the atmosphere, and placed them in reclining chairs for a quick check-up. Squinting at the sun, Peake said he felt "elated," adding that "the smells of Earth are just so strong." "I'd love some cool rain right now!" he said with a smile as he sat in scorching heat in his balky spacesuit. After a medical check-up, the crew will change their spacesuits for regular clothing and be flown separately to their respective bases. Maj. Peake, a 44-year-old former army helicopter pilot, has become a hero at home, helping rekindle an interest in space exploration. He was not the first Briton in space. Helen Sharman visited Russia's Mir space station in 1991 on a privately backed mission and several British-born American citizens flew with NASA's space shuttle program. But Peake is Britain's first publicly funded British astronaut and the first Briton to visit the International Space Station. He performed the first British space walk and was honored by Queen Elizabeth II in her annual Birthday Honors List. He excited many at home by joining the 26.2-mile (42-kilometer) London Marathon from 250 miles (400 kilometers) above the Earth, harnessed to a treadmill aboard the ISS with a simulation of the route through London's streets playing on an iPad. Peake finished the race in 3 hours and 35 minutes, a record for the fastest marathon in orbit, according to Guinness World Records. The trio spent 186 days in space since their launch in December 2015. They have conducted hundreds of experiments in biology, biotechnology, physical science and Earth science. "I'm going to miss the view definitely," Peake said after landing. NASA said the data received would help in the potential development of vaccines and could be relevant in the treatment of patients suffering from ocular diseases, such as glaucoma. For Malenchenko, it was a sixth mission, and he logged up a total of 828 days in space, the second-longest accumulated time in space after Russian Gennady Padalka. Kopra has logged up 244 days in space on two flights. NASA astronaut Jeff Williams along with Russians Oleg Skripochka and Alexey Ovchinin of Roscosmos will operate the station for three weeks until the arrival of three new crew members. Claim: 3 International Space Station astronauts land in Kazakhstan.
Solution: An International Space Station crew including an American, a Briton and a Russian landed safely Saturday in the sun-drenched steppes of Kazakhstan.