Given the task definition, example input & output, solve the new input case.
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
Output: 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.
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.

New input case for you: Paragraph: The story doesn't specifically address costs, but it does discuss some of the most common types of fiber-rich food such as fruits, vegetables, legumes and whole grains. Given the diversity, and widespread availability, of these foods, we'll give this a Satisfactory rating. However, it would have been nice to see some acknowledgment that many people people particularly people with limited financial resources live in so-called "food deserts," which have little access to fresh produce, etc. The story discusses a wide range of benefits, ranging from reduced risk of heart disease to weight loss. But the focus of the story was on weight loss, so that's what we'll focus on here. The story refers to two studies, only one of which appears to have been published. The first study is an analysis of people who have used the MyFitnessPal app in an attempt to lose weight. In that case, users who came within 5 percent of their weight loss goal consumed an average of 29 percent more fiber than users who did not come close to their weight loss goals. The second study was actually published (in 2015), and compared weight loss across two groups of study participants who had metabolic syndrome. One group followed the American Heart Association's recommended diet, while the other was told only to eat 30 grams of fiber per day. Both groups ended up eating the same amount of fiber per day (19 grams), and both groups lost weight. At the end of a year, the AHA diet group lost more (an average of 5.6 pounds), but the second group still lost 4.6 pounds. Neither of these studies are in the mold of a conventional intervention/health-benefit paradigm. But then neither is specifically looking at either a precisely-defined intervention (such as a pharmaceutical trial) or a disease they're looking loosely defined dietary guidelines and weight loss (and while weight can be a risk factor, it is not an illness). Bearing that in mind, the story does a satisfactory job of quantifying the relevant benefits in each instance. In general, eating more fiber carries few potential harms. The primary risks are, as the Mayo Clinic notes, "adding too much fiber too quickly can promote intestinal gas, abdominal bloating and cramping." To minimize that risk, the Mayo Clinic urges people to "Increase fiber in your diet gradually over a period of a few weeks. This allows the natural bacteria in your digestive system to adjust to the change. Also, drink plenty of water. Fiber works best when it absorbs water." This story does not outline these harms specifically, which is too bad. But the story does tell readers that they should "add fiber slowly and with plenty of water." That's enough to rate this as Satisfactory (though it's clearly not ideal). The two studies, mentioned above under benefits, have some problems: It's not clear where the unpublished MyFitnessPal data come from or how they were analyzed; and the 2015 study was of only 240 volunteers. These limitations were not noted. Also,the story would have been much stronger if it had addressed one key question: Were there any differences between groups (in either study) in regard to their age, sex, or physical activity? Any of those factors could play a key role in differences in weight loss, and the story sheds no light there. A side note: As we mentioned above, this story discusses a wide range of other benefits associated with eating enough fiber, ranging from reduced risk of heart disease to reduced risk of diabetes. We mention this because the story links to relevant research supporting each of those claims. We applaud that. There is no overt disease mongering. But we did want to point out two things. The story states: "fiber may play an important role in that ever-elusive health goal, weight loss." First, while being obese may be a disease, simply being overweight is not. Second, many people who aspire to lose weight do so for reasons other than health (and aren't overweight in the first place). Those are important distinctions, and ones that this story doesn't make. The story quotes from a wide variety of sources, and clearly labels each source's affiliation. One issue that's not addressed in the story is the utility of fiber supplements. Are they good? Bad? Beneficial? Useless? The story doesn't offer any insight here. It would be useful for readers to know whether such supplements may be useful tools for meeting daily fiber intake goals. Foods that contain fiber have been around longer than humans have, so we'll rate this N/A. Dietary fiber isn't new, and the story doesn't claim that it is. We'll rate this N/A. The story doesn't appear to be based on a news release. (In fact, given that the story doesn't seem to draw on any particularly new studies, guidelines or other external drivers, we're kind of curious as to what spurred this story. We're suspecting a pitch from MyFitnessPal.) Claim: It's Comical. It's Critical. It Might Even Help You Lose Weight.
Output:
This story urges people to make sure they're eating enough dietary fiber, with a focus on fiber's role in promoting healthy weight loss. And, overall, it does a fairly good job though giving a high-profile to unpublished data from a privately-owned fitness app (MyFitnessPal) is a little unusual. To draw causal conclusions about a specific food/dietary component, without providing fulsome data is worrisome. Also, we're unaware of any studies at this point that speak to the veracity of MyFitnessPal dietary record keeping, and the accuracy of its collection is probably worth validating and exploringor at least noting its limitations. And, on a broader level, focusing on a single ingredient such as"fiber" feeds nutritionismthe notion that the presence or absence of a particular nutrient makes a food healthful or not. We don't have nutrition drilled down that specifically. This point would have made the story stronger. Fiberespecially from whole fruits and vegetablesis an important part of a healthy diet, with institutions from the Mayo Clinic to Harvard's T.H. Chan School of Public Health outlining the myriad ways that a fiber-rich diet reduces health risks. And, as this story notes, most people don't get enough fiber. Recommendations for daily intake of fiber vary, but tend to come in between 25 grams per day to 38 grams per day, depending on age and sex. A 2014 paper from USDA's Food Surveys Research Group found that Americans consume an average of 16 grams of fiber per day. Given the potential benefit of eating more fiber, this would seem like a conversation worth having. And that appears to be the goal of the story.