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.

Q: Paragraph: Michelle Obama is visiting Tanzania on the last day of President Barack Obama's eight-day tour of Africa. She helped Laura Bush open a summit of the wives of African leaders, saying Africa was "at the hub of global development". The summit aims to promote women's well-being on the continent. The unusual Obama-Bush combination spotlights U.S. interest in the continent and the importance of Africa to the legacy of the president and his predecessor George W. Bush. For Obama, his three-nation tour has given him a break from a row over spy agency eavesdropping and a chance to promote U.S. commercial interests to a receptive African audience. Bush, who launched a widely praised program to combat HIV/AIDS in Africa when in office, was due to join Obama for a ceremony to remember the victims of the 1998 U.S. embassy bombing in the Tanzanian capital. An expansion of a program to detect and treat cervical and breast cancer, Pink Ribbon Red Ribbon, is due to be announced on Wednesday, organizers said. Former President Bush is due to speak at the first ladies' summit the same day. The United Nations and non-governmental groups, including Bush's foundation, launched Pink Ribbon Red Ribbon to provide health services to women in sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America, building on the U.S. HIV/AIDS prevention program. Claim: Michelle Obama, Laura Bush spotlight Africa women's health.

A: U.S. First Lady Michelle Obama and predecessor Laura Bush combined their star power to draw attention on Tuesday to efforts to improve women's health and welfare in east Africa.
****
Q: Paragraph: The three have been speaking out this week as part of a high-profile "Heads Together" campaign, which aims to break stigmas around mental health issues and encourage people to speak openly about their emotions. In a six-minute film recorded at Kensington Palace in central London on Wednesday, the trio discussed the stress of becoming new parents, dealing with trauma at work, and the death of the princes' mother, Princess Diana, in a Paris car crash in 1997. "When you have children, it really does put your own emotions and your own life into perspective and it has been very, very interesting understanding why I get so upset about some things, why some things effect me," William said in the clip released by his office on Friday. "I thought I was fairly straight down the line, but I feel quite a lot more than I used to." William, Queen Elizabeth's grandson and second in line to the throne, said he had taken home some of the cases he had encountered when working as an air ambulance helicopter pilot. He and Kate also spoke of the pressure of parenthood following the birth of son George in 2013. "... You have no idea what you're doing no matter how many books you read - nothing can prepare you for it," Kate said. The first few weeks after they returned to their former home in Wales, she said, "were a steep learning curve, massively". Earlier this week, William talked about how the shock of losing his mother still lingered 20 years after her death. Harry said he had sought counseling to help deal with the grief. William warned the British virtue of the stiff upper lip could damage mental health - a departure from the royal family's traditional stoic attitude amid crises ranging from the 1936 abdication of King Edward VIII to the death of Princess Diana. "We have been brought closer because of the circumstances. You are uniquely bonded because of what we've been through. But even Harry and I over the years have not talked enough about our mother," William said. Harry added: "Never enough". "I always thought to myself, 'what's the point in bringing up the past?'," Harry said. "What's the point in bringing up something that's only going to make you sad, it ain't going to change it, it ain't going to bring her back. When you start thinking like that, it can be really damaging." A Kensington Palace spokesman said the royals had been overwhelmed by the response to their campaign. "Having asked others to start conversations on mental health with their friends and families, they wanted to show that they are taking part as well," the spokesman said. Claim: UK's William, Harry and Kate open up about emotional struggles.

A: Britain's Prince William, his wife Kate and brother Harry have given their most public comments on their emotional struggles and how the siblings' closeness helped them cope with their mother's death.
****
Q: Paragraph: The release does not mention cost or whether it's covered by private insurance or Medicare, and in this case, it's a pretty big omission. This may be an enormously expensive treatment for patients and it's why we have a cost criterion in our reviews. The hopeful psoriasis patient who sees this release without a cost discussion might already have their hand on the phone to call their dermatologist. Here's a very rough estimate of what that patient might face in terms of cost: Based on a conservative wholesale price of roughly $4,000 per 80mg injection and following the recommendation (found on the package insert) of twoinjections every two weeks for 12 weeks, followed by monthly injections, we calculated $48,000 for the first 12 weeks plus $36,000 for the following 9 months or $84,000 total. The release stated that by week 12,"76.4 to 81.8 percent of patients had their psoriasis classified as "clear" or "minimal" compared to 3.2% of patients on the placebo. By the 60th week, 68.7 to 78.3 percent of patients had maintained their improvement." We also wanted more detail on the measured strength of the response for each patient. For example, what constitutes "minimal"? The release adequately addresses harms and notes that long-term side effects are unknown with this sentence: "Adverse events associated with ixekizumab included slightly higher rates of neutropenia (low white blood cell count), yeast infection and inflammatory bowel disease compared to the placebo. The safety of therapy longer than 60 weeks will need to be monitored in the future." The release clearly and thoroughly describes the three phase 3 international trials at 21 sites, that they enrolled a large number of patients, and that they were randomized and controlled. There was no disease mongering. The release describes what psoriasis is and its prevalence, and explains that these trials were for moderate to severe psoriasis which covers at least 10 percent of the body. The release is very transparent in stating that the drug manufacturer paid for the research and that the lead researcher is a paid consultant to Eli Lilly. The release did not compare the many different ways that patients treat psoriasis, some with topical agents and some with oral steroids or other medications. The release states that the drug has been approved by the FDA following the completion of the trials. This is a strong indication that the drug is or soon will be available. The release should have noted that the drug is already being marketed under the brand name Taltz. The release makes an understated claim to novelty with this quote from the lead researcher: "Ten years ago, we thought complete clearance of this disease was impossible. It wasn't something we would even try to do. Now with this drug, we're obtaining response levels higher than ever seen before." There was no unjustifiable language in the release. Claim: New drug clears psoriasis in clinical trials

A:
This release summarizes results from a group of three phase 3 studies that evaluated ixekizumab, a new drug treatment for psoriasis. The clinical trials enrolled nearly 4,000 patients from 21 countries. About 80 percent of the patient volunteers with moderate-to-severe psoriasis that received the drug saw improvement that lasted about a year, according to the release. The release avoided exaggeration of benefits, and carefully noted the side effects and that the drug manufacturer, Eli Lilly, funded the research and hired the first author as a paid consultant. A little more information about the drug itself specifically that it is an injection and a discussion of the cost would have made this an even more thorough elease. An estimated 7.5 million people in the United States have psoriasis, an inflammatory auto-immunedisorder of the skin and other tissues, according to the American Academy of Dermatology. The positive results being published in a high-level New England Journal of Medicine report (on which the release is based) will likely result in this treatment being used in clinical practice.
****