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 Q]: Paragraph: "The cost of the drug wasn't mentioned a big oversight. Other news stories pegged it at about $35,000 a year. Adequate job. The story explained: ""But experts stress that Benlysta is not a miracle drug: It only worked in 35 percent of North American patients tested and was not effective for patients with the deadliest form of the disease. Additionally, it did not show positive results in African Americans, who are disproportionately affected by lupus."" There was no discussion of harms. An NPR story, by comparison, pointed out that ""There are side effects, of course, and some of them are pretty serious. In clinical tests involving about 2,100 people, 11 taking Benlysta died compared with 4 getting placebo. About 6 percent of people taking Benlysta got serious infections compared with 5.2 percent on placebo."" The story offered an interesting historical perspective on the evidence: ""The company originally tested Benlysta, known generically as belimumab, as a treatment for rheumatoid arthritis. When a mid-stage trial in lupus patients failed to meet researchers' goals in 2006, many analysts wrote the drug off and downgraded the company's stock. But when scientists reanalyzed the data they found that the drug helped block the antibodies that cause lupus symptoms in a subset of patients."" No disease mongering of lupus. Two independent sources were quoted. Not applicable. With no other new drug approved for lupus in 56 years, there's not been much to compare it with. The story did state that some experts thought this ""could prompt development of other drugs that are even more effective in treating the debilitating immune system disorder."" The focus of the story is FDA approval of the new drug. The headline explains that the FDA approved the first new drug for lupus in 56 years. It's clear the story did not rely solely on a news release." Claim: FDA approves first new drug for lupus in 56 years
[EX A]: "Good caveats, including in the patient profiled, who said, ""It's a bittersweet thing for me because I have friends with lupus for whom this drug won't work. There's no one-size-fits-all for lupus and I'm just extremely fortunate that my lupus is mild and is helped by Benlysta."" The story should have discussed potential harms and costs. As the story explained, this was not only the first new lupus drug approved in 56 years, but it could be ""a milestone that medical experts say could prompt development of other drugs that are even more effective in treating the debilitating immune system disorder."""

[EX Q]: Paragraph: "Independents need to know they can invest their vote in the Democratic Party," Carter said Tuesday during his annual report at his post-presidential center and library in Atlanta, where he offered caution about the political consequences should Democrats "move to a very liberal program, like universal health care." That's delicate and, Carter admitted, even contradictory advice coming from the 93-year-old former president, and it underscores the complicated political calculations for Democrats as they prepare for the November midterms and look ahead to the 2020 presidential election. "Rosie and I voted for Bernie Sanders in the past," Carter noted. He was referring to his wife, Rosalynn, and their support for the Vermont senator, an independent who identifies as a democratic socialist, over establishment favorite Hillary Clinton in the 2016 Democratic presidential primary. At another point, he pointed to California's environmental policies limits on carbon emissions, stiffer fuel-efficiency standards as the model for combating climate change. Still, Carter stressed, Democrats nationally must "appeal to independents" who are souring on the current administration. Trump's job approval rating, according to Gallup, has dipped to 40 percent, mostly because of declining support among independents. Carter alluded to arguments from self-identified progressives that Democrats will sacrifice votes on the left if they don't embrace the liberal base: "I don't think any Democrat is going to vote against a Democratic nominee," and he insisted that he's not asking the left to sacrifice its goals, only to see that winning elections is necessary to accomplish any of them. There is some historical irony in Carter's analysis. He came to the White House in 1976 from the moderate wing of the Democratic Party, and he clashed with party liberals, drawing a spirited primary challenge in 1980 from Massachusetts Sen. Ted Kennedy. Carter prevailed, but he was wounded, abandoned by Kennedy's most liberal supporters and unable to win over independents who helped deliver a landslide for Republican Ronald Reagan. Carter's latest handicapping comes near the conclusion of a midterm primary season that has seen Democratic primary voters move the party to the left. In some states and districts, that means nominating full-throated advocates of single-payer health care, a $15 minimum wage and abolishing or at least overhauling the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency. In other races, it means nominees who back more cautious moves to the left, such as background checks before certain gun purchases, a "public option" health insurance plan to compete alongside private insurance policies, step raises for the minimum wage and an immigration overhaul that offers legal status to some immigrants in the country illegally. Carter did not delve into those distinctions, instead offering a sweeping condemnation of his latest successor to remind Democrats of the stakes. He denounced the administration's latest environmental policy proposal to make it easier for energy companies to release methane gas that contributes to climate change. He singled out Trump's policy of separating immigrant families at the border, including those seeking asylum. "America is inherently committed to human rights, and I think in the future we will let that prevail," Carter said, "but for the next two years, I can't predict the imprisoned children are going to be any better off unfortunately." Carter has previously criticized Trump for his repeated falsehoods, and he's chided Trump for his hardline support for Israel over Palestinians. Yet Carter has found common ground with Trump on other foreign policy fronts, and did so again Tuesday. While avoiding any mention of the special counsel's investigation into whether Trump's presidential campaign coordinated with Russia in the 2016 U.S. election, Carter said he has engaged for years with Russian President Vladimir Putin concerning the ongoing Syrian civil war. "I have his email address," Carter said, adding that he and Putin share the same Russian river as their favorite spot for salmon fishing. That friendship, Carter said, means when Russia and other nations hold multilateral talks about the Syrian conflict, "Quite often they invite the Carter Center. ... They do not invite the U.S. government." Carter also praised Trump for meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. Carter repeated his frustrations with the last Democratic president, Barack Obama, for not engaging more directly with the insular Asian nation. Carter said he's not sure Trump has made real progress yet with North Korea, but he endorsed calls for the U.S. to formally declare an end to the Korean War and normalize relations with Pyongyang. "Let them be part of the community of nations," he said. "I think that would be enough in itself to bring an end to the nuclear program in North Korea." ___ Follow Barrow on Twitter at https://twitter.com/BillBarrowAP Claim: Jimmy Carter: To beat Trump, Dems cannot scare off moderates.
[EX A]: Former President Jimmy Carter sees little hope for the U.S. to change its human rights and environmental policies as long as Donald Trump is in the White House, but he has a warning for his fellow Democrats looking to oust the current administration: Don't go too far to the left.

[EX Q]: Paragraph: Americans are living healthier and longer that ever before. The U.S. Census Bureau predicts boomers will turn 65 at a rate of 10,000 per day for the next decade, making them, along with centenarians, the fastest-growing segment of the population. More than 75 percent of seniors questioned in the poll on aging are optimistic, think the best is yet to come, and expect to have the same quality of life, or better, during their next decade. "The reason they are upbeat is because we have changed our definition of aging. People are working longer. They see people that are older being healthier," said Donna Shalala, the president of the University of Miami and a former U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services during the Clinton administration. Shalala, 71, who will discuss the results of the poll during a panel on successful aging in Miami on Wednesday, said people are buoyed by seeing their relatives living longer. "My mother is 100 years old. Why shouldn't I be optimistic?" she added. The majority of 2,250 seniors, aged 60 or older, questioned in the telephone survey from the National Council on Aging, medical insurer UnitedHealthcare and the newspaper USA Today said they are confident they will be able to maintain their health and think they manage stress effectively. Although many seniors feel financially secure, nearly half of low- and middle-income seniors questioned in the poll are not confident they will be able to cover their expenses over the next five to 10 years. About a third of older Americans do not think they will be able to afford long-term care, according to the poll, and for 1 in 5 seniors, a major financial event would result in a fiscal crisis. Lower income seniors are also more likely to suffer from chronic illnesses and less likely to exercise. Seventy-two percent of people who make less than $30,000 a year said they live with a lingering health problem. Whether it is out of necessity, a sense of productivity, or the enjoyment of it, about 20 percent of seniors over 65 said they are still working either full- or part-time. "The market absolutely threw this generation off," Shalala said about the impact of the recession. And just as many seniors are staying in the workplace longer, the vast majority want to "age in place," or continue to live in their own home for the next decade. It could be a feasible option for most 60 somethings, but less than half of seniors in their 70s said they could live independently. The poll also showed that a lack of services in the community is a concern for seniors. More than 25 percent of people in their 60s were not confident there would be resources and facilities in their communities to allow them to live independently. "With appropriate preventive care and lifestyle changes, growing older doesn't have to mean living with chronic disease and disability," said Rhonda Randall, the chief medical officer at United Healthcare & Retirement. The poll was conducted between May 10 and June 6. The margin of error for the general population is +/-3.1 percent. Claim: Older Americans upbeat about aging, future: survey.
[EX A]:
Baby boomers are upbeat about aging and expect the next phase of their lives to be better than the last, but many are concerned about their financial future and long-term health costs, a survey released in Tuesday showed.