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: A nurse extracts a vaccine in a file photo. Federal health officials said on Thursday the government has not conceded that vaccines cause autism even after a Georgia girl won federal compensation in a case arguing a vaccine led to her brain damage. REUTERS/Phil Klein Hannah Poling, 9, had a rare mitochondrial disorder and a federal court ruling said regular childhood vaccinations may have contributed to some of her autism-like symptoms. She was awarded compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program in a case that became public this week. Some activists who argue vaccines can trigger autism jumped on the case as vindication of their cause. But Dr. Julie Gerberding, director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, denied this. "Let me be very clear that (the) government has made absolutely no statement about indicating that vaccines are a cause of autism," Gerberding told reporters in a telephone briefing. "That is a complete mischaracterization of the findings of the case, and a complete mischaracterization of any of the science that we have at our disposal today. So I think we need to set the record straight on that." The vaccine injury program is a no-fault system that has a $2.5 billion fund built up from a 75-cent-per-dose tax on vaccines. It was set up to ensure companies would not be afraid to make vaccines, and to provide injured children an easier way to seek compensation. Thousands of lawsuits have been filed by parents who argue their children have autism caused by vaccines. The Institute of Medicine, an independent organization set up to inform U.S. policy, has found there is no evidence that vaccines can cause autism. Many recent studies have come to the same conclusion. Some autism advocacy groups argue that a mercury-containing preservative in vaccines called thimerosal can cause autism. Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain entered the debate last week, saying there is "strong evidence" linking autism to a thimerosal. Dr. Edwin Trevathan, director of the CDC's National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, said the Poling case did not demonstrate any link between vaccines and autism. "I think it's also worth noting that most children with autism do not seem to have a mitochondrial problem," he told the briefing. "So this association between mitochondrial disorders and autism is actually probably relatively rare. But the association between mitochondrial disorders and severe brain damage and dysfunction is one that is not as rare and is actually quite important." Trevathan said it is not clear whether a fever caused by a vaccine might further stress a child with such a condition, causing autism-like symptoms. Autism can have relatively mild symptoms or can severely disable a child by interfering with speech and behavior. No one knows what causes it. The CDC estimates that about one in every 150 children has autism or a related disorder such as Asperger's syndrome 560,000 people up to age 21 in the United States. "Our message to parents is that immunization is life-saving. There's absolutely nothing changed in the adamant recommendations that we are making to get children vaccinated," Gerberding said. Claim: Still no autism-vaccine link, say health officials.
Output:
Federal health officials said on Thursday the government has not conceded that vaccines cause autism even after a Georgia girl won federal compensation in a case arguing a vaccine led to her brain damage.