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.

Paragraph: No mention of the cost of treatment. This is important if the surgery is not a permanent fix for acute sinusitis. Repeated operations and continued medications need to be compared to cost for traditional surgery. No quantitative estimate of the benefits of the new procedure. There was a study of 10 people that found "no safety concerns", but readers should be told more about this very small group. What were the long term outcomes and did these patients eventually have to have further sinuplasty, more invasive surgery or continue to take medications to relieve sinusitits? The story mentions that a larger, randomized trial is underway to better understand the risks and benefits of sinuplasty compared to medication and traditional sinus surgery. Mentions that more information is needed and no one knows if balloon sinuplasty works as well as the more traditional surgical option for chronic sinusitis. Mentions that general anesthesia is still needed for balloon procedure and this comes with its own set of health risks. There isn't much evidence for the story to report. The story did stress the importance of a randomized trial underway comparing medication, traditional sinus surgery and the newer balloon sinuplasty. Story describes this trial and the need for further evidence before this new procedure can be widely recommended. Mentions that this procedure should not have been FDA approved with so little quality evidence. No evidence of disease mongering. The story mentions that this procedure would be for chronic, not acute sinunitis and describes how these are different. Good balance of information on treatment options with input from otolaryngologists not affliated with the makers of the device who are able to provide perspective on the new procedure. They mention that further study is needed. There is a note that one of the physicans studying the new sinuplasty has no financial ties to Acclarent, maker of the balloon devices used in this type of sinuplasty. Mentions that this form of sinuplasty is not for everybody and that it may not prevent the need for more comprehensive surgery in which bone and tissue are removed. There is mention of other options including medication and the more traditional surgery, which is decribed as highly effective, but with a painful recovery and side effects such as scar tissue. Quantification of the incidence of this and other side effects of traditional surgery would be useful. The story is clear that the FDA approved the device but that it still needs to undergo further study via randomized controlled trials. Story mentions that this is a new procedure only offerred by 100 doctors. This story is a blananced presentation of sinuplasty and the information here does not appear to be from a press release. The are quotes from otolaryngologists not affliated with the makers of the device who are able to provide perspective on the new sinuplasty procedure. Claim: A balloon instead of a knife: Sinuplasty for ailing sinuses
This story provides a good balance of information on a new treatment option for chronic sinusitis, and there is corroboration with otolaryngologists not affiliated with the makers of the balloon device who are able to provide perspective on the procedure. The story clearly notes this procedure would be for chronic, not acute sinusitis and describes how these are different. The story explains that this form of sinuplasty is not for everybody, and that it may not prevent the need for more comprehensive surgery in which bone and inflamed tissue are removed to open the sinus passages. More information is needed on the safety and efficacy of balloon sinuplasty, and no one knows if this surgery works as well as traditional surgery for chronic sinusitis. The story mentions other options for treating chronic sinusitis, including medication and sinus surgery, which is described as highly effective, but with a painful recovery and side effects such as scar tissue. Quantification of the incidence of side effects with traditional surgery would be useful. While there is not much quantitative evidence available on the new procedure, the story stresses the importance of a randomized trial underway comparing medication, traditional sinus surgery and the newer balloon sinuplasty. There is adequate description of this trial and the need for further evidence before this new procedure can be widely recommended. There is a caveat that this procedure should not have been FDA approved with so little quality evidence: a study of 10 people that found "no safety concerns", but readers should be told more about this very small group. What were the long term outcomes and did these patients eventually have to undergo further sinuplasty, more invasive surgery or continue to take medications to relieve their chronic sinusitis? The story explains that general anesthesia is still needed for the balloon procedure and this comes with its own set of health risks and additional costs. There is no mention of the cost of this newer procedure. This is important information if the surgery is not a permanent fix for chronic sinusitis. A cost comparison of the newer sinuplasty, which may require repeated operations, sinus medications and traditional surgery is needed.

Paragraph: The Illinois Department of Veterans Affairs and the Illinois Department of Public Health are reviewing the case of the resident with the flu-like illness. Officials say the resident of the home 312 miles (500 kilometers) southwest of Chicago has received medical treatment and is recovering. Officials say no other cases of the illness contracted by breathing infected water vapor have been identified. Staff members are monitoring residents for respiratory illnesses. Officials have notified residents, staff members, and relations and representatives of residents. The last case of Legionnaires' at Quincy was in 2018. An outbreak that began in 2015 caused the deaths of 13 residents and sickened dozens more. Then-Gov. Bruce Rauner faced withering criticism for not doing enough in response to the crisis. Claim: Legionnaires' case identified at Quincy veterans' home.
Gov. J.B. Pritzker's administration is investigating a case of Legionnaires' diseases at the veterans' home in Quincy, the site of 13 deaths from the malady starting with a 2015 outbreak.

Paragraph: The policy change was made at the request of doctors at hospitals specially designated to treat the new coronavirus, which often causes pneumonia. Tests for COVID-19, the respiratory disease caused by the new coronavirus, were producing accurate results only 70%-80% of the time, the doctors said. The policy change is likely to add weight to arguments made by critics who say the official number of new coronavirus cases in Russia is lower than the real figure, because many cases have been classified as simple pneumonia. Reuters reported last month that a sharp spike in the incidence of pneumonia in Moscow had fuelled concerns about the reliability of official data on the number of cases, which at the time was well below levels seen in other European capitals. "The accuracy of existing tests used to detect COVID-19 is at 70%-80%," Denis Protsenko, chief doctor at Moscow's main coronavirus hospital, Kommunarka, was cited as saying in a statement, published on the website of the city's health department. "In some cases, the tests give false negative results, and the proportion of such results is significant," Protsenko was cited as saying. The doctors, members of a new clinical committee bringing together the heads of Moscow hospitals treating COVID-19 patients, said most pneumonia cases were being caused by the new coronavirus. The proposal would mean that patients diagnosed with pneumonia, who had not yet received COVID-19 test results, would be treated as coronavirus patients and taken to appropriate hospitals. "Based on the consensus of the members of the COVID-19 clinical committee, a Department of Healthcare order has been issued to change the principles of patient routing, diagnosis and clinical decision-making during the admission stage," the city's health department head Alexei Khripun was cited as saying. Russia has reported 10,131 confirmed cases of the new coronavirus, with 6,698 in Moscow. Claim: Moscow, in U-turn, to assume all pneumonia patients may have coronavirus.
The city of Moscow's health department said on Thursday it would begin regarding all pneumonia patients as potential sufferers of the new coronavirus and route them to hospitals accordingly, after doctors raised concerns about the accuracy of tests used to diagnose the virus.