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 article does a good job of noting the cost of the combing salons, as well ascost of the medicinal shampoos and other drug treatments, specifically noting also that insurance may not cover the costs. The article cites data from a recent review article in a medical journal that outlines the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of the medicinal treatments. "The medications have been found to be from 68% to 87% effective after one or two applications. Most don't require combing," the story says. We do wish they story explained what "67% effective" meansfor a typical person, however. The careful reader will note that the evidence for the effectiveness of the featured combing salons is mostly anecdotal, and it would have greatly strengthened the article to have been more explicit about this, as well as including more solid proof that standard lice medications are not as effective as they used to be. The article notes that various organizations and experts consider the chemical/medicinal treatments to be highly safe as well as effective. The story needed to be more explicit about the quality of evidence for each of the treatment options mentionedcombing, going to a delousing salon, over-the-counter treatments, prescription treatments. Only the latter are mentioned in the context of research. The story references a review article that compares the different approaches, but it provides no details on what kind of evidence the review is based on. No disease mongering here, and we were glad the story pointed out thatthere are no adverse physical health effects from lice. The article does a very good job of noting the conflicts of interest of those quoted. The story explored alternatives. Good job on this. It's clearthat businesses that assist with combing are easy to find, and over-the-countershampoos are even easier. What appears to be "new" is the explosion of combing salons and newer prescription shampoos, as well as the review article published last week that evaluates them. This story doesn't appear to rely on a news release. Claim: New Ways to Fight Super Lice
[EX A]: The treatment of childhood cases of head lice infestations is a popular news media perennial at the start of the school year, and this Wall Street Journal storyfalls into that category. It covers the usual elements prevalence of the infestations among school age children, over-the-counter and prescription treatments, home remedies (which generally don't work) and reassurance about the pesky but essentially benign health impact. This story also takes a look at the rise of "lice-combing" salons and newer medications meant to stand in when older medications are ineffective. We were impressed by the depth of the sourcing, along withthe details that helped readers assess anypotential conflicts of interest among said sources. One thing we wished had been more detailed: How the evidence stacks up for each of the treatments. As the article itself makes clear, head lice infestationisa widespread, unpleasant, and disruptive albeit relatively benign condition that costs millions of families money, aggravation and time in efforts to prevent and treat. Adding to the nuisance of ridding scalps, tresses, clothing and home furnishings of the pests, some of the historic over-the-counter medicinal treatments have lost their power owing to drug-resistant mutations in the lice. Newer prescription medicines are effective, but worry an apparently growing number of parents who work hard to avoid what they consider unnecessary chemical exposure. Thus, parents are certain to be looking for the best and latest information about treatments.

[EX Q]: Paragraph: As social media users expressed alarm over United States President Donald Trump's administration's apparent efforts to sabotage the U.S. Postal Service (USPS), one Twitter user's suggestion caught traction on August 14 2020.That accountwrote:Heard this from a postal worker- IF you return your ballot BUT place 2 First Class stamps on it (instead of the business reply free postage provided) the USPS MUST deliver your letter AS First Class BECAUSE you PAID for First Class! It CANNOT be put into Bulk Mail! DO IT!A spokesperson for the Portland, Oregon chapter of the American Postal Workers Union which represents more than 200,000 current and retired USPS workers confirmed to us that using one first-class stamp would be enough to ensure that a mail-in ballot would be sorted individually."One 55-cent stamp will get it where it's supposed to go," she said.For some voters, the issue could be moot; a USPS staffer told us that because state and local election boards have the ability to design their own ballots and election materials, some boards may already be paying for them to have them classified as first-class mail.The USPS has urged voters to use first-class mail "or an expedited level of service" to send their ballots in, and to be clear on the submission requirements for their local jurisdictions. An agency spokesperson told the Salt Lake City Tribune in a statement:The Postal Service recommends that domestic, nonmilitary voters mail their ballots at least one week prior to their state's due date to allow for timely receipt by election officials.The Los Angeles Times reported that there is a difference in processing times between regular mail-in ballots and first class mail:Election officials typically use marketing mail (or nonprofit bulk) to send out ballots, which is cheaper than using first class mail. The delivery timelines, however, are different: Marketing mail takes three to 10 days, while first class mail is delivered in two to five days. The postal service has traditionally treated election mail with priority, even if it's not sent first class.But USPS General Counsel Thomas Marshall implied in letters to election officials that marketing mail delivery standards would be enforced for election mail."Using Marketing Mail will result in slower delivery times and will increase the risk that voters will not receive their ballots in time to return them by mail," Marshall wrote in language later repeated in [a USPS] statement.Democratic Party Sen. Chuck Schumer, though, has accused the USPS of price-gouging voters."The postal service has informed some states they may need to pay a first class rate to deliver ballots rather than the normal rate, nearly tripling the cost at a time when people will have to vote by mail in record numbers because they can't or won't go vote in person," he wrote on August 11, 2020. "This would be an outrageous policy that should alarm every American. Democrats will fight this with every tool at our disposal."According to the Washington Post, the agency also sent letters to 46 states and the District of Columbia informing them that it could not guarantee that ballots sent by mail would arrive in time to be counted for the November 3 2020 general election:Some states anticipate 10 times the normal volume of election mail. Six states and D.C. received warnings that ballots could be delayed for a narrow set of voters. But the Postal Service gave 40 others including the key battleground states of Michigan, Pennsylvania and Florida more-serious warnings that their long-standing deadlines for requesting, returning or counting ballots were "incongruous" with mail service and that voters who send ballots in close to those deadlines may become disenfranchised.The only states to not receive the warnings from USPS were Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, and Rhode Island.The Twitter post was shared more than 8,000 times on the platform amid escalating concerns over the United States Postal Service's autonomy and ability to handle voting by mail amid the COVID-19 pandemic following the appointment of Louis DeJoy a fundraiser for Trump as Postmaster General in June 2020. Hours after the tweet began spreading online, CNN reported that the agency's inspector general launched an investigation into DeJoy's actions since taking the position, in response to calls by Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren.The Massachusetts lawmaker had asked the inspector general to investigate not just DeJoy's new policies for the USPS but whether he had "met all ethics requirements." DeJoy reportedly still owns a $30 million stake in a separate company that is a USPS contractor and bought stock in Amazon, which operates a delivery service that competes with the agency.Criticism of DeJoy intensified following reports of several mailboxes being removed from use in Portland, Oregon (which the USPS attributed to an overall decline in outgoing mail) and the decommissioning and dismantling of 671 mail-sorting machines around the U.S., which the Post reported had the capacity to sort a combined 21.4 million pieces of paper mail per hour.The American Postal Workers Union, which represents more than 200,000 current and retired USPS employees, filed a grievance over the scuttling of the sorting machines. But union president Mark Dimondstein expressed confidence to the newspaper that his colleagues could still handle the expected surge in mail-in voting in November."Piece of cake for postal workers," he said.DeJoy released a statement on August 18 2020 saying that he would suspend what he called "longstanding operational initiatives" that had raised concern from the public until after the election."I want to assure all Americans of the following: Retail hours at Post Offices will not change," the statement read. "Mail processing equipment and blue collection boxes will remain where they are. No mail processing facilities will be closed. And we reassert that overtime has, and will continue to be, approved as needed."But the skepticism toward DeJoy did not subside; a day after the USPS posted his statement, WOOD-TV in Michigan reported that mail sorting machines inside the agency's office in downtown Grand Rapids were being dismantled per an order from him.Internal sources say mail sorting machines are being dismantled at downtown GR post office. Process started yesterday. Order came from Postmaster General DeJoy. @WOODTV pic.twitter.com/tNm9pXjcnU Heather Walker (@_HeatherWalker) August 19, 2020Three hours after their initial report, WOOD said that the dismantling had stopped.That same day, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi released a statement criticizing DeJoy for not reversing course on the actions he had already taken since taking over the USPS."The Postmaster General frankly admitted that he had no intention of replacing the sorting machines, blue mailboxes and other key mail infrastructure that have been removed and that plans for adequate overtime, which is critical for the timely delivery of mail, are not in the works," Pelosi said. "All of these changes directly jeopardize the election and disproportionately threaten to disenfranchise voters in communities of color. At the same time, we are highly concerned that the slowdown of the delivery of medicines to veterans is not being sufficiently addressed."Trump himself admitted in a Fox News interview that his administration was holding up an agreement with Democratic Party lawmakers over a new stimulus package over the inclusion of $3.5 billion in USPS funding."They need that money in order to make the post office work so it can take all of these millions and millions of ballots," he said. "Now, if we don't make a deal, that means they don't get the money. That means they can't have universal mail-in voting, they just can't have it."Did Trump Say That Without a Deal 'They Can't Have Universal Mail-in Voting, They Just Can't Have It'?The suggestion to use first-class mail also gained visibility following the spread of similar posts (presented as "an inside tip from a postal worker") urged voters to personally take their ballots to their local election boards or polling sites:'Don't Mail Ballots In, Drop at Board of Elections, This is an Inside Tip from a Postal Worker, Can't Say More than That'Trump has repeatedly claimed entirely falsely that mail-in voting would lead to a "rigged" election. But both he and First Lady Melania Trump used absentee ballots to vote by mail in Florida. At least fifteen other officials in his administration have done the same.Update August 19, 2020 1:27 p.m. PST: Updated with notes on additional mail sorting machine scuttling and statements from Louis DeJoy and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.Comments Claim: Mail-in voters in the United States can send their ballots with first-class postage to ensure that it is delivered on time before the November 3 2020 election.
[EX A]: Can You Have Your Mail-In Ballot Delivered as First Class Mail?

[EX Q]: Paragraph: The cost isn't provided, since the work is not available to the public. But like most other digital aids for smoking cessation, we presume this method would be free. We're told 36 percent of smokers who received multiple encouraging and informative emails said they didn't smoke 6 months after the trial, whereas single-email subjects only had a 6-month abstinence rate of 26.5 percent. That's enough detail for a Satisfactory rating. The story would have been stronger if it had specifically compared these effects with other approaches. The story implies that the email method might not work the first time, or perhaps even the first couple dozen times, since quitting is an incredible challenge. We also appreciated how the story detailed a few risks of popular alternative approaches to quitting smoking, including medications and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). We were pleasantly surprised to see a paragraph dedicated to covering the weaknesses of this study, namely that study participants were well-educated and white, and how future research could make up for this and other shortcomings. The story also describes the controls quitters who used NRT and how the email method still seemed to have a positive effect when NRT was subtracted from the results. We didn't see anything in this story that'd unnecessarily frighten or incense readers. The story quotes two expert sources who don't appear to be involved with the study, though this fact isn't pointed out. Both sources emphasize the difficult nature of quitting smoking, and how there's no silver bullets out there. The story notes that trying multiple cessation methods is the most effective strategy, and that tailored emails are intended to be an additional aid not a replacement for other methods. But several specific alternatives to quitting smoking are noted, including NRT, a text-message support program, mobile apps to support quitting, professional counseling, and medications such as varenicline and bupropion. The story would have been stronger if it had told readers how the 36% quit rate seen in this study after 6 months compares with other approaches. We'retoldthetailoredemailprogramisn'tyetavailabletothepublic, but that the American Cancer Society hopes to take a similar program live in 2018. Research on tailored messages to help smokers quit goes back nearly two decades, and this isn't the first study to probe the efficacy of emails. The story doesn't provide this context. Nor does it note that the BMJ-published study appears to be the largest of its kind more than 1,000 subjects participated. We didn't detect any copy-pasted quotes in this story, or other evidence that it leaned on a news release. Claim: You've Got Mail About Quitting Smoking
[EX A]:
This story by U.S. News & World Report highlights the results of a trial of a digital aid to quit smoking: tailored emails. Researchers sent multiple encouraging messages, which also included links to information on how to quit, to willing smokers, then followed up six months later to see if the recipients had resumed smoking at lower rates than participants who received a single non-tailored email. The story did a good job of explaining how the study worked, seemed to grasp the quality of the evidence, and went out of the way to describe multiple alternative methods to quitting smoking (and their risks). However, the article would have been stronger had it had described previous research into email-based interventions, and compared the benefits of multiple emails to other effective approaches. We learn that more tailored emails are better than a single non-tailored email, but how do the quit rates seen here compare, numerically, with other approaches that smokers might try? Smoking kills nearly half a million Americans every year, according to the CDC, and dependence on tobacco products is seen by many medical professionals today as a chronic disease. Any new tool to help smokers quit and reduce their risks for disabling and life-threatening diseases would be a positive step.