TASK DEFINITION: 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.
PROBLEM: Paragraph: Dock Phillip Ellis, best remembered as the winningest pitcher on the champion 1971 Pittsburgh Pirates baseball club, was also one of his sport's more colorful personalities, although his exploits were generally overshadowed by those of players (Curt Flood, Richie Allen, Reggie Jackson) more talented and more controversial. Ellis' intolerance for slights which he perceived to be related to the color of his skin was well-established long before he reached the major leagues (he declined to play on his high school's baseball team because it was coached by a "racist," and while in the minor leagues he once took a bat into the stands in pursuit of a racially-motivated heckler), and he was the subject of several headline-grabbing altercations during his prime years in the big leagues: "I know the orders came from [baseball commissioner] Bowie Kuhn, and I don't like it. Look around, there are fellows who wear white shoes in practice. Some wear jackets. Others don't wear hats. I wasn't going to say anything, but since they seem to be aiming in my direction, I'm going to say things. They didn't put out any orders about Joe Pepitone when he wore a hairpiece down to his shoulders." But, oddly enough, the most notorious aspect of Dock Ellis' playing days wasn't disclosed until several years after he had retired, and it involved an accomplishment that is usually the highlight of any pitcher's career. On 12 June 1970, Ellis hurled the first no-hitter of the 1970 season as he blanked the Padres 2-0 in the opening game of a double-header in San Diego. Ellis' feat was a bit unusual in that he seemed particularly wild that day, walking eight batters and hitting one, but many pitchers have achieved stellar results despite laboring with obvious control problems. (Yankee hurler Bill Bevens came within one out of throwing a no-hitter against Brooklyn in the fourth game of the 1947 World Series despite issuing the Dodgers an astounding ten bases on balls.) In post-game interviews Ellis said he had been thinking about a no-hitter from the fourth inning onward and attributed his wildness to his efforts to keep the ball away from hitters: "I know guys who don't want to talk about it, but if you're going to throw [a no-hitter], you're going to throw it. The ball I was throwing was moving. I was keeping the ball away from the hitters. That's why I walked so many." Fourteen years later, however, Dock Ellis revealed an alternative explanation for his lack of control that day: he was under the influence of LSD at the time. According to accounts he gave the press in April 1984, Ellis had spent the morning of 12 June 1970 relaxing in his home town of Los Angeles, under the mistaken belief that the Pirates had the day off. Ellis said he ingested LSD around noon, but at about 1:00 PM his girlfriend picked up a newspaper and discovered that not only were the Pirates scheduled to play a double-header in San Diego that evening, but Ellis was slated to start the first game for Pittsburgh. Ellis' companion hustled him off to the airport by 3:30 PM and got him on a flight to San Diego, where arrived at 4:30 PM, in time for the double-header's 6:05 PM start. Ellis told reporters he remembered little of what took place during the game itself: "I can only remember bits and pieces of the game. I was psyched. I had a feeling of euphoria. I was zeroed in on the [catcher's] glove, but I didn't hit the glove too much. I remember hitting a couple of batters and the bases were loaded two or three times. The ball was small sometimes, the ball was large sometimes, sometimes I saw the catcher, sometimes I didn't. Sometimes I tried to stare the hitter down and throw while I was looking at him. I chewed my gum until it turned to powder. They say I had about three to four fielding chances. I remember diving out of the way of a ball I thought was a line drive. I jumped, but the ball wasn't hit hard and never reached me." Any assignment of a "True" status to this story must be a guarded one: only Dock Ellis knows whether or not he actually took LSD the day he pitched his no-hitter, and even if he did ingest LSD that day, judging the extent to which the drug (which can affect different people in different ways) was affecting him by the time he took part in that evening's game is problematic. Baseball is a difficult game to play at the major league level, even for skilled professionals free from the effects of mind-altering substances, yet Ellis managed to pitch a complete game that evening, apparently did not act so unusually that his teammates or manager took notice, and was quite lucid while conducting post-game interviews with the press. (Of course, since it's a long-standing baseball superstition that players should avoid speaking to a teammate who is in the midst of pitching a no-hitter, the other Pirates likely had little or no interaction with Ellis in the dugout during the latter half of the game.) Although Ellis might correctly be described as having been "under the influence of LSD" during his no-hitter, quite possibly the drug's primary effects had peaked and were wearing off by game time. Dock Ellis' recollections are also somewhat questionable. Donald Hall's 1976 biography, Dock Ellis in the Country of Baseball, initially stated that Ellis had been drinking (vodka) before his no-hitter. Ellis maintained that he never pitched again while under the influence of LSD after his 1970 no-hitter, but he later said he had also taken the drug before the 1974 Cincinnati game in which he intentionally threw at the first several batters. And that admission came after he had previously stated that he took "pep pills," not LSD, before that 1974 game. Then he said in 1985 that he "never pitched a game in the major leagues I wasn't high." Claim: Pittsburgh Pirates pitcher Dock Ellis hurled a no-hitter while under the influence of LSD.

SOLUTION: An unfortunate aspect of Dock Ellis' admission is that he is now remembered by many people (especially those too young to have seen him play during his heyday with the Pirates) as "the guy who pitched a no-hitter on drugs," a characterization which not only slights a baseball career that included some very fine moments, but also obscures the many acts of charity and conscience in which Ellis engaged both during and after his playing days: he worked with the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections to rehabilitate black prisoners, helped start the Black Athletes Foundation for Sickle Cell Research, and served as the coordinator of an anti-drug program in Los Angeles before passing away from liver disease in 2008.

PROBLEM: Paragraph: Up to 94 students will get scholarships on campuses in Phoenix and Tucson, the UA Colleges of Medicine said. For each year of tuition waived, they'll have to commit to working in an underserved area after their residency for one year. The scholarships are funded with $3 million from an $8 million state funding plan approved earlier this year. The rest of that money will allow growth from 80 to 100 medical students at UA's Phoenix campus. State and federal governments have looked to a wide variety of grants, scholarships, loan forgiveness and other initiatives to seek out doctors willing to work in underserved areas and support them financially. An aging population and projected physician retirements have fueled concerns that the U.S. will face a growing shortage of providers a problem felt hardest in lower-income areas. Physician groups say high debt burdens discourage new doctors from working in primary care in rural or urban underserved areas, which tend to come with lower salaries than jobs in specialties or wealthy areas. Debt concerns discourage some would-be doctors from even applying to medical school, Dr. Michael Dake, senior vice president of UA Health Sciences, said in a news release. The scholarships will be available only to UA students who qualify as Arizona residents. Eligible post-residency specializations include family medicine, general internal medicine, geriatrics, pediatrics, psychiatry, and obstetrics and gynecology. Eligible underserved areas are designated by the federal government based on having too few doctors, high infant mortality rates, high poverty or a large elderly population. UA medical school tuition for Arizona residents is about $33,000 per year. Medical school is four years. Arizona's physician training capacity has grown in recent years with the opening of the UA's Phoenix campus and schools run by the Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, A.T. Still University in Mesa and Midwestern University in Glendale. Nebraska-based Creighton University is building a health sciences campus that will include a medical school in midtown Phoenix. Claim: Scholarships target doctors in Arizona underserved areas.

SOLUTION: University of Arizona's medical school announced Friday that it will give free tuition to some students who commit to working as primary care doctors in underserved areas, an effort to improve access to health care in areas where it's most lacking.

PROBLEM: Paragraph: The invention of the shopping cart during the Dirty Thirties altered how consumers shopped for groceries by removing the weight of accumulated goods from the equation. Thanks to the new wheeled assistance, those looking to reprovision could shop longer and for greater quantities than in the days when prospective purchases were all toted by hand. But the newfangled gadgets also created yet another common field upon which harmful bacteria and viruses could be easily passed from one person to another, because the handles of shopping carts are grasped by a great many people day in and day out. And, of that horde of shoppers, some will undoubtedly be carrying some nasty bugs on their unwashed hands. Yet, just as we rarely think about giving our purses, briefcases, and backpacks a good scrub-down, so do shopping carts fly under our germ awareness radar. The very folks that fuss with disposable toilet seat covers often won't think twice about manhandling a grocery cart around a store for half an hour, even though the surface they're hanging onto so fiercely for that interval has likely been coughed on, sneezed on, and grasped by shoppers who'd just finished handling packages of raw chicken and meat, or who just weren't the sort to wash their hands all that often. As for the fold-out child's seat found in most carts, even though it is routinely graced by the diapered bottoms of infants, it remains the cart's transport region of choice for fruits and vegetables, items that are often eaten uncooked or unwashed. According to a four-year study conducted by the University of Arizona's Environmental Research Lab and sponsored by Clorox, grocery carts are veritable petri dishes teeming with human saliva, mucus, urine, fecal matter, as well as the blood and juices from raw meat. Swabs taken from the handles and child seats of 36 grocery carts in San Francisco, Chicago, Tucson, and Tampa showed these common surfaces to rank third on the list of nastiest public items to touch, with only playground equipment and the armrests on public transportation producing more disgusting results. In terms of playing host to germs and bacteria, the carts are far worse than public bathrooms, which at least are cleaned more often. Bacteria and viruses such as E.coli, staphylococcus, salmonella, and influenza can live on grocery carts, a sorry fact most shoppers are blissfully unaware of. There are efforts afoot to render these surfaces less germ-laden. In March 2007, a bill (A4109) was introduced into the New Jersey State Assembly calling for supermarkets to provide shoppers with sanitary wipes to clean off their carts. In February 2007, Arkansas passed its "Health-Conscious Shopper Act" (HB1040), which encourages businesses in that state to voluntarily provide consumers with sanitation wipes to use on the carts. Nice-Pak Products of Rockland County, New York, the company that enhanced your fried chicken eating experience with Wet-Naps, has devised a wipe specifically for use in sanitizing shopping cart handles and child seats. Its SaniCart is designed to remove salmonella, staphylococcus, and other germs from such surfaces. As of late 2005, more than 6,400 supermarkets were using them. Meanwhile, another system on the market focuses on cleaning the entire cart rather than just parts of it. PureCart is a sort of drive-through washer that sanitizes the whole contraption. It works by coating the carts with a safe mist of a peroxide-based disinfectant, the same solution used to clean dialysis machines and poultry processors. Critics of the various efforts to clean up the carts point out that a great many things routinely used by the public also harbor germs and viruses, therefore targeting the handles and child seats of shopping carts will not render the common world free of contagion. While it is true that which causes illness also lurks upon the latches of bathroom stall doors, elevator buttons, and stairwell handrails (to name just a few bacterial hot spots), those shared surfaces are generally handled relatively fleetingly compared to the interval the average person hangs onto the handle of a shopping cart or the length of time a leaky-diapered baby or a food item is left resting on the cart's fold-out seat. Those looking for a less technological approach to staving off the nasties ferried about by their shopping buggies should attempt to fall into the habit of always washing their hands as soon as they return home from any retail foray and eschewing touching their faces or blowing their noses in the interim. In April 2007, the truth about the nasty state of shopping carts was bent to a hellish purpose when an e-mailed rumor about Hispanics polluting the wheeled conveyances with staph infections spread through Guntersville, Alabama. In that anonymous note, Dr. John Packard Jr., a local pediatrician, was falsely described as having advised a patient that her baby, along with twelve other children, had picked up the potentially deadly contagion from an infected cart at a local grocery store. The doctor was moreover reported to have said Hispanics had put it there, themselves being immune to that form of bacteria. Hispanics have no special immunity to staphylococcus. All the statements attributed to Dr. Packard were not his; they were the invention of the letter's anonymous writer. As for the wave of illness that had supposedly felled thirteen children who had come into contact with the sickness-laden carts, Packard assured the community no such infection existed and that the alleged incidents never happened. Additional Information: Shared surfaces most favored by germs: Claim: Handles of shopping carts are laden with germs.

SOLUTION:
One study ranked grocery cart handles and child seats third on a list of nastiest public items to touch.