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: Doctors' letters provided to The Associated Press give glowing medical marks to both men. The AP requested the results of a post-primary physical and, for each, a list of any major health conditions or prescription medications. Neither has any medical problems to speak of. The two have been engaged in one of the year's most expensive and closely watched Senate contests though outside groups on both sides have begun pulling money from the race as Strickland fails to gain traction against Portman's well-funded effort. The 60-year-old Portman, the Republican incumbent, is an avid sportsman who kayaks and cycles. He's on no medications and has no illnesses or chronic conditions. Strickland, Ohio's Democratic former governor, takes blood-pressure medicine. His doctor reports the 75-year-old has no illnesses or chronic conditions. Strickland would be the oldest person elected to a first term in the Senate though he'd be far from the oldest in the chamber. Thirteen sitting senators are 75 or older. That includes eight who are 80 and above. The median age in the Senate is around 63. When questioned about his age, Strickland says longevity runs in his family. The Portman campaign provided a letter from the senator's longtime doctor, James Hochwalt in Cincinnati, drawn from a July physical. "To my knowledge, there is nothing in his medical history or current medical status that would interfere with his demanding schedule and commitments of United States Senator," Hochwalt wrote. Strickland's physician, Paul Dusseau in Hilliard, also saw the candidate in July. In addition to an exam and lab work, Dusseau wrote that he reviewed Strickland's "past medical history, family medical history, daily habits and activities, and health over the past year." Dusseau issued what he dubbed an "Excellent Report!" Green Party Senate candidate Joseph DeMare is also in excellent health. His doctor, Matt Roth of Maumee, says in a letter provided to the AP that the 54-year-old takes no medication and has no ongoing medical concerns. Claim: Health reports rosy in Ohio's otherwise ugly US Senate race.
Output:
There's rosy news in the nasty, high-stakes battle for Ohio's U.S. Senate seat: Both Rob Portman and Ted Strickland are in excellent health.