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: A 34-year-old woman from Loudi city in the central province of Hunan confessed to poisoning the yoghurt drink before delivering to the students, Xinhua said on Saturday. It said the woman was suspected to be suffering from a mental disorder. Three children were in serious condition but their lives were not in danger, Xinhua said. Investigations were going on. There have been several attacks on schools in China in recent years while at the same time, food safety has become a contentious issue with a rising number of food-poisoning cases due in part to lax safety standards at small factories. Claim: Nineteen students sick in China from poisoned yoghurt.
Nineteen primary school children in China have been hospitalized after drinking yoghurt said to be laced with rat poison and herbicide, the Xinhua state news said.

Paragraph: Roy treads carefully as the water rises to his knees, seeming for a moment to lose sight of his prey. Then in one swift action he steps back, takes aim and shatters the outback calm, and a crocodile, with a single booming shotgun blast. I am definitely not in Sydney anymore. For more than 10 years I have dreamed of photographing the daily lives of Aboriginal Australians in the northern-most tip of the Northern Territory, Australia's rugged "Top End". Their Arnhem Land reserve - closer to Bali than Sydney - covers an area of around 97,000 sq km (37,500 sq miles), has a population of around 16,000 and access for non-Aborigines is by invitation only. Australia's Aborigines are the custodians of the longest unbroken cultural tradition on Earth, having migrated Down Under from Africa via Asia between 40,000 and 60,000 years ago, and connection to the land is practically written into their DNA. But the arrival of European settlers in the 18th century marked the beginning of a painful disenfranchisement. Massacres are still tearfully remembered and today the majority of Aborigines live in abject poverty. Last year, while on patrol with the Indigenous Australian Army unit known as NORFORCE, I met Sergeant Norman Daymirringu, a Yolngu Aborigine, who invited me to go hunting with him near Ramingining, located a bumpy and dusty 600 km drive east of Darwin. Norman is allowed by tradition to share his ancient culture with those he deems worthy, and I was honoured to have been told the Yolngu people's creation stories and shown their sacred sites. But entering Arnhem Land as a "White Fella" means changing gears and seeing the world through a completely different set of eyes, a great challenge for a photographer. For example, an outsider might struggle to understand a site such as "Dog's Tongue", an orange rock amid a barren salt pan, but for Norman it is an integral part of the creation of the universe. The rock has tipped over from its normal position and Norman, as custodian of the land, affords me the rare honor of watching as he puts it back in place, where it has stood for countless millennia. At Yathalamarra, a community consisting of around a dozen houses, we pick up some relatives for the hunt and head on foot to an isolated billabong. With the sun blazing and temperatures reaching 40 degrees Celsius, or 104 Fahrenheit, I am getting pessimistic, when suddenly Roy fires his shotgun. At his feet lies a dead crocodile. Roy pulls the beast from the water, while Marcus keeps lookout. Not far from the shoreline the water starts moving. Suddenly Marcus pounces and, from just beneath the surface, he pulls another crocodile, this one a bleating baby. Roy is nervous about crossing the billabong carrying a heavy dead crocodile, but wanders downstream and grabs a boat hidden in the bushes. Using a stick as a paddle he navigates towards us, throwing the two crocs onto the muddy shore. Wow, its over, I think. We can head off with a great catch and potential feast awaiting. Roy has other ideas: "It's easier to carry them without all that skin," he tells me. Any butcher would have been extremely impressed with the skill he showed at filleting this massive beast. The baby was carried out alive. As we are leaving, Roy wraps the intestines in leaves, as nothing that can be eaten is wasted, and he and his sons walk the few kilometers back to the car with crocodile meat and a goanna lizard slung over their shoulders. As for me, I walked away with a unique insight into their culture and some photographs that not many others have had the privilege of taking. Claim: Hunting for pictures, and crocodiles, in remote Aboriginal country.
We are deep in a forest crowded by Australian paperback trees, the air thick with humidity but eerily silent save for the screeching of tropical birds, when Marcus shouts: "Look, crocodiles!" As a Reuters photojournalist, I'm a trained observer, but I can't see any crocs. I can't see anything beyond mud and what little water is left in the small billabong. Aboriginal hunters Marcus and Roy, a father and son team, take off running past a herd of water buffalo and by the time I catch up Roy is standing ankle-deep in murky water, his shotgun pointed at the surface. Hang on a minute: wasn't your son pointing at crocodiles in that water ten seconds ago? Is this safe?

Paragraph: As this is not an available treatment, the cost was presented as something not yet known. The story suggested that the cost for the pill would likely be something less than $17/month the cost for its component medications. The story did not provide a rational for why the expected costs would be less than the costs for the individual medications on their own. Nonetheless, it tried to address cost. The benefits of treatment in terms of blood pressure, LDL cholesterol, triglycerides, HDL, and anti-clotting were presented However, it is premature to present an estimate for the reduction in heart attack and stroke as the time frame of the study presented is much too short to inform us as to whether this is the case. There was no discussion of harms of treatment beyond a statement that the side effect rates for the polypill were the same as for the medications individually. While this was what was observed in the current 12 week trial, the reader should have been reminded of the short term nature of the study, the limited demographics of the study population, and that conclusions, although informed by the common long-term use of the component medications, still require analysis of the effects these medications may have in individuals who may not have all of the underlying conditions being treated. Although the story did an adequate job of describing the results of the study, it did not confine itself to discussion of the observed outcomes but chose to focus on extrapolating the results to what might be the longer term benefit. Stating that this pill could 'cut a person's risk of heart disease and stroke roughly in half, the study concludes' implies that the pill was tested for its effect on cardiovascular outcomes, when in fact it has only been shown to reduce risk factors levels in a single, short-term study. This is misleading. The story did not engage in overt disease mongering. Quotes from a number of clinicians involved in the current study, and individuals who were supportive or critical of the current treatment approach were included in this story. While the story failed to mention options other than the use of multiple pharmaceuticals to lower risk of heart attack and stroke, it did touch on the use of the drugs separately rather than in combined form. The story made clear that the combination pill discussed was experimental, while at the same time indicating that all of its components were available as generic medications. The novelty of such a polypill was appropriately portrayed. Does not appear to rely on a press release. Claim: Once-a-day heart combo pill shows promise in study
"This story accurately reported on the results of a recent study and at the same time engendered enthusiasm not supported by the current data for the use of a single pill that contained a group of 5 different medications for heart disease. While the study enrolled individuals who could be calculated to be at increased risk of heart attack or stroke, the story went on to speculate about the use of this 'polypill' for use as a preventative medication. The story should have included some discussion about the difference between treatment and prevention of conditions. The story included discussion of psychologic benefits which could be gained through the use of a combined pill as opposed to individual medications without providing any background on where the data demonstrating this came from. While there is reason to think that there may be benefits to be gained through the use of multi-action medications, there ought to be some critical thought given to the impact of medication of this nature when used in older individuals or in those being treated for other conditions with drugs that might interact with a combination medication of this nature. The line that states ""Taking it could cut a person's risk of heart disease and stroke roughly in half, the study concludes" overwhelms several other good features of the story. That statement makes it seem like it was tested for its effect on cardiovascular outcomes, when it has only been shown to reduce risk factor levels in a short-term study. To its credit, the story included comments with caveats that were not included in some other news accounts."