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: "South Florida has a reputation as a place ripe for fraud and crime -- including bilking the government. State Rep. Ron Saunders, the Democratic minority leader from Key West, has slapped a more specific label on a costly problem in South Florida: Medicaid fraud. ""The two worst counties for fraud in the country -- not state -- are Dade and Broward county,"" he told a roomful of reporters on Jan. 19, 2011, during an Associated Press preview of Florida's upcoming legislative session. It's easy to find news articles describing South Florida as a mecca for such fraud -- with labels such as ""ground zero"" or mind-boggling tales of abuse. But the word ""worst"" caught our eye -- are the South Florida counties of Miami-Dade and Broward truly the ""worst"" in the country for Medicaid fraud? Medicaid, a health care program for low-income individuals, is administered by the states and receives some federal funding. The Truth-O-Meter has weighed in multiple times on fact-checks related to the high cost and growth of Medicaid, including a claim by Pam Bondi, now Florida's attorney general, and Bill McCollum, Florida's previous attorney general. For more background, check out this website of the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. We spoke to Saunders directly on Jan. 20, who told us that his statement was in response to a question about how to resolve the state's budget crisis. Saunders said it's a ""no-brainer"" to cut back on fraud such as in Medicare and Medicaid rather than make more cuts in areas such as education. But after a lot of calls and research, we can say one thing for certain: Nobody tracks county-by-county Medicaid fraud nationally. Even within Florida, a county breakdown is not available. So we're going to rely on expert opinions and documented trends in this ruling. Mark Hollis, spokesperson for the House Democratic caucus, sent us links to newspaper articles and government reports about Medicaid fraud in South Florida. Among the sources Hollis cited was a March 2009 article in Health News Florida, quoting state Sen. Don Gaetz saying: ""Since we have the worst problem in the nation, we need the most effective solution."" Hollis also sent us a December 2005 article in HomeCare, an industry publication, quoting FBI agent Michael Clemens, who was in charge of the Miami field office at the time, saying: ""South Florida is ground zero for health care fraud."" But neither article provides any documentation to support that ""worst"" label. Hollis also sent us links to a House bill and recent government reports about Medicaid fraud. House Bill 1487 in 2009, which labeled Miami-Dade an area of ""special concern,"" was intended to rein in Medicaid fraud. The Senate version, Senate Bill 2658, was signed into law in June 2009. The staff analysis outlined the rampant growth in home health care agencies in Florida: Of the 431 licensure applications in 2007, 58.5 percent were in Miami-Dade. In that county, the number of licensed agencies grew 414 percent between August 1999 and March 6, 2009. The analysis also stated that ""While Miami-Dade has about 20 percent of Florida’s Medicaid population and about 33 percent of Florida’s residents over the age of 60, 91 percent of the state reimbursement for certain home health services were going to Miami-Dade."" While the bill analysis doesn't provide data ranking all of Florida's counties, it certainly suggests that Miami-Dade has an overwhelmingly disproportionate share of Medicaid dollars -- and fraud. Florida's Agency for Health Care Administration, which administers the Medicaid program, has a report from 2009-10 that also provides some insight. Although the 94-page report does not describe Broward and Miami-Dade as the worst in the nation, it noted:  • ""Home health agencies have been an acknowledged area of health care fraud in recent years. For the four fiscal years ending June 30, 2009, approximately 90 percent of Medicaid expenditures for home health aide visits were made to providers in Miami‐Dade County, while only about 20 percent of Medicaid recipients reside in that area. At the end of the fiscal year, there were 339 home health agencies in Miami‐Dade County actively enrolled in the Medicaid program and only 293 in the other 66 counties combined."" (Page 53)  • Statutes were changed in 2008 and 2009 to address home-health fraud. Forty-seven licensure denials for home health agencies were upheld in FY 2009-10 for fraud-related reasons. Thirty-one of the denials (66 percent) were in Miami-Dade County. (Page 65)  We reached out to several agencies that have a role in Medicaid. Both the Florida Attorney General, which has a Medicaid Fraud Control Unit, and AHCA said they had no nationwide county-by-county information to support or refute Saunders' claim. Don White, spokesman for the Office of Inspector General for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, also told us that the federal government has ""no statistics on Medicaid fraud."" As for Saunders' claim that Dade and Broward are the ""worst"" in the country, White said: ""Do we have the numbers? No. Is he probably correct? Yes."" We ran Saunders' claim by Alan Levine, a former secretary at AHCA under Gov. Jeb Bush and an expert on Medicaid. ""I have absolutely no doubt South Florida is among the highest,"" Levine wrote in an e-mail. ""Others that likely run in the same circle are New York and New Jersey. But South Florida, from all the experience I have, clearly leads the way."" Levine sent us a 2009 report, ""Stop Paying the Crooks,"" by the Center for Health Transformation, an organization founded by former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. It stated that the U.S. Department of Justice labeled ""South Florida -- and more specifically, Miami-Dade County --Ground Zero for health care fraud in America."" But no numbers ranking counties nationwide. We sent Saunders' claim to Craig Smith, the attorney who wrote the South Florida chapter, who works at Hogan Lovells law firm in Miami. ""Whatever the exact figure is, there can be no question that the bulk of the fraud, waste and abuse is occurring in Miami-Dade and Broward counties,"" Smith wrote to us in an e-mail Feb. 1. ""Based on the size of Florida's Medicaid program, you can fairly eliminate about 45 states from the comparative discussion."" So let's review: Saunders said that ""The two worst counties for (Medicaid) fraud in the country -- not state -- are Dade and Broward county."" We could not find any government office that could point to numbers ranking counties across the nation in terms of Medicaid fraud. But we found four experts -- one from the federal Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General, one a former secretary of the state's AHCA, a spokesperson from a national organization that provides information on health care fraud and an attorney who specializes in health care law -- who all agree that Saunders is likely right. At PolitiFact Florida, we dig for data to support claims by politicians -- and Saunders and our experts haven't provided hard numbers to prove him right. But the fact that four experts -- including one appointed by a Republican governor -- generally back up the Democratic minority leader or say that the two counties are at least among the worst in the nation carries weight with us." Claim: The two worst counties for (Medicaid) fraud in the country -- not state -- are Dade and Broward county.
[EX A]: Ron Saunders says Miami-Dade, Broward rule the country in Medicaid fraud

[EX Q]: Paragraph: "As a matter of course, stories about the increased use of drugs should report the drugs’ prices. A change in guidelines based on the study would increase the number of patients eligible for treatment by several hundred thousand in the US. The annualized cost of drug treatment is $12,000-$24,000 depending on the regimen, leading to potential new expenditures of $24 to $48 billion. While there are significant offsets, the potential for this level of additional costs should have been included in the story The story states that delaying treatment ""nearly doubles the risk of dying over the next several years"" and yields a ""70 percent improvement in survival."" This reporting is vague. The story should have compared absolute risks, not relative risks. See our primer on this issue. The story should have included the time span studied. These numbers should have stated the two death rates directly so readers can understand the magnitude of the benefit–whether the risk of death went from [say] 2 percent to 1 percent or from 30 percent to 15 percent. The story places the recommended treatment of earlier drug intervention in the context of the treatments’ known side effects, which can be very serious. The story should have described the severity of those side effects. We give this a satisfactory score, but barely. The report is based on a study presented at a major medical meeting. The story should have mentioned the fact that it has not been published or peer-reviewed. It should also have pointed out that it was a retrospective cohort study, which is considered to be less conclusive than prospective, double-blind studies. It should also have pointed out, as the NIH press release does, that a clinical trial is needed to validate the results in a way that would call for changing the current guidelines. These failures to provide caveats and context earn the story an ""unsatisfactory"" rating under this criterion. The story does not exaggerate the gravity or prevalance of AIDS. The story quotes Anthony Fauci, one of the best-known and -respected experts in the field of HIV/AIDS. The story also quotes the study’s lead investigator, and the author of AIDS treatment guidelines. That source’s link to companies that make AIDS drugs is properly noted. The story also quotes an independent clinician familiar with the guidelines and the current research. The story plainly compares the current guidelines with the regimen tested. The story explains that the drug combinations used by AIDS patients have been widely used since the mid-1990s. No claims are made for the novelty of the drug treatment. The recommendation to treat earlier is presented not as novel, but as a plan under consideration and study for quite some time. The story does not draw excessively on the NIH press release." Claim: AIDS treatment should be started sooner, study says
[EX A]: "This is a Columbus Dispatch version of a story reported by the Associated Press. Since the Columbus paper changed the original article substantially, we send our comments to the Columbus paper. Taking the big view, this story about the benefits of starting the standard multi-drug AIDS treatment sooner than current guidelines suggest accomplishes its mission. It fairly describes important new research that verifies earlier work suggesting the same thing. It says, correctly, that the continuing research could drive changes in treatment. The story is well-sourced and provides a lucid description of the disease process and detailed definition of ""early"" treatment. Having said that, the report falls short of two key best practices:  It fails to quantify the benefits of early treatment in a meaningful way. It uses ""relative risk"" [a percent reduction in mortality] instead of ""absolute risk"" [which would allow readers to understand the gravity of the risk and the size of the benefit. It fails to describe the limitations of the study with caveats and context. If the story had mentioned those limitations, its predictions of imminent clinical use and eventual changes to the guidelines would have been properly tempered. As presented, the story fails to check the sources’ consistent enthusiasm with journalistic disinterest. Given the credibility of the study, the opinions of multiple high-quality sources and the previous research record, the predictions seem justifiable. But the history of AIDS science, treatment and politics recommends a bit more reporting distance and care."

[EX Q]: Paragraph: The board said an 8-year-old white-tailed doe tested positive after it was killed by its pen-mate, a white-tailed buck, the only other deer on the site. Test results are pending on the buck, which was euthanized. No deer remain on the site, which has been quarantined, the board said. The board’s senior veterinarian, Dr. Courtney Wheeler, said they’re investigating how the disease might have reached the herd, which was owned by a hobbyist, including the herd’s history and the movements of animals to the property. Chronic wasting disease is caused by abnormally shaped proteins called prions, which can persist in the environment. It spreads from deer to deer. While it’s not known to infect humans, authorities advise against consuming infected meat. Claim: Chronic wasting disease found in 2-deer Douglas County herd.
[EX A]:
A case of chronic wasting disease has been confirmed in a captive deer in Douglas County of west-central Minnesota, marking the first appearance of the fatal brain disease in that county, the Board of Animal Health announced Tuesday.