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.

[Q]: Paragraph: Since Nov. 1, South Carolina has recorded 86 reported cases of the contagious disease. State Epidemiologist Linda Bell said Monday that’s more than four times what state officials normally expect to see. Over the last 10 years, South Carolina averaged 19 reported cases of hepatitis A annually. Most of the new cases have occurred in Aiken County, and almost half of all cases involve individuals who reported drug use, Bell said. Still, the general population needn’t be overly concerned, she said. “But we are seeing cases higher that what we expect to see,” Bell said. “And so it’s important for us to do our prevention efforts early to reach those high-risk groups, get them vaccinated ... so that we can prevent” a severe outbreak. The State reports the Department of Health and Environmental Control is offering no-cost vaccines to high risk groups including drug users, homeless, formerly incarcerated and sexually-active gay men. Additionally, health officials recommend all children get two doses of the vaccine as part of their immunization schedule. Of the 86 reported cases in South Carolina, 59 have led to hospitalization and one resulted in death, the DHEC said. Hepatitis is a disease characterized by inflammation of the liver. It comes in many forms, including hepatitis A, B and C. As a result, individuals with chronic liver disease, like cirrhosis, are at increased risk of complications if infected and should be vaccinated. The virus-borne infection can be prevented by vaccination and is usually transmitted person-to-person through consumption of contaminated food or water, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Antibodies produced in response to hepatitis A infection last for life and protect against reinfection. Infection usually results in sickness in two to six weeks after exposure. Symptoms include fatigue, loss of appetite, stomach pain, nausea, and yellowing of the eyes and skin. Symptoms usually resolve within two months of infection, according to the CDC. State public health officials in February declared an outbreak in Aiken County after an employee at a second restaurant in Aiken tested positive for the virus, the DHEC said. Bell, though, stressed transmission by food or beverage is uncommon. “Most transmission in the United States is through person-to-person contact,” Bell said. “Good hygiene - diligently washing your hands - is a good way to prevent hepatitis A, as well as not sharing personal items,” including drug equipment, she said, adding the state has received reports of hepatitis A from people using various drugs, “everything from marijuana to meth.” Residents can schedule an appointment for a vaccination at their local health department by calling 855-472-3432 or going to http://bit.ly/2HhEsM8 . ___ Information from: The State, http://www.thestate.com Claim: South Carolina declares hepatitis outbreak.
[A]: What began as a spike in reported hepatitis A cases in Aiken County has now spread to other parts of South Carolina, prompting public health officials to declare a statewide outbreak.


[Q]: Paragraph: "Ohio Sen. Rob Portman has been busy in Washington touting the Comprehensive Addiction Recovery Act in response to a shocking number of heroin overdoses in Ohio. The bill just passed in the Senate, 94-1. (Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse was the sole ""nay,"" saying he believes that fighting addiction is a local issue.) Ohio ranks high on the list of states reeling from the national epidemic. In Montgomery County, which encompasses Dayton, Ohio, heroin-related deaths increased 225 percent between 2011 and 2015. Back in the 1970s, the heroin on U.S. streets was the ""black tar"" variety, and much of it came from southeast Asia. In 2010, 80 percent of the heroin in the world came from poppy fields in Afghanistan, according to the Office of National Drug Control Policy. So when Portman said that most of the heroin in America comes from Mexico’s border, we were skeptical. Portman, it turns out, has done his homework. The Drug Enforcement Administration’s National Drug Threat Assessment of 2015 says that Mexico is the primary supplier of heroin to the United States. ""Southeast Asia was once the dominant supplier of heroin in the United States, but Southeast Asian heroin is now rarely detected in U.S. markets,"" the report state. ""Mexico and, to a lesser extent, Colombia dominate the U.S. heroin market, because of their proximity, established transportation and distribution infrastructure, and ability to satisfy U.S. heroin demand."" The report also says that Mexican ""transnational criminal organizations,"" (the DEA’s term for drug-dealing gangs) ""pose the greatest criminal drug threat to the United States; no other group is currently positioned to challenge them."" The National Drug Threat report notes that Colombian gangs were traditionally the suppliers of wholesale cocaine and heroin to Mexican and Dominican groups. But cartels in Mexico are ramping up their roles on the supply side -- opium production in Mexico increased by 50 percent in 2014. Mexican labs also produce fentanyl, a synthetic painkiller that is 80 to 100 times stronger than morphine. Fentanyl is sometimes mixed with heroin or substituted for heroin, and the DEA reports more than 700 overdoses attributed to fentanyl between late 2013 and early 2015. Drugs get past the U.S. borders mostly ""by land, not by sea,"" said Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, in the same March 8 hearing with Portman. And a 2015 Washington Post series on the surge of heroin puts the border detection rate at a scant 1.5 percent. Smugglers’ creativity defies gravity: One successful bust came when agents caught two men flying a drone carrying 28 pounds of heroin from Mexico to California. Our ruling Portman said that heroin is coming to the United States primarily from Mexico. He hasn’t been studying drug facts for nothing." Claim: We understand that this heroin is primarily coming from Mexico, over the border.
[A]: Portman said that heroin is coming to the United States primarily from Mexico. He hasn’t been studying drug facts for nothing.


[Q]: Paragraph: The story reports that these scans typically cost $300-400 and are not generally covered by insurance. The story would have been better if it had clearly pointed out that the potentially huge cost of such a screening program, because hundreds of smokers had to be scanned to extend one life in this trial and follow-up tests and treatments cost much more than the initial scan. Nonetheless, we’ll give it the benefit of the doubt on this criterion. The New York Times never specified the scans’ costs. This story does a better job than some others in how it portrays the potential benefits of CT screening for lung cancer. The headline and lead report that deaths were reduced somewhat. The third paragraph of the story notes that among the 53,000 participants there were 20 percent fewer deaths among those offered CT scans compared to those offered chest x-rays, but that the “actual number of deaths averted was fairly modest” (354 in the CT group vs. 442 in the x-ray group). This way of presenting the results helps readers put the results in perspective. The story also notes that the National Cancer Institute said “it’s not clear that all smokers should get the scans.” However, the story could have made it more clear that the reduction in lung cancer death rates was seen after five years of folllow-up, which leaves open the question about whether that difference will persist over a longer time frame. It would have been helpful for this story to tell readers that 300 smokers had to be screened in this trial in order to extend the life of one of them. The story points out that such scans can produce false positive results, lead to further tests and treatments that don’t always benefit patients and have their own risks, and that CT scans expose people to radiation that may raise the risk of other types of cancer. It explains that the NCI is “still compiling the rates of false alarms and other risks” but estimates could have been drawn from past research. The story explains that 53,000 current or former smokers were given either CT scans or chest x-rays and that researchers tracked the number who died of lung cancer. However, readers may be confused by a reference to “the eight-year study period.” While it has been eight years since the trial began, the participants were followed for up to five years. Also, the story leads with a vague statement that this trial provides “the first evidence that a screening test may help fight the nation’s top cancer killer.” It would have been better for the story to be clear that this trial provides evidence about a difference in lung cancer death rates. The story could have done a better job of explaining that the randomization and other features of this trial set it above any other investigation of this topic. The story clearly states that this trial only involved people who are or were “very heavy smokers” and that it is not clear that the results are applicable to other smokers. There is no independent source quoted. (Please note: later versions of AP stories carried independent perspectives but we reviewed the first version we found.) This story highlights advice that quitting is the best way for smokers to avoid lung cancer. While this story does call the CT scans used in this trial “special” and different from conventional CT scans, it does not make clear that the trial applied rigorous standards to the equipment, operators and radiologists that may not be followed by other providers who offer CT scans to smokers. The story squeaks by this criterion. It mentions earlier trials that left key questions unresolved, but it does not clearly tell readers what was different about this trial. The only direct quote in the story is from a news release issued by the National Cancer Institute. (http://www.cancer.gov/newscenter/pressreleases/NLSTresultsRelease) It is not clear what other sources may have been consulted. Claim: Special CT scans cut lung cancer deaths in major study, but questions remain about screening
[A]:
It’s clear that this story worked very hard to avoid hyping the results of the National Lung Screening Trial, which found that heavy smokers who were offered certain CT scans were less likely to die of lung cancer than those who were offered chest x-rays. It quickly puts the relative difference in death rates (20 percent) into context with the actual numbers (354 vs. 442 deaths among 53,500 participants). Near the top, this story tells readers of doubts about the balance of harms and benefits of this type of screening. It emphasizes that quitting smoking is the best way to avoid lung cancer death. However, it appears that the story is mostly based on material handed out by the National Cancer Institute, which sponsored the trial. It fails to give readers any independent perspectives on the trial or the meaning of its results. Even a call to the American Cancer Society would have provided a cautious viewpoint. (Please note: later versions of AP stories carried independent perspectives but we reviewed the first version we found.) News reports on medical trials must give readers a balanced perspective. But journalists should seek out independent sources, so that they are not dependent on the sponsor or lead researcher to provide that balance.