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 Input: Paragraph: The idea that the domestic dog descended from the grey wolf was originally established in 1993 using comparisons of wolf and dog mitochondrial DNA. This investigation showed that no other living animal was more closely related to the domestic dog than the grey wolf: “The domestic dog is an extremely close relative of the grey wolf, differing from it by at most 0.2% of [mitochondrial DNA].” Mitochondrial DNA is passed down by the mother (without any genetic contribution from the father) and changes only through random mutations that occur from generation to generation. Scientists use this much smaller and separate DNA sequence to estimate when populations of animals first diverged and to estimate the evolutionary relationships between organisms. By the mid-2000s, new technology allowed scientists to map the much longer DNA sequence found on the chromosomes of wolves and dogs — the genes that actually code for physical traits and behaviors. These studies demonstrated a 99.9% similarity (technically 99.96%) between dog and grey wolf, as covered in a 2007 review paper on the topic: In general, the domestic dog is an extremely close relative of the grey wolf, from which it differs by only ~0.04% in nuclear coding-DNA sequence, and no dog [mitochondrial DNA] sequences have been found that show closer kinship to other canid species. This similarity is so profound that hybridization often occurs between dogs and wolves. By the biological definition of species, this would mean that the domestic dog is a subspecies of the grey wolf (canis lupus familiaris). There remains some debate, however, as to what the appropriate classification for the domestic dog would be, with some arguing that the domestic dog should be its own distinct species (canis familiaris). Claim: Dogs and wolves are genetically 99.9% identical.
Example Output: These advances in genetic analysis have allowed scientists as well to pin down the probable timing of the split between these two canid lineages. A study published in 2015, which compared the whole genome sequence of dogs to a 35,000 year old Siberian wolf specimen, suggested the split likely occurred between 27,000 and 40,000 years ago, and that domestic dogs are likely themselves the descendants of a now extinct descendant of grey wolves.

Example Input: Paragraph: The story does not give any estimate of the cost of Doppler ultrasound examinations. The story clearly states the reduction in fetal death rates the review authors calculated by combining the results of the studies ithey looked at. It reports the absolute risk calculation of fetal or newborn deaths (1.7 percent among women who did not receive ultrasound monitoring vs. 1.2 percent among those who did). This reporting of absolute (as opposed to relative) risk reduction is a strong point of the story since it conveys to readers that while the intervention did improve outcomes, the underlying risk is small. We only wish, however, that the story had cited the Number Needed to Test that was included in the study – 203 would need to be tested in order to find one case of fetal distress that would otherwise not have been seen using other routine exams. The story notes that there has been concern that the use of Doppler ultrasound might increase unnecessary interventions, including cesarean section deliveries in cases where it is not actually needed. It says the studies indicated that Doppler ultrasound appeared to lead to better decisions about cesarean sections and inductions of labor. The story explains that this report is a review of other studies. It also points out some shortcomings in the underlying studies. The story also includes a comment from one of the study authors that since the technique is established in current practice it is unlikely that there will be future studies of the use of the technology in high-risk pregnancies. The story clearly states that the evidence on the use of Doppler ultrasound applies only to high-risk pregnancies and that there is no evidence the examinations should be done in low-risk pregnancies. There is no information in the story that appears to come from an independent source. Comments from experts in the field would have helped put the authors’ comments into perspective. The story says other types of testing, including electronic fetal-heart monitoring, may also be done during high-risk pregnancies. The story notes that Doppler is an established technique used to monitor high-risk pregnancies. The story notes that Doppler ultrasound is an established technology and that most of the studies reviewed were done in the 1990s. The story does not appear to rely solely on a news release. It says the lead researcher was interviewed. Claim: Ultrasound may cut deaths in high-risk pregnancies
Example Output: This story clearly explains that a new review of the available evidence from published trials backs the use of Doppler ultrasound to monitor high-risk pregnancies. Notably, the story reports the absolute risk calculation of fetal or newborn deaths (1.7 percent among women who did not receive ultrasound monitoring vs. 1.2 percent among those who did), rather than trumpeting a large reduction in relative risk. By including the absolute risk numbers, the story helps readers understand both that the test appears to reduce the death rate and, importantly, that the overall risk of fetal or newborn death in developed nations is very small, thus putting the results in perspective. This story also pointed out that there is some uncertainty about the findings because of concerns about the quality of the underlying studies including in the review. What’s more, it highlights the point that the studies included only women who had high-risk pregnancies and that there is no evidence to suggest the use of Doppler ultrasound to monitor low-risk pregnancies. The story would have been ranked as satisfactory on all criteria if it had reported the typical cost of Doppler ultrasound monitoring and included an independent source in addition to the lead author of the review. When there is concern about potential problems with a pregnancy, Doppler ultrasound is a commonly recommended test used to help make decisions about cesarean section, induced labor or other interventions; thus misuse of the test could lead to inappropriate interventions.

Example Input: Paragraph: "Newly minted Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., blasted the incoming administration for already abandoning campaign pledges in an interview on MSNBC. For example, he pointed to Rep. Tom Price of Georgia, an orthopedic surgeon and President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the Department of Health and Human Services. ""Price, the guy from HHS, Donald Trump said when he campaigned he wouldn't cut Medicare and Social Security, but he turns around nominates as his HHS secretary, guy who made his career on cutting Medicare and Medicaid,"" Schumer said on Jan. 3’s Rachel Maddow Show (around the 14:10 mark). ""We’re going to slam him on these things."" Trump certainly promised to keep health care programs for seniors (Medicare) and the poor (Medicaid) intact and to protect Social Security (which doesn’t fall under HHS’ jurisdiction). But what about Schumer’s characterization of Price’s record on the health care programs? Price has supported reducing the government’s role in Medicare and Medicaid and reducing spending on the programs. That would be a major change of course from how the programs ran under the Obama administration. Trump’s pledges Throughout the course of the 2016 election, Trump largely promised to protect or save Social Security and Medicare and instead to crack down on waste and fraud, with a few detours. Trump tweeted that he would leave all three safety nets intact in May 2015, a month before he made his official presidential announcement (in which he said the same thing). During the election, Trump continued to promise to protect Social Security and Medicare during debates, numerous campaign events, multiple interviews and campaign ads. He even seemed to suggest expanding Medicare or Medicaid in some instances and (falsely) accused Hillary Clinton of wanting to cut them. Post-election, Trump’s incoming chief of staff said Trump intends to keep those promises. Trump’s health care plan, released in March 2016, proposed to turn Medicaid into a ""block grant"" program but didn’t specify what that would look like. (Typically, block grants set a cap on the amount of federal funding to states for Medicaid instead of the current structure of the federal government matching state spending.) Price’s career A doctor and staunchly conservative policy wonk, Price has made health care one of his legislative priorities in his 20-year stint as a public servant. Price, who had his own orthopedic clinic in northern Atlanta, first ran for state office in 1996. During his time in the Georgia State Senate from 1997 to 2005, he sponsored legislation ""to increase patient choice, enact Medical Savings Accounts, and reform the Medicaid system,"" according to his Georgia legislature biography. In 2006, he ran for and won former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s old seat, spurred at least in part from outrage over the rising cost of malpractice insurance (tort reform is another pet issue of Price’s). Price has focused on reducing government oversight of health care and shifting to more private insurance. The first piece of legislation he introduced was a resolution ""recognizing the need to move the nation's current health care delivery system toward a defined contribution system,"" which would be a move away from employer-provided coverage as it exists today. He also sponsored bills to increase Medicare payments to doctors, allow doctors to enter into private contracts with Medicare beneficiaries and charge the program for their services,  and called for implementing cost-saving measures in Medicare and Medicaid. After Obama’s election, Price emerged as one of the leading opponents of the president’s signature Affordable Care Act. ""While the stated goal (of health care reform) remains noble, as a physician, I can attest that nothing has had a greater negative effect on the delivery of health care than the federal government’s intrusion into medicine through Medicare,"" Price wrote in a 2009 column in Politico that advocated for ""a third way that puts patients in charge."" He has introduced a plan to repeal and replace Obamacare every legislative session since 2009. Price’s Empowering Patients First Act instead provides tax credits to help pay for private insurance plans and expands health savings accounts. The Price plan also allows for people to opt out of Medicare and Medicaid (and other government-run health programs) and choose the tax credits to purchase private plans instead. It folds in his previous advocacy of private contracting between Medicare beneficiaries and doctors. Beyond his own proposals, Price supported Paul Ryan’s 2011 budget plan, which would have eventually moved Medicare toward private insurance by giving people under 55 voucher-like tax credits to purchase plans. This is also called premium support. When he became chairman of the House budget committee, Price was the primary author of a budget for fiscal year 2016  that included $900 billion in spending reductions to Medicaid (through block granting) and $148 billion to Medicare (by leaving the Obama administration’s cost-saving measures intact), according to the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. Price’s budget for fiscal year 2017 similarly sought: $1 trillion from Medicaid and $449 billion from Medicare. After Trump’s election, Price expressed optimism that lawmakers could overhaul Medicare in 2017. Did Price cut Medicare, Medicaid? For all of Price’s efforts to change Medicare and Medicaid and reduce spending, nothing actually came to fruition. Whether Price’s supported policies amount to ""cutting"" the health program or making it more market-oriented is a matter of debate, though he clearly wants to reduce the government’s role in Medicare. Schumer’s office pointed to Price’s comment on Medicare being government intrusion and his support for Medicare overhaul as evidence for Schumer’s claim. But a Trump transition team spokesman told us Price ""has long been a champion for strengthening Medicare for both current and future beneficiaries"" and believes that ""Medicaid provides a crucial safety-net for millions of Americans."" Experts, meanwhile, were divided over whether Price’s proposals amounted to ""cutting"" Medicare and Medicaid. The Center for Medicare Advocacy, a nonpartisan health care advocacy group, typically doesn’t weigh in on cabinet appointments but opposes Price’s nomination precisely because of his position on Medicare, said David Lipschutz, the group’s senior policy attorney. ""The policies he has advocated would significantly cut and alter Medicare,"" Lipschutz told us, listing Price’s support for a premium support model, opposition to allowing Medicare to negotiate prescription drug prices and advocating for private contracting between Medicare beneficiaries with physicians with Medicare footing the bill. Gail Wilensky, the former director at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid under President George H.W. Bush, called Price’s comment on Medicare as government intrusion a ""gross exaggeration."" But Wilensky preferred to characterize Price as a supporter of Medicare reform. She added that like Price, she supports premium support as a model for Medicare reform, as do prominent Democrats Alice Rivlin, a health care policy expert who served under President Bill Clinton, and Bob Reischauer, a fellow at the left-leaning Urban Institute. Our ruling Schumer said, ""Donald Trump said when he campaigned he wouldn't cut Medicare and Social Security"" but his nominee for the Secretary of Health and Human Services ""made his career on cutting Medicare and Medicaid."" Price, Trump’s HHS pick, has supported reducing the government’s role in Medicare and block granting Medicaid, which would amount to spending reductions to both programs. While it’s clear these proposals would reduce federal spending on the health safety nets, experts say it’s not the same thing as gutting the programs entirely. Trump did pledge to leave Medicare and Social Security alone, and Price’s positions seem at odds with that. (It’s worth noting that Social Security isn’t administered by HHS)." Claim: "Charles Schumer Says Donald Trump campaigned on not cutting Medicare and Social Security, but his nominee for the Secretary of Health and Human Services, Tom Price, ""made his career on cutting Medicare and Medicaid."
Example Output:
"Schumer said, ""Donald Trump said when he campaigned he wouldn't cut Medicare and Social Security"" but his nominee for the Secretary of Health and Human Services ""made his career on cutting Medicare and Medicaid."" Price, Trump’s HHS pick, has supported reducing the government’s role in Medicare and block granting Medicaid, which would amount to spending reductions to both programs. While it’s clear these proposals would reduce federal spending on the health safety nets, experts say it’s not the same thing as gutting the programs entirely. Trump did pledge to leave Medicare and Social Security alone, and Price’s positions seem at odds with that. (It’s worth noting that Social Security isn’t administered by HHS)."