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.

Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: Earlier this week, officials at the National Health Service (NHS) in England recommended that hospitals cancel all non-urgent appointments and operations until next month. May, during a visit to a hospital outside London, said she recognized it is frustrating for patients who had their operations postponed. “I know it is difficult, I know it is frustrating, I know it is disappointing for people and I apologize,” she told Sky News. A flu outbreak, colder weather and high levels of respiratory illnesses have put hospitals in England under strain with many operating at or near full capacity. The issue is potentially damaging for May, already weakened after losing a parliamentary majority in last year’s election and struggling to pacify her deeply divided party as she navigates the final year of Brexit negotiations. The NHS, which delivers free care for all and accounts for a third of government spending on public services, is typically one of the most important issues for voters during elections and one which is often regarded as a weakness for May’s Conservative party. Opposition parties regularly accuse the government of failing to adequately fund the health service. “Ministers refused to provide the funding top NHS officials said was necessary and now patients are paying the price,” said Vince Cable, leader of the Liberal Democrats. Founded in 1948 by the opposition Labour Party, the NHS is a source of huge pride for many Britons who are able to access free care from cradle to grave. But tight budgets, an aging population and increasingly complex medical needs have left many hospitals struggling during the winter in recent years. The pressure continues to grow, according to new data on Thursday. The number of patients stuck in ambulances for at least an hour almost doubled to more 4,700 cases during the Christmas week compared with the week before. Department of Health guidelines say ambulance crews should be able to hand patients over to hospital staff within 15 minutes of arrival at hospital. The average bed occupancy for the Christmas week was 91.7 percent. Doctors say that anything above 85 percent is unsafe. The conditions have led some doctors taking to Twitter to vent their frustrations. One London-based doctor wrote that conditions were so bad that he was practicing “battlefield medicine”, while another apologized for the “3rd world conditions” caused by overcrowding. Claim: British PM May apologizes as overwhelmed hospitals cancel non-emergency operations.

Output: Britain’s Prime Minister Theresa May apologized on Thursday to tens of thousands of patients whose operations were canceled to free up staff and beds to deal with emergency patients.


Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: The footage, said to be filmed in January at Planned Parenthood clinics in Falls Church, Charlottesville and Roanoke, Virginia, is the latest in a series of videos made public by Live Action, a California-based group that opposes abortion. Live Action said in a statement that the videos are evidence Planned Parenthood is “willing to aid and abet the sexual trafficking and exploitation of minors and young women.”   Planned Parenthood said the undercover videos are part of a coordinated lobbying effort to advance legislation that would take away funding from the family planning organization. The three videos, one at each clinic, show a man saying he’s involved in sex work and manages teenage girls ask questions about prices and identification requirements for sexually transmitted disease testing, birth control and abortions. In each case he asks if the conversations are confidential. In the videos, Planned Parenthood employees answer questions about health services offered at the clinic and explain requirements associated with different procedures. “It’s very clear to us that these tapes show health professionals doing their job,” said Planned Parenthood spokesman Stuart Schear of the new footage. “What the tapes don’t show is that after these unusual encounters, these health professionals went to their superiors and reported they had unusual encounters with a suspicious individual and Planned Parenthood managers reported their suspicions to local authorities,” Schear said. Planned Parenthood has said previously that the FBI is reviewing evidence and photos related to the encounters. All of the undercover videos were filmed during the same week. The first one, released on Tuesday, focused on a clinic in central New Jersey. The New Jersey clinic employee captured on film was later fired for her behavior. Planned Parenthood said it notified both local and national authorities after the string of unusual visits, which occurred within one week in at least 12 centers in six states, including New Jersey and Virginia. In January, Planned Parenthood said it alerted U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder that a series of health centers had been approached by visitors whose comments indicated involvement in sex trafficking of minors. Live Action’s founder, Lila Rose, said her group will send the Virginia footage to state law enforcement officials and Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli. Cuccinelli said in a statement released Friday that he plans to review the footage, noting that what he has seen so far “is very disturbing.”   Meanwhile, New Jersey’s Attorney General Paula Dow is aware of the video and has referred the matter to the Division of Criminal Justice for review, spokesman Paul Loriquet said earlier in the week. Claim: Anti-abortion group releases more video of Planned Parenthood.

Output: An anti-abortion group released on Friday three more undercover videos, which it said show Planned Parenthood employees helping a man posing as a pimp get abortions and birth control for underage girls.


Input: Consider Input: Paragraph: "The story reports that harvesting enough stem cells for infusion is difficult and costly, though it fails to cite specific costs. For research in Phase I, any comment on cost might be purely speculative. Since the study is designed to prove safety, there are no credible benefits data to report. The report does allow sources to make general claims of benefit based on that preliminary data, but the reporter shows restraint by not plucking benefits data points from the study. On a close call, the story earns a satisfactory rating. While the story briefly mentions the potential for rejection, it fails otherwise to specify the potential side effects of the stem cell harvesting or infusion. This is surprising, given the fact that the Phase I trial is designed to prove safety. The story makes plain that the evidence from the published study can only prove safety, not efficacy. It does a good job educating readers about the three phases of FDA trials and what each is designed to establish. The story does nothing to exaggerate the prevalence or severity of the damage to the heart muscle by heart attacks. The story uses two sources: One stem cell expert who is not involved with the research, and the lead author of the published paper. While that’s thin sourcing for a story of this length, it’s sufficient to earn a satisfactory rating. The story compares this process, which involves infusing the patient with a donor’s bone marrow stem cells, with both use of the patient’s own stem cells and with surgical introduction of the cells. The story does not specify conventional treatments for heart failure, which would have provided useful context. Still, the story earns a satsifactory rating. Most of the story makes it clear that the technique is in early trials and not in clinical use. Only the opening line is troubling – ""If you’ve just had your first heart attack, doctors may one day be able to reverse the damage done with stem cell therapy."" Due to clumsy wording,  this suggests that if you had your first  heart attack in late 2009, doctors may someday be able to reverse today’s damage from it – which is not  at all the case. But this misstep is remedied by a later statement that it would take a best-case scenario to have such an approach approved even in five years. The story does not make false claims for the procedure’s novelty. See he criterion – ""Compare the new approach with existing alternatives"" – below. There’s no evidence that the story relied on a news release." Claim: Stem cell therapies for hearts inching closer to wide use


Output: The story does a solid job of explaining that the current research, a Phase I study, can establish only that the procedure is safe, not that it is effective. The reader learns about the differences among the three phases of studies the FDA requires. The reader learns about how stem cells might benefit damaged heart muscle. Having said that, this story raises an existential question: Should the story have been done? If the results can prove only safety but not efficacy, why should a reader care? A story that demonstrates safety of a technique of no known benefit would never see mainstream publication. But the Phase I study results does show some promising benefits, and related research provides reason to believe the technique may indeed be useful. So should CNN report the story because of those apparent benefits, despite their not being established by data? That’s a lot of worry about one story. CNN decided to run with it. The report adds responsible context. The reader ultimately gets a mostly fair-minded report on promising early research into a new kind of stem cell research for heart disease. No reader would expect that the treatment is available or imminent. At the end of the day, that’s not a bad outcome. Despite advances in diagnostics and therapies, heart attack and its consequences represent a significant problem. This report highlights the results of an early phase 1 trial comparing a placebo infusion to an infusion of processed adult stem cells in patients with recent first heart attacks. The approach holds the potential to repair damage caused by a heart attack making subsequent heart failure less likely.