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 Input:
Paragraph: The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) said it was investigating 14 fake or unlicensed products to treat COVID-19, the respiratory disease caused by the coronavirus. So far 3,605 Britons have died from the coronavirus, the latest data show, and experts have said deaths will continue to rise until the effect of recent lockdown measures filter through and slow the spread of the disease in the coming weeks. MHRA said it was investigating fake self-testing kits, miracle cures and so-called “antiviral misting sprays”. “Don’t be fooled by online offers for medical products to help prevent or treat COVID-19,” Lynda Scammell, MHRA enforcement official said. “There is no medicine licensed specifically to treat or prevent COVID-19, therefore any claiming to do so are not authorised and have not undergone regulatory approvals required for sale on the UK market.”  Scammell added that MHRA was working alongside law enforcement agencies to combat the spread of fake and unlicensed medical products. Claim: Miracle cures? UK investigators go after fake coronavirus medicines.

Ex Output:
British authorities said on Saturday they were clamping down on bogus cures for the coronavirus, which currently has no specific licensed treatment.


Ex Input:
Paragraph: In its latest “report card,” the American College of Emergency Physicians said such reduced access earned the nation a “D+” — that’s down from the overall “C-“ grade from the group’s last report in 2009. Shortages and reduced hospital capacity make it more difficult to access emergency care, the group said. It also warned about the impact on disaster preparedness. While the report does not measure the actual quality of care provided, it does offer a snapshot of national and state policies affecting emergency medicine as seen by providers. Washington, D.C., was ranked the highest in the report, earning a “B-“ grade, while Wyoming ranked last and was the only state to earn an overall failing grade of “F.”  The group’s task force looked at scores of measure in five major categories — access to care, quality and patient safety, liability, injury prevention and disaster preparedness — and relied on data from the Centers for Disease Control and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, among others. The report comes just as the Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare, comes into full effect this year. The 2010 law aims to expand access to health insurance and reduce the nation’s healthcare costs, but it has become a political flashpoint amid a troubled rollout of the federal insurance exchange website. While the physician’s report does not factor in all of the effects of the law — its grades are based on data from early 2013 — emergency rooms could be used even more as more Americans gain insurance coverage under Obamacare, it said. Some health experts have predicted that increasing the number of insured patients should reduce pressure on hospital emergency rooms because access to regular doctor care will improve, something that is hoped would prevent chronic conditions from spiraling out of control or help catch other problems before they worsen. But insurance coverage could also lead those who might have held off going to the emergency room to seek care, said Jon Mark Hirshon, an emergency medicine doctor and researcher at the University of Maryland who oversaw the group’s report card. Newly insured people also may have a hard time finding a regular doctor who accepts their plan, he said. “On top of that, emergency departments are open 24 hours a day, seven days a week. If I have a primary care provider but it’s 9 o’clock at night on a Friday and they’re closed, then people come to the emergency department,” Hirshon told Reuters. The group is asking for congressional hearings to probe whether the law puts “additional strains” on emergency rooms. Already, beds for patients have fallen from a rate of 358 per 100,000 people four years ago to about 330 beds per 100,000 people now, the report said. Wait times have increased to a median of 4.5 hours compared to four hours in 2009. Despite the dismal U.S. grade given by the group, it noted that policies and infrastructure varied widely by state. States with the best emergency care include Massachusetts, Maine, Nebraska and Colorado, while Kentucky, Montana, New Mexico and Arizona rounded out the bottom, just above Wyoming. States are also still grappling with the uninsured. By law, hospitals must provide emergency care regardless of patients’ ability to pay. Under Obamacare, states can expand access to Medicaid, the federal-state health insurance plan for the poor. Data shows that Medicaid patients use emergency rooms as much as other insured patients, but several recent studies have shown that Medicaid patients utilize them more than the uninsured. One study this month showed Oregon patients given Medicaid through a lottery increased their emergency room use by 40 percent compared to those not offered Medicaid. “We have to be leaner and more efficient, but it just becomes more and more challenging,” Hirshon said. Claim: Doctors say pressure on ERs may rise, give U.S. failing grade.

Ex Output:
People seeking urgent medical could face longer wait times and other challenges as demand increases under Obamacare, U.S. emergency doctors said in a report on Thursday that gives the nation’s emergency infrastructure a near failing grade.


Ex Input:
Paragraph: In a declaration issued after a meeting in the Bosnian capital Sarajevo, they urged Balkan governments to halt any further construction of hydro dams. “We want everybody to see that it is bad, and it is wrong and that we are devastating our natural beauties,” said Irma Popovic Dujmovic, from World Wide Fund for Nature Adria group, one of the organizers of the Sarajevo gathering. Concerns have been raised that small plants are being built for profit without any regard for the local community and local eco-systems. “Nature is losing, and local people are losing,” Dujmovic said. In Bosnia alone, participants at the meeting said there are plans to build 300 dams on 244 rivers. In the region, some 2,700 hydropower plants are envisaged in the coming years. Also Thursday, EuroNatur and Riverwatch groups said in a report that small hydro power plants are putting “immense pressure” on rivers throughout Europe. In addition to the 21,387 existing hydropower plants, another 8,779 are planned, mainly in the Alps and the Balkans. According to the report, this proliferation could destroy previously untouched rivers especially in the Balkans. Anger over crystal clear rivers being turned into building sites has fueled citizens’ movements throughout the Balkans. Residents of small villages have held protests and sought to bring the work to a halt. In the central Bosnian village of Merdani, residents said a small hydro plant under construction on the river Lasva has led to problems with water supplies and damaged roads. “It was a peaceful river before,” said villager Mehrudin Halilovic. “I am totally against the building of this plant.” Countries in the Balkans are lagging the rest of Europe in environmental standards. Many rivers in the area also are heavily polluted with waste from factories or clogged with garbage washed away from the riverbanks. Martin Skalsky, from the Czech Republic’s ARNIKA group, said in Sarajevo that it is important to preserve the Balkan nature because there are not many other regions in Europe so untouched and unpopulated. “If you will build hundreds or thousands of small hydropower plants on your rivers, you can just lose everything in very few years,” he said. “So, it’s really dangerous.” Claim: Activists warn Balkan rivers at risk from hydropower plants.

Ex Output:

Unspoiled rivers in the Balkans are facing new dangers from small hydropower plants that have sprouted up across the region in recent years, environmental experts warned Thursday.