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: Once an illness is added to the list of approved conditions, the board cannot remove it because state law does not give the board authority to do so, according to board spokeswoman Tessie Pollock. Petitions will be reviewed early next year. AIDS, Alzheimer’s disease, and Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, or ALS, are among the 21 current approved illnesses, along with cancer, epilepsy, glaucoma and Parkinson’s disease. Earlier this year the board rejected petitions seeking to add anxiety and autism spectrum disorders as qualifying conditions. The board will for the first time open up a public comment period, beginning after its Jan. 8 meeting, said executive director Stephanie Louka. Final decisions on new accepting conditions would come after several months. ___ This story was first published on Dec. 25, 2019. It was updated on Dec. 27, 2019, to correct the name of the State Medical Board of Ohio spokeswoman. She is Tessie Pollock, not Tessa Pollock. It was also updated to clarify that the board says state law does not give it the authority to remove conditions from the list of approved conditions for which doctors can recommend medical marijuana to patients. Claim: Board to consider new conditions for medical marijuana use.
[A]: The state Medical Board is accepting new petitions through the end of the year from those seeking to add illnesses as qualifying conditions for physicians to recommend medical marijuana to Ohio patients, cleveland.com reported.


[Q]: Paragraph: No mention of the cost of treatment. This is important if the surgery is not a permanent fix for acute sinusitis. Repeated operations and continued medications need to be compared to cost for traditional surgery. No quantitative estimate of the benefits of the new procedure. There was a study of 10 people that found “no safety concerns”, but readers should be told more about this very small group. What were the long term outcomes and did these patients eventually have to have further sinuplasty, more invasive surgery or continue to take medications to relieve sinusitits? The story mentions that a larger, randomized trial is underway to better understand the risks and benefits of sinuplasty compared to medication and traditional sinus surgery. Mentions that more information is needed and no one knows if balloon sinuplasty works as well as the more traditional surgical option for chronic sinusitis. Mentions that general anesthesia is still needed for balloon procedure and this comes with its own set of health risks. There isn’t much evidence for the story to report. The story did stress the importance of a randomized trial underway comparing medication, traditional sinus surgery and the newer balloon sinuplasty. Story describes this trial and the need for further evidence before this new procedure can be widely recommended. Mentions that this procedure should not have been FDA approved with so little quality evidence. No evidence of disease mongering. The story mentions that this procedure would be for chronic, not acute sinunitis and describes how these are different. Good balance of information on treatment options with input from otolaryngologists not affliated with the makers of the device who are able to provide perspective on the new procedure. They mention that further study is needed. There is a note that one of the physicans studying the new sinuplasty has no financial ties to Acclarent, maker of the balloon devices used in this type of sinuplasty. Mentions that this form of sinuplasty is not for everybody and that it may not prevent the need for more comprehensive surgery in which bone and tissue are removed. There is mention of other options including medication and the more traditional surgery, which is decribed as highly effective, but with a painful recovery and side effects such as scar tissue. Quantification of the incidence of this and other side effects of traditional surgery would be useful. The story is clear that the FDA approved the device but that it still needs to undergo further study via randomized controlled trials. Story mentions that this is a new procedure only offerred by 100 doctors. This story is a blananced presentation of sinuplasty and the information here does not appear to be from a press release. The are quotes from otolaryngologists not affliated with the makers of the device who are able to provide perspective on the new sinuplasty procedure. Claim: A balloon instead of a knife: Sinuplasty for ailing sinuses
[A]: This story provides a good balance of information on a new treatment option for chronic sinusitis, and there is corroboration with otolaryngologists not affiliated with the makers of the balloon device who are able to provide perspective on the procedure. The story clearly notes this procedure would be for chronic, not acute sinusitis and describes how these are different. The story explains that this form of sinuplasty is not for everybody, and that it may not prevent the need for more comprehensive surgery in which bone and inflamed tissue are removed to open the sinus passages. More information is needed on the safety and efficacy of balloon sinuplasty, and no one knows if this surgery works as well as traditional surgery for chronic sinusitis. The story mentions other options for treating chronic sinusitis, including medication and sinus surgery, which is described as highly effective, but with a painful recovery and side effects such as scar tissue. Quantification of the incidence of side effects with traditional surgery would be useful. While there is not much quantitative evidence available on the new procedure, the story stresses the importance of a randomized trial underway comparing medication, traditional sinus surgery and the newer balloon sinuplasty. There is adequate description of this trial and the need for further evidence before this new procedure can be widely recommended. There is a caveat that this procedure should not have been FDA approved with so little quality evidence: a study of 10 people that found “no safety concerns”, but readers should be told more about this very small group. What were the long term outcomes and did these patients eventually have to undergo further sinuplasty, more invasive surgery or continue to take medications to relieve their chronic sinusitis? The story explains that general anesthesia is still needed for the balloon procedure and this comes with its own set of health risks and additional costs. There is no mention of the cost of this newer procedure. This is important information if the surgery is not a permanent fix for chronic sinusitis. A cost comparison of the newer sinuplasty, which may require repeated operations, sinus medications and traditional surgery is needed.


[Q]: Paragraph: "First, Gov. Rick Scott scared the bejesus out of seniors with an online ad claiming that Medicare rate cuts would lead them to lose access to their doctors, hospitals and preventive care. Then, the Florida Democratic Party fired back at Scott, issuing a press release that called Scott ""the ultimate Medicare thief."" The Democrats were referring to Scott’s prior tenure as CEO of Columbia/HCA about a decade ago, when the hospital company was fined $1.7 billion for Medicare fraud. ""Rick Scott is saying Democrats are committing Medicare robbery, when in fact he's the ultimate Medicare thief. He lost the right to accuse Democrats of raiding Medicare when he oversaw the largest Medicare fraud in the nation's history. Rick Scott's company stole money that should have gone to health care for seniors,"" said Florida Democratic Party spokesman Joshua Karp in the Feb. 25 press release. Separately, we have fact-checked Scott’s claim ""we are seeing dramatic rate cuts"" to Medicare that will affect people's choice of doctor, hospital and preventive care. We concluded that Scott had failed to say that the rate cut only applies to Medicare Advantage, and thus only affects a fraction of all Medicare beneficiaries. Also, it could be several months before we know the actual impact of the cut which could vary county by county. Here, we’ll fact-check the Democratic counter-attack that Scott ""oversaw the largest Medicare fraud in the nation’s history."" Scott’s tenure at Columbia/HCA During Scott’s 2010 race for governor, PolitiFact fact-checked multiple claims related to his tenure at Columbia/HCA. Now, we’ll recap some of our earlier discussion of the investigation and fine. Scott started what was first Columbia in 1987, purchasing two El Paso, Texas, hospitals. Over the next decade he would add hundreds of hospitals, surgery centers and home health locations. In 1994, Scott’s Columbia purchased Tennessee-headquartered HCA and its 100 hospitals, and merged the companies. In 1997, federal agents went public with an investigation into the company, first seizing records from four El Paso-area hospitals and then expanding across the country. The investigation focused on whether Columbia/HCA had committed Medicare and Medicaid fraud. Scott resigned as CEO in July 1997, less than four months after the inquiry became public. Company executives said had Scott remained CEO, the entire chain could have been in jeopardy. During his 2010 race, the Miami Herald reported that Scott had said he would have immediately stopped his company from committing fraud -- if only ""somebody told me something was wrong."" But there were such warnings in the company’s annual public reports to stockholders -- which Scott had to sign as president and CEO. Scott wanted to fight the accusations, but the corporate board of the publicly traded company wanted to settle. In December 2000, the U.S. Justice Department announced that Columbia/HCA agreed to pay $840 million in criminal fines, civil damages and penalties. Among the revelations from the 2000 settlement: • Columbia billed Medicare, Medicaid, and other federal programs for tests that were not necessary or had not been ordered by physicians; • The company attached false diagnosis codes to patient records to increase reimbursement to the hospitals; • The company illegally claimed non-reimbursable marketing and advertising costs as community education; • Columbia billed the government for home health care visits for patients who did not qualify to receive them. The government settled a second series of similar claims with Columbia/HCA in 2002 for an additional $881 million. The total for the two fines was $1.7 billion. On Scott’s 2010 campaign website, he admitted to the $1.7 billion fine, though the link is no longer on the site. What type of record was that fine? The fine clearly set a record, though the Justice Department (and media reports at the time) were not always consistent in their terminology, sometimes describing it as the ""largest government fraud settlement in U.S. History"" and other times more specifically as the ""largest health care fraud case in U.S. History."" A Justice Department spokeswoman said that officials refer to Columbia/HCA as ""largest health care fraud"" rather than the more narrow term ""Medicare fraud"" because it involved defrauding other government programs such as Medicaid rather than Medicare exclusively. The Justice Department described in detail the various ways the company defrauded Medicare and other government health programs here. Here’s a key point, though: While the Columbia/HCA settlement was a record at the time for health care fraud, it has since been surpassed. In cases related to the improper promotion of certain drugs, Johnson & Johnson agreed to a a $2.2 billion settlement in 2013, Pfizer settled for $2.3 billion in 2009, and GlaxoSmithKline settled for $3 billion in 2012. ""HCA was the record health care fraud at the time. It’s now Glaxo,"" Justice Department spokeswoman Linda Mansour told PolitiFact in an email. That said, these cases were a little different. While the Justice Department’s case against Columbia/HCA repeatedly mentions overbilling and defrauding Medicare and Medicaid specifically, the three newer cases focused on the marketing of drugs, with Medicare, Medicaid and other federal programs caught up in the impropriety, rather than being the specific targets of the fraud. Because the Justice Department press releases explaining the settlements don’t explicitly break down how much of the misconduct in those more recent cases defrauded Medicare explicitly, it’s difficult to make comparisons. The Pfizer case includes violations relating to misbranding and kickbacks, ""so there may be a distinction to be made for that reason when thinking about whether it all should be classified under the very general category of ‘Medicare fraud,’ "" said Asha Scielzo, who practices health care law at the firm Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman. The Columbia/HCA case ""still is the largest fraud settlement for a hospital corporation in U.S. history,"" since all the others involved pharmaceutical firms, added Zack Buck, a health care law professor at Mercer. ""So I guess, the quote (by the Florida Democratic Party) is a little loose."" The Scott campaign did not respond to an inquiry for this fact-check. However in 2010, Scott told the Tampa Bay Times, ""There's no question that mistakes were made and as CEO, I have to accept responsibility for those mistakes. I was focused on lowering costs and making the hospitals more efficient. I could have had more internal and external controls. I learned hard lessons, and I've taken that lesson and it's helped me become a better business person and a better leader."" Our ruling The Florida Democratic Party said Scott ""oversaw the largest Medicare fraud in the nation’s history."" The Columbia/HCA settlement has since been surpassed in dollar value, though the bigger cases involved Medicare somewhat less directly. Because the Democratic Party could have been a bit more specific in its wording -- by saying that Scott oversaw the largest Medicare fraud at the time. Claim: "Florida Democratic Party Says Rick Scott ""oversaw the largest Medicare fraud in the nation’s history."
[A]:
"The Florida Democratic Party said Scott ""oversaw the largest Medicare fraud in the nation’s history."" The Columbia/HCA settlement has since been surpassed in dollar value, though the bigger cases involved Medicare somewhat less directly. Because the Democratic Party could have been a bit more specific in its wording -- by saying that Scott oversaw the largest Medicare fraud at the time.