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.
--------
Question: Paragraph: The 10,000 or so people who remain on Ambae island have mixed feelings about the plans. Some who are badly affected by the ash are eager to leave while others are resisting losing their land and culture. The island was temporarily evacuated last September when the eruption cycle began. This time, authorities are planning a permanent move. Government spokesman Hilaire Bule told The Associated Press on Thursday that he expects the Council of Ministers to approve a relocation plan by next week. Bule said the islanders would be offered residence on two neighboring islands. “It’s not an easy decision,” Bule said. He said there were many details to work through, including providing schools and facilities to the displaced residents and negotiating land and new homes for them. Many people have close family and spiritual ties to the islands where they’ll be relocated, Maewo and Pentecost, Bule said. Traditional religion even has it that the islands are part of a family — Pentecost being the mother, Maewo the father and Ambae the son. Most people on Ambae live a subsistence lifestyle by farming and fishing. Already hundreds of people have moved to temporary shelters on parts of the island that are not so affected by the ash. Ambae is about 400 square kilometers (154 square miles) and is one of about 65 inhabited islands in Vanuatu, which is home to 280,000 people. Vanuatu sits on the Pacific’s “Ring of Fire,” the arc of seismic faults around the Pacific Ocean where earthquakes and volcanoes are common. Brad Scott, a New Zealand volcanologist with GNS Science who has been seconded to help Vanuatu authorities, said more than one-quarter of Ambae has been severely impacted, with many traditional thatch roofs collapsing under the weight of the thick ash. He said traditional gardens have been buried and killed in some places and water supplies have been discolored and the water tastes strange. He said there is lots of fine-grained ash, which can affect people’s breathing and respiratory functioning. Other countries including France, New Zealand and Australia provided aid and financial help for the earlier evacuation. Australia on Thursday announced it was providing 300,000 Australian dollars ($226,000) to help with the island’s permanent evacuation, with a focus on the needs of women, children and people with disabilities. Despite the problems, Scott said, many people want to stay put. “There has been significant pushback in the community,” Scott said. “Some people, suffering from significant ash fall, would love to be anywhere else on the planet. Others have strong cultural associations.” Scott said the Manaro volcano on Ambae island had a large eruption about 400 years ago and has had several smaller eruptions over the past 100 years. There have been three phases in the current eruption, with the most recent phase, which started in March, producing the most ash. He said the volcano has actually quietened down over the past two weeks, although there is no way of predicting if and when the next explosive phase would begin. Asked if there was a chance that the residents might be able to one day move back to the island, Bule, the government spokesman, said that was not a question for him. “We don’t know,” he said. “You’ll have to ask the volcano.” Claim: Vanuatu plans to permanently evacuate entire volcanic island.

Answer: The Pacific nation of Vanuatu is preparing to permanently evacuate the entire population of one of its islands as thick ash spewing from a volcano kills crops, dirties water supplies and fouls the air.


Question: Paragraph: "During his widely watched monologue about his newborn son’s recent medical emergency, ABC late-night host Jimmy Kimmel offered a bit of praise for one group of Americans that doesn’t receive much love these days: members of Congress. ""President Trump last month proposed a $6 billion cut in funding to the National Institutes of Health. And thank God our congressmen made a deal last night to not go along with that. They actually increased funding by $2 billion."" Is that what happened? Basically, yes. Kimmel has a point that by approving the increase, both Republicans and Democrats in Congress rebuked Trump’s proposal and made clear a distaste for cutting NIH. Budget experts, however, may quibble that Kimmel oversimplified a bit on the numbers. First, some background. NIH conducts and disseminates research into the causes, diagnosis, prevention and cure of human diseases. It is a collection of 27 separate institutes and centers, such as the National Cancer Institute, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. Explaining Kimmel’s comment starts with the release earlier this year of the Trump White House’s budget blueprint. While this proposal did not offer significant detail, it did include a cut for NIH. Specifically, the proposal would reduce spending for fiscal year 2018 by $5.8 billion compared to the fiscal 2017 level, through a range of reorganizations, consolidations and other changes. That’s short of a $6 billion cut, as Kimmel described it, but it’s pretty close. Fast-forward a few weeks to congressional negotiations over a bill to keep the government funded and avoid a government shutdown. Under the agreement reached by lawmakers, NIH would see a $2 billion increase in its budget over the five-month period of extended federal spending. (That's on top of the funding that was already expected.) According to news reports, the agreement provides an additional $400 million for Alzheimer’s disease and an additional $476 million for the National Cancer Institute, $120 million for the Precision Medicine Initiative, and an additional $110 million for the BRAIN Initiative, which aims to map the human brain. Where Kimmel oversimplified matters is on the numbers. Specifically, the $2 billion increase did not directly replace Trump’s $5.8 billion proposed cut -- the two actions are distinct, since they targeted two different fiscal years. It would have been more accurate to say that the $2 billion increase directly rejected a separate Trump proposal to cut $1.2 billion from NIH for the remainder of fiscal 2017, which concludes at the end of September. (Remember, the $5.8 billion cut was to be for the 2018 fiscal year, not for the rest of 2017.) Indeed, the Trump proposal to cut NIH by $5.8 billion in 2018 is still officially on the table since Congress hasn’t yet acted on spending for 2018. The agreement Kimmel cited only addresses a five-month extension of federal spending. That said, Kimmel’s overarching point -- that Congress effectively rejected Trump’s proposal to cut NIH -- is on target, experts say. Steve Ellis, vice president of the group Taxpayers for Common Sense, agreed that while Kimmel oversimplified the numbers, he added that the talk show host’s ""overall message is accurate. The administration sought cuts and Congress boosted the funding."" And the decision to protect NIH in the budget has been supported not just by Democrats but also by key Republicans, including the chairmen of the two chambers’ health appropriations subcommittees, Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., and Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla., as well as Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn. ""There is no appetite on the Hill for cutting NIH,"" Stan Collender, a budget expert at the consulting firm Qorvis MSLGROUP, told PolitiFact. Our ruling Kimmel said, ""President Trump last month proposed a $6 billion cut in funding to the National Institutes of Health. And thank God our congressmen made a deal last night to not go along with that. They actually increased funding by $2 billion."" Technically, the two funding changes Kimmel referenced are for different fiscal years, so Congress didn’t precisely exchange the increase for Trump’s proposed cut. But Kimmel’s broader point is solid: The move by Congress to increase, rather than decrease, NIH’s funding for the rest of the 2017 fiscal year is a signal that lawmakers are in no mood to cut NIH’s budget by $5.8 billion once the 2018 spending bills are taken up." Claim: President Trump last month proposed a $6 billion cut in funding to the National Institutes of Health. And thank God our congressmen made a deal last night to not go along with that. They actually increased funding by $2 billion.

Answer: "Kimmel said, ""President Trump last month proposed a $6 billion cut in funding to the National Institutes of Health. And thank God our congressmen made a deal last night to not go along with that. They actually increased funding by $2 billion."" Technically, the two funding changes Kimmel referenced are for different fiscal years, so Congress didn’t precisely exchange the increase for Trump’s proposed cut. But Kimmel’s broader point is solid: The move by Congress to increase, rather than decrease, NIH’s funding for the rest of the 2017 fiscal year is a signal that lawmakers are in no mood to cut NIH’s budget by $5.8 billion once the 2018 spending bills are taken up."


Question: Paragraph: The list price is 282,000 pounds ($369,000) per patient, given as a single intravenous infusion, but Novartis agreed to offer the therapy for relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) at a confidential discounted price, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) said. NICE had turned down a previous proposal from Novartis in September, saying it exceeded the level considered an acceptable use of resources. “Today’s positive announcement regarding access to Kymriah treatment in England and Wales was secured as a result of our close working collaboration with NICE and NHS England, with all parties showing flexibility,” Novartis said. DLBCL patients eligible for Kymriah have life expectancies of just months, after failing previous treatments. Novartis expects Kymriah to eventually top $1 billion in annual sales, though the drug has started modestly with $76 million in 2018. Over 2019, the company expects to increase commercial and clinical capacity for Kymriah four-fold after buying more production facilities and deals with partners. The Swiss firm hopes expanding its treatment geography will narrow the sales gap with Gilead Sciences’ Yescarta, which reaped $183 million in the first nine months of 2018. Novartis already has NICE’s go-ahead for children and young people with aggressive acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) when other drugs have failed. The Basel-based company now has 26 treatment centers in the European Union and Kymriah is now commercially available to patients from 10 countries, it said. Kymriah belongs to a new class of treatments, like Yescarta, called CAR-T therapies where disease-fighting T cells are removed from a patient and genetically modified to better recognize and attack cancer. They are then re-infused into the same patient where they can circulate for years to seek out and fight the disease. Novartis is also working with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to resolve a snag in which some batches of Kymriah did not meet commercial specifications, forcing the company to give it away for free to some patients. “We expect resolution ... soon,” a spokeswoman said. Claim: Novartis's cancer therapy wins UK backing after initial lymphoma snub.

Answer:
Novartis’s Kymriah cell therapy won the blessing of health authorities in England for adult lymphoma patients, the Swiss drugmaker said on Friday, reversing last year’s rejection.