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.

Paragraph: The U.N. agency is seeking to balance the need to ensure China continues to share information about the virus while also giving sound scientific advice to the international community on the risks, according to several public health experts and a Western diplomat who tracks the WHO’s work. The WHO has declared five global emergencies in the past decade, including the ongoing Ebola epidemic in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Doing so can hurt host countries because it may lead to flight cancellations and travel or trade restrictions, dragging on the economy. In the latest case, the WHO declined to declare China’s coronavirus a public health emergency of international concern(PHEIC) twice last week, although its Emergency Committee was split “50-50” over whether to do so. “What was lacking for them to declare an international emergency were deaths abroad and human-to-human transmission outside of China,” said the Geneva-based diplomat following the agency. “If there was proof of human-to-human spread among the ‘imported’ cases, the panel would lean toward another finding.”  WHO spokesman Christian Lindmeier declined to comment beyond what he told a news briefing earlier on Tuesday. He restated that the WHO’s criteria for a global emergency include a “serious or unusual” health situation that affects other countries and may require a coordinated international response. In reply to a question, he added: “It is not ‘wildly spreading’ outside of China.”  While the vast majority of the 4,500 or so confirmed cases and all 106 deaths so far have been in China, cases in Germany, Vietnam, Taiwan and Japan where the virus has spread person-to-person have heightened concerns. “As information is coming in, it seems to be confirming our worst fears,” Lawrence Gostin, university professor at Georgetown Law in Washington, DC, told Reuters. “So I do believe that the WHO is going to have to declare an emergency and is going to have to take the lead ... You can’t leave this to China.”  The WHO’s 16-member expert panel is being “kept in the loop” and could be reconvened at any time to reassess the outbreak. “Just because of rising numbers in China now this would not automatically trigger an Emergency Committee,” Lindmeier told the briefing. A declaration would lead to boosting public health measures, funding and resources to prevent and reduce global spread. It could include recommendations on trade and travel, although the WHO generally tries to avoid disruptive trade restrictions. The Emergency Committee deliberations are secret and its members have been told not to speak about their debate, several WHO officials told Reuters. WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus and Chinese President Xi Jinping met in Beijing on Tuesday to discuss how to protect Chinese citizens and foreigners in areas affected by the virus and “possible” evacuation alternatives, Lindmeier said. China has agreed that the WHO can send international experts there as soon as possible to increase understanding of the new coronavirus and guide the global response to the outbreak, the WHO said at the end of Tedros’ two-day visit. Some experts believe the Geneva-based health agency is in a difficult position, having drawn fire in the past for acting either too quickly or too slowly. “Essentially the WHO is between a rock and a hard place,” said Jeremy Farrar, an expert in infectious disease epidemics and director of the Wellcome Trust global health charity. Farrar noted that the organization was criticised for having called an early emergency in 2009 for the H1N1 flu pandemic, which proved mild, and then for being too late in declaring the Ebola epidemic in West Africa in 2014. Claim: WHO weighs science and politics in global virus emergency decision.
Most of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) criteria for declaring a global emergency have been met, but it is awaiting clear evidence of a sustained spread of the new coronavirus outside China before doing so, some experts and diplomats said.

Paragraph: The confirmation hearing of Ronny Jackson, Trump’s White House doctor and a Navy rear admiral chosen to speed up improvements to the VA, is scheduled for next week. On Tuesday, he met privately with Sen. Jon Tester of Montana, the top Democrat on the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, as a part of visits this week to assure lawmakers he could effectively lead the government’s second-largest department. Tester said after the meeting that Jackson had committed to the same stance against privatization as David Shulkin, who pledged before his confirmation as VA secretary last year to continue strong investment in core VA programs and facilities while expanding access to private doctors. Shulkin was fired last month. “We talked extensively about why Shulkin got fired with the issues revolving around privatization and capacity building,” Tester said. He “seems to be somebody who doesn’t want to privatize the VA.” Asked if Jackson had pledged not to privatize VA, Tester said “yes.” “He said basically the same thing Shulkin said--that he wanted to build capacity at the VA,” Tester said. According to Tester, Jackson had not yet informed Trump of his views but would be doing so. Both Tester and Sen. Johnny Isakson, the Republican chairman of the veterans committee who met with Jackson Monday, have declined to endorse Jackson in advance of his confirmation hearing on April 25, saying they need to hear more about his plans to fix VA. Jackson is “certainly not an expert on VA,” Tester said. Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., a Senate committee member who also met Tuesday with Jackson, said she needed more assurances that Jackson would resist undue White House pressure to aggressively expand private care. Major veterans groups view VA medical centers as best suited to treat complex battlefield injuries, such as traumatic brain injury. “In our meeting today, I appreciated how strongly Dr. Jackson spoke against privatizing the VA, but I still need to know more about how he will stand up to ideological opponents of VA and remain fully committed to putting the needs of veterans first,” Murray said. The issue of privatizing VA has been a political hot button since the 2016 campaign, when Trump pledged to aggressively expand veterans’ access to private doctors outside the government-run VA system at taxpayers’ expense via the Veterans Choice program. Trump’s comments came in the wake of a 2014 scandal at the Phoenix VA medical center in which some veterans died while waiting months for medical appointments. After he was fired as VA secretary, Shulkin blamed “political forces” in the Trump administration that he says are bent on privatizing the agency and prioritizing “companies with profits” over the care of veterans. On Tuesday, the White House reiterated that there were “no discussions” about privatizing VA. “This administration has taken several unprecedented steps to transform and modernize the VA,” White House spokesman Raj Shah said in a statement. “We look forward to continuing our work with Congress to reform and strengthen the VA Choice program to provide our veterans with more choice in their health care.” Several Democratic senators, including Bernie Sanders of Vermont, a member of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, have vowed to oppose Jackson’s nomination if it leads to greater privatization at the agency. Before he was confirmed last year as VA secretary, Shulkin, a holdover from the Obama administration, declared in advance that he wouldn’t “privatize” VA. “VA is a unique national resource that is worth saving, and I am committed to doing just that,” Shulkin said in February 2017. “There will be far greater accountability, dramatically improved access, responsiveness and expanded care options, but the Department of Veterans Affairs will not be privatized under my watch.” ___ Follow Hope Yen on Twitter at https://twitter.com/hopeyen1 Claim: Dem senator: Trump VA pick vows not to privatize vets care.
President Donald Trump’s pick to be Veterans Affairs secretary is promising not to privatize the agency, a key Democratic senator said Tuesday, taking a stance on a politically charged issue that his predecessor says led to his firing.

Paragraph: A heart surgeon and his team performs a complex mitral valve reconstruction at Papworth Hospital in Cambridge July 5, 2007. REUTERS/Ben Edwards Among patients admitted to the hospital for a heart attack, women were far less likely than men to get angiography in which blood vessels are injected with dye so that blockages are visible on an X-ray, or angioplasty to clear blockages, a study found. Women were about twice as likely as men to die within a month of a heart attack, the study said. “This suggests that we could reduce mortality in female patients by using more invasive procedures,” said Dr. Francois Schiele, chief cardiologist at the University Hospital of Besancon, France. Schiele, who presented the research at the American College of Cardiology meeting in Atlanta, said women should be treated with all recommended strategies, including invasive ones. Some earlier studies have also suggested that women have a higher risk of death after a heart attack than men, but it is unclear why. Biological differences might explain it, researchers said, but there were also substantial differences in the treatment regimens women received. Researchers analyzed data from a registry that included more than 3,500 patients who were treated for heart attacks between January 2006 and December 2007. The women, who made up almost one-third of the patients, were nine years older than the men on average and had more health problems. In most major heart studies, the majority of patients have been men, leaving women an understudied population. The French study, sponsored by European drugmakers including GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis and Sanofi-Aventis, found women received fewer effective treatments for heart attack. Women were almost twice as likely to die during the initial hospital stay and during the following month. Dr. Marcelo Di Carli, director of Cardiovascular Imaging at Brigham & Women’s Hospital in Boston, noted that the risk of death is higher in women with heart disease than in men and the women in this study were older and sicker in the first place. Carli, who was not involved in this study, said he was not surprised by the findings, but noted that there is a growing awareness that women’s heart attack symptoms are different from men’s symptoms. “Just about every major hospital in the United States has a program on women’s health. Things are changing in a positive way because there’s so much research,” he said, adding that there is a recognition that women have different symptoms then men and sometimes no symptoms. One important difference, he said, is that women tend to have problems in smaller blood vessels, rather than the main coronary arteries. “This disease looks different in women,” Carli added. Claim: Women more likely to die after heart attack: study.

When it comes to matters of the heart, women should be treated more like men.