instruction:
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 story notes the an additional $20 per mammogram with CAD when billed to Medicare. With the newer technology, costs to public health would increase via additional screening and unnecessary biopsies, and treatment would increase for cancers that may never become problematic (i.e. some forms of DCIS or ductal carcinoma in situ). The story provides data that there was little positive difference between radiologists' and CAD detection of cancer via mammogram images. However, the story does not mention results of any other evaluations of the technology (e.g. how it has been used in UK and other countries where results did show benefit in terms of increased detection of cancer). The story mentions that the newer technology may result in over treatment as there are more false positives with the CAD technology vs. radiologists' analysis alone. In a recent study published in the New England Journal of Medicine, there was 20% increase in biopsy rates after mammographers used the CAD software. The article does not present the study well. It was an observational study of select practices in the US – not randomized, not controlled and there was no information about how representative these samples were, especially the centers that used CAD. The story presented some key results but virtually nothing about the study design. The story does not engage in disease mongering or suggest that women should opt for mammograms at centers that have the new CAD technology. The story provides many clinical perspectives on the CAD technology. The reporter interviews not only the study author and the author of an accompanying NEJM editorial, but also clinicians and radiologists who talk about use of CAD in practice. Interviews with clinicians who provide their rationale for not using the CAD technology provide excellent balance to the story. The story discusses the continued benefit of mammography for early detection of breast cancer. The story highlights that computer-assisted screening does not replace human judgment in interpretation of radiological films. The story mentions that about 30% of mammography centers use computer-aided detection (CAD) technology. The story mentions that CAD is a newer method of reading mammographies, but in a recent observational trial it was no better–and may have produced more false positives–than images read and interpreted by radiologists alone. The story does not rely solely on a press release for information, and there is independent reporting and sources cited not affiliated with the recently published data on CAD. Claim: Doubts on mammogram software
answer:
This story provides readers with a balanced discussion of the potential downside of incorporating newer technologies into routine practice too soon. Specifically, the story reports evidence recently published in the New England Journal of Medicine that computer-aided detection (CAD), a newer method of reading mammographies, was no better–and may have produced more false positives–than images read and interpreted by radiologists alone. There was 20% increase in biopsies after mammographers used the CAD software, and many of these women had non-malignant lesions. The article did not adequately describe the study. It was an observational study of select practices in the US – not randomized, not controlled and there was no information about how representative these samples were, especially in the centers that used CAD. The story reported on key results, but without adequately explaining how they were arrived at. The story provides multiple perspectives on the CAD technology in breast cancer detection. The reporter interviews not only the lead author of the NEJM study, but also the author of an accompanying editorial on this newer technology, as well as radiologists who talk about CAD in their practice. Interviews with clinicians who offer a rationale for not using the CAD technology give excellent balance to the story and provide an often overlooked perspective: newer and more high-tech devices are not necessarily better. The story notes the additional $20 per mammogram cost to Medicare with CAD. With the newer technology, costs to public health would increase via additional screening and unnecessary biopsies, and treatment would likely increase for cancers that may never become problematic (i.e. some forms of DCIS or ductal carcinoma in situ). Importantly, the story discuses the continued benefit of mammography for early detection of breast cancer. The story highlights that computer-assisted screening does not replace human judgment in interpretation of radiological films. More screening centers with the CAD technology are available; however, the new technology may not serve women any better. Traditional mammography with a radiologist interpreting the results may be more accurate and result in fewer unnecessary tests and biopsies.


question:
Paragraph: There will be 50,000 more nurses going into the NHS. The government has committed to do this by 2024/25. Not all of these nurses will be ‘new’. The government have announced the end of hospital parking charges for patients. In December it was announced that hospitals in England will have to provide free car parking to frequent hospital visitors, blue badge holders and at certain times to staff and parents of child patients. The government will build 40 new hospitals. Six hospitals in England are getting the money to upgrade their buildings within the next five years. Up to 38 hospitals are getting money to develop plans for their hospitals between 2025 and 2030, but not to actually begin any building work. The government is putting 20,000 more police on the streets. The government has committed to do this. If this happens it will take the number of police in England and Wales to almost, but not quite the same level as it was at in 2010. The government gave the police much more use of Tasers to help deal with street crime. The Home Office announced police in England and Wales can bid for part of a fund to equip their force with more Tasers. Final funding allocations will be announced in February. The government are lifting the living wage by the biggest ever amount, up to £8.72, and it will go up to £10.50. The national living wage set by the government is set to rise to £8.72 in April, the largest rise since it was put in place in 2016. It was also announced at last year’s Conservative party conference that it would rise to £10.50 within the next five years. Claim 1 of 7 Claim: The government are lifting the living wage by the biggest ever amount, up to £8.72, and it will go up to £10.50.
answer:
The national living wage set by the government is set to rise to £8.72 in April, the largest rise since it was put in place in 2016. It was also announced at last year’s Conservative party conference that it would rise to £10.50 within the next five years.


question:
Paragraph: On 30 April 2019, the Facebook page “Historical Pictures” renewed interest in an old news story involving the movie Titanic, seafood chowder, and the drug PCP (Phencyclidine, or angel dust):  The Facebook page reads: “On the last night of filming Titanic, someone laced the cast and crew’s food with PCP. 80 cast and crew members, including James Cameron and Bill Paxton, started hallucinating and had to be hospitalized.” This Facebook post recounts a genuine news story from the set of Titanic. However, some of the details are misleading or inaccurate. For instance, this incident occurred during the final day of shooting at one specific location but not the final day overall for the film: The location was the Halifax area on the Akademik Msislav Keldysh research vessel that Cameron used to film the underwater sequences, a year earlier. Fifty crew members made the trip to Nova Scotia for what was supposed to be a pit stop to the main event. However, on 9 August 1996, three weeks into filming, all hell broke loose when several people fell violently ill after a dinner break. More importantly, the included image in this Facebook post is misleading, as neither of the movie’s stars, Leonardo DiCaprio or Kate Winslet, were on set at the time of the incident. On 26 August 1996, the Canadian press reported that nearly 80 people were taken to the hospital from the set of Titanic for what was initially thought to be food poisoning. However, the Halifax regional police investigated the incident and found that someone had laced the seafood chowder with PCP:  Thu, Aug 29, 1996 – 30 · Star-Phoenix (Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada) · Newspapers.com Though the movie’s lead stars were not on set during this incident, other big names attached to the film, such as actor Bill Paxton and director James Cameron, were on set and did eat the PCP-laced chowder. Paxton was quoted by Entertainment Weekly in 1996 saying that he typically didn’t eat the catering on the set but on that night, for whatever reason, he decided to join Cameron for a bowl of the chowder: Exactly who spiked the chowder remains a mystery — and the source of an ongoing criminal investigation — but for actor Bill Paxton (Twister), who plays a modern-day treasure hunter, it was truly a night to remember. After planning to eat Italian food in his trailer, Paxton opted instead to join Cameron for a bowl of lobster chowder. Within 15 minutes after eating, he recalls, ”the crew was all milling about. Some people were laughing, some people were crying, some people were throwing up.” Assuming that bad shellfish had caused the problem, Paxton jumped in a van headed for Dartmouth General Hospital. ”One minute I felt okay,” he says, ”the next minute I felt so goddamn anxious I wanted to breathe in a paper bag. Cameron was feeling the same way.” Paxton also recounted the experience during an interview with Larry King:  Several other people who were on set that day have given their own versions of this story. Marilyn McAvoy, who was a standby painter on the set, spoke with Vice in May 2017: Vice: Hey Marilyn, so tell me, what was that chowder like? Marilyn McAvoy: The chowder was unbelievable. People were going back for second bowls. I really thought about going back because it was so good. And I think that was part of the problem: People ate a lot more than usual because it was so delicious. What else do you remember about that night? There was no indication that there was anything strange happening … until the meal. By the time we got back from eating, after about 30 minutes, that’s when I started noticing something was wrong. Everyone seemed confused. Everyone was having trouble getting their work done. […] How did the rest of the crew react? While I was trying to figure out what was going on, everyone else seemed to be going outside. They were all gathering outside of the giant doors of the building we were working in. I also heard later on that as soon as James Cameron realized something had been put in the chowder, he ran up to his room and forced himself to throw up. This incident is also mentioned in a biography of DiCaprio. In it, actor Lewis Abernathy was quoted describing how Cameron allegedly looked after eating the drug-laced chowder: Actor Lewis Abernathy, who played a cynical sidekick to Bill Paxton’s relic hunter, recalled: “There were people just rolling around, completely out of it. Some of them said they were seeing streaks and psychedelics.” “I thought it was food poisoning,” he continued (luckily he had eaten in his hotel that night). “Really bad seafood can make you hallucinate and this caterer was big on clams. Jim was being loaded into the back of this van – I was just shocked at the way he looked. One eye was completely red, like the Terminator eye – a pupil, no iris, beet red. The other eye looked like he’d been sniffing glue since he was four.” Cameron confirmed that he had eaten the chowder but said that he avoided a trip to the hospital by forcing himself to throw up the contaminated food. While police confirmed that numerous people on the movie set were sickened after eating PCP-laced seafood chowder, investigators never found out who was responsible. Some suspected that the culprit was a disgruntled chef, while others believed that a crew member was attempting to get revenge on Cameron, who has a reputation for being a tyrannical director. As far as we can tell, the person who put drugs in the chowder was never identified and no charges were ever filed over the incident. In 1998, the Calgary Herald published an article entitled “Titanic Mystery: Who Spiked the Chowder?” In it, both Paxton and Cameron expressed their anger (as well as confusion) over the incident, saying that whoever laced the chowder put everyone on set, including elderly people and children, in danger:  Thu, Jan 15, 1998 – 63 · Calgary Herald (Calgary, Alberta, Canada) · Newspapers.com Some disagreement exists over the exact number of people who were sickened or the type of chowder (lobster, clam, or seafood?) that was laced with PCP. However, it is undoubtedly true that dozens of people unknowingly took angel dust on the set of Titanic after an unidentified person spiked the food with it. Claim: "Dozens of people on the set of the film ""Titanic"" were sickened after eating seafood chowder that had been spiked with the drug PCP on the final day of shooting."
answer:

"What's true: Dozens of people on the set of ""Titanic,"" including actor Bill Paxton and director James Cameron, were sickened after someone laced the seafood chowder with PCP. What's false: The movie's stars, Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet, were not on set at the time, and the incident did not occur on the final day of shooting."