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: Torrential rain caused floods and triggered landslides in western Japan last week, bringing death and destruction to neighborhoods built decades ago near steep mountain slopes. At least 176 people were killed, the government said, with dozens missing in Japan’s worst weather disaster since 1982. In Kumano, a mountainside community in Hiroshima prefecture that was hit by a landslide last week, Ken Kirioka anxiously watched rescuers toiling through mud, sand and smashed houses to find the missing, including his 76-year-old father, Katsuharu. “He is old and has a heart condition. I prepared myself for the worst when I heard about the landslide on Friday night,” he said, pointing at a pile of mud and rubble where he said his father was buried. “He is an old-fashioned father who is hard-headed and does not talk much,” Kirioka said, adding he would stay until his father was found. “It would be too bad for him if a family member were not around”. Rescuers working under a scorching sun combed through heaps of wood and thickly caked mud in a search for bodies, helped by sniffer dogs. In some cases only the foundation of homes remained as they cut through debris with chain saws. With temperatures of 33 degrees Celsius (91 degrees Fahrenheit) or higher in the devastated areas in Okayama and Hiroshima prefectures, attention turned to preventing heat-stroke among rescue workers and in evacuation centers where thousands of people have sought shelter. People sat on thin mats on a gymnasium floor in one center, plastic bags of belongings piled around them and bedding folded off to the side. Portable fans turned slowly as children cried. Abe, who canceled an overseas trip to deal with the disaster, was criticized after a photograph posted on Twitter showed Abe and his defense minister at a party with lawmakers just as the rains intensified. After observing the damage from a helicopter flying over Okayama, one of the hardest-hit areas, Abe visited a crowded evacuation center. He crouched down on the floor to speak with people, many of them elderly, and asked about their health. He clasped one man’s hands as they spoke. Later he told reporters the government would do everything it could to help the survivors. “We’ll cut through all the bureaucracy to secure the goods people need for their lives, to improve life in the evacuation centers - such as air conditioners as the hot days continue - and then secure temporary housing and the other things people need to rebuild their lives,” he said. Abe is up for re-election as party leader in September and has seen his popularity ratings edge back up after taking a hit over a cronyism scandal earlier this year. His government pledged an initial $4 billion toward recovery on Tuesday, and a later special budget if needed. Officials turned to social media to warn of the additional danger of food-borne illnesses, urging people to wash their hands and take other measures against food poisoning. Evacuation orders were issued for 25 households in the city of Fukuyama after cracks were found in a reservoir. Water accumulating behind piles of debris blocking rivers also posed a danger after a swollen river rushed into a Fukuyama residential area on Monday, prompting more evacuation orders. The intensifying heat was expected to trigger thunderstorms on Wednesday, with authorities warning new landslides could be set off on mountainsides saturated with water. Japanese media on Wednesday focused on the timing of evacuation orders issued in the hard-hit Mabi district of Kurashiki city just minutes before a levee broke and water poured into the residential area. A number of the dead in Mabi were found in their homes, suggesting they did not have enough time to flee, media reports said. Claim: Japan PM visits flood disaster zone, promises help as new warnings issued.

A: Prime Minister Shinzo Abe visited flood-stricken parts of Japan on Wednesday as the death toll from the worst weather disaster in 36 years reached 176 and health concerns rose amid scorching heat and the threat of new floods.
****
Q: Paragraph: Cancer patients increasingly are having their care guided by gene tumor boards, a new version of the hospital panels that traditionally decided whether surgery, radiation or chemotherapy would be best. These experts study the patient’s cancer genes and match treatments to mutations that seem to drive the disease. “We dissect the patient’s tumor with what I call the molecular microscope,” said Dr. Razelle Kurzrock, who started a board at the University of California, San Diego, where Cairnes is treated. It’s the kind of care many experts say we should aim for — precision medicine, the right drug for the right person at the right time, guided by genes. There are success stories, but also some failures and many questions: Will gene-guided care improve survival? Does it save money or cost more? What kind of gene testing is best, and who should get it? “I think every patient needs it,” especially if cancer is advanced, said Kurzrock, who consults for some gene-medicine companies. “Most people don’t agree with me — yet. In five years, it may be malpractice not to do genomics.” Few people get precision medicine today, said Dr. Eric Topol, head of the Scripps Translational Science Institute. “The only thing that’s gone mainstream are the words.” HOW IT WORKS NOW If you have a cancer that might be susceptible to a gene-targeting drug, you may be tested for mutations in that gene, such as HER2 for breast cancer. Some breast or prostate cancer patients also might get a multi-gene test to gauge how aggressive treatment should be. Then most patients get usual guideline-based treatments. If there’s no clear choice, or if the disease has spread or comes back, doctors may suggest tumor profiling — comprehensive tests to see what mutations dominate. That’s traditionally been done from a tissue sample, but newer tests that detect tumor DNA in blood — liquid biopsies — are making profiling more common. The tests cost about $6,000 and many insurers consider them experimental and won’t pay. Gene tumor boards analyze what the results suggest about treatment. They focus on oddball cases like a breast cancer mutation in a colon cancer patient, or cancers that have widely spread and are genetically complex. The only options may be experimental drugs or “off-label” treatments — medicines approved for different situations. But as tumor profiling grows, it’s revealing how genetically diverse many tumors are, and that oddball cases are not so rare, said Dr. John Marshall. He heads the virtual tumor board at Georgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center that also serves cancer centers in Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Michigan and Tennessee. “There is a little bit of faith” that testing will show the right treatment, but it’s not a sure thing, said Dr. Lee Schwartzberg, who heads one participating center, the West Cancer Center in Memphis. Dr. Len Lichtenfeld, the American Cancer Society’s deputy chief medical officer, is optimistic yet wary. Drugs that target BRAF mutations work well for skin cancers called melanomas, but less well for lung or colon cancers. “Just because a mutation occurs it doesn’t mean that drug is going to work in that cancer,” he said. LUCKY CASES When it does, results can be dramatic. Cairnes’ cancer was between her stomach and esophagus, and had spread to her liver, lungs and lymph nodes. Tissue testing found 10 abnormal genes, but on the liquid biopsy only EGFR popped out as a good target. Two drugs aim at that gene but aren’t approved for her type of cancer. A tumor board advised trying both — Erbitux and Tarceva, the drug her husband also had taken. Within two weeks, she quit using pain medicines. After two months, her liver tumor had shrunk roughly by half. There are signs that cancer may remain, but it is under control. She feels well enough to travel and to take care of her granddaughter. “I’m very, very grateful to have a targeted therapy,” Cairnes said. “I cannot expect a better outcome than what we’re seeing right now,” said her doctor, Shumei Kato. WHAT STUDIES SHOW But is gene-guided treatment better than usual care? French doctors did the first big test, with disappointing results. About 200 patients with advanced cancer were given whatever their doctors thought best or off-label drugs based on tumor profiling. Survival was similar — about two months. Another French study, reported in June, was slightly more encouraging on survival but exposed another problem: No drugs exist for many gene flaws. Tests found treatable mutations in half of the 2,000 participants and only 143 got what a tumor board suggested. Some doctors worry that tumor boards’ recommending off-label treatments diverts patients from research that would benefit all cancer patients. For example, the American Society of Clinical Oncology’s TAPUR study tests off-label drugs and shares results with their makers and federal regulators. LETTING PATIENTS CHOOSE Ann Meffert, who lives on a dairy farm in Waunakee, Wisconsin, endured multiple standard treatments that didn’t defeat her bile duct cancer. “She was going to be referred to hospice; there was not much we could do,” said Dr. Nataliya Uboha, who took the case to a tumor board at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. The panel gave several options, including off-label treatment, and Meffert chose a study that matches patients to gene-targeting therapies and started on an experimental one last October. “Two weeks in, I started feeling better,” she said, and when she saw test results, “I couldn’t believe the difference.” Many lung spots disappeared and the liver tumor shrank 75 percent. She is not cured, though, and doctors are thinking about next steps. And that could involve a fresh look at her tumor genes. ___ Marilynn Marchione can be followed at @MMarchioneAP __ This Associated Press series was produced in partnership with the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content. Claim: Ultra-personal therapy: Gene tumor boards guide cancer care.

A: Doctors were just guessing a decade ago when they gave Alison Cairnes’ husband a new drug they hoped would shrink his lung tumors. Now she takes it, but the choice was no guesswork. Sophisticated gene tests suggested it would fight her gastric cancer, and they were right.
****
Q: Paragraph: "U.S. Sen. Kelly Ayotte, a Republican, is again backing programs aimed at identifying mentally ill people who pose a risk for mass killings. Ayotte, saying she has strong bipartisan support, has co-sponsored a bill geared toward education, awareness and intervention relating to mental illness since the mass shootings in Newtown, Conn., in December 2012. Ayotte introduced the Mental Health First Aid Act in January 2013, which never made it past a congressional committee. However, elements of that bill went into the Mental Health Awareness and Improvement Act that was part of the gun control legislation the Senate voted down in April. Two days after a mass shooting at the Washington Navy Yard in September 2013, Ayotte and Sen. Mark Begich, D-Alaska, issued a joint statement to Senate leadership advocating programs to educate teachers in recognizing symptoms of mental health illness and how they could defuse potentially dangerous situations. Soon after, she appeared on CNN’s The Lead With Jake Tapper. She said a bill that addresses mental health issues would pass the Senate easily. Ayotte said the mental health amendment that was attached to last April’s gun-control legislation passed easily. However, it was not enacted because the gun bill itself lost. ""I actually think it can be taken up separately and easily passed because of the mental health provisions. It got over 90 votes in the Senate and very little gets 90 votes around here,"" Ayotte said. We wondered whether the mental health amendment really got such overwhelming support. We looked at the official roll call vote on the amendment and found that it had indeed passed by a 95-2 vote on April 18. Despite voting for the mental health amendment she co-sponsored, Ayotte later became one of 41 Republicans who voted against the gun control proposal sponsored by Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Pat Toomey, R-Pa., that would have expanded background checks. Five Democrats also voted against it. The mixed messages these votes sent drew sharp criticism from critics. Ayotte responded with a statement that said: ""I believe that restricting the rights of law-abiding gun owners will not prevent a deranged individual or criminal from obtaining and misusing firearms to commit violence. While steps must be taken to improve the existing background check system, I will not support the Manchin-Toomey legislation, which I believe would place unnecessary burdens on law-abiding gun owners and allow for potential overreach by the federal government into private gun sales."" Our ruling Ayotte said that mental health provisions related to mass shootings ""got over 90 votes in the Senate."" While an early version of the bill never made it out of committee, the Senate did eventually vote, 95-2, for a mental-health amendment to a gun control bill. The full bill lacked enough votes to pass and was pulled from the floor, but she is correct that the amendment did get 90 votes." Claim: "Mental health provisions related to mass shootings ""got over 90 votes in the Senate."

A:
"Ayotte said that mental health provisions related to mass shootings ""got over 90 votes in the Senate."" While an early version of the bill never made it out of committee, the Senate did eventually vote, 95-2, for a mental-health amendment to a gun control bill. The full bill lacked enough votes to pass and was pulled from the floor, but she is correct that the amendment did get 90 votes."
****