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: "Fox Business host Lou Dobbs, a vocal supporter of President Donald Trump and his allies, challenged the president’s top health official recently on the administration’s handling of the 2019 coronavirus outbreak. Dobbs criticized Health and Human Secretary Alex Azar over a lack of transparency in the agency’s handling of COVID-19, which has infected nearly 91,000 people globally across 73 countries and led to more than nine American deaths. ""There’s a better ratio of testing for the coronavirus in other countries than we maintain here,"" Dobbs said during the March 2 interview on his TV show. ""We’re actually screening fewer people because we don’t have appropriate testing."" Azar countered that the Trump administration has taken recent steps to roll back regulations and increase the availability of diagnostic test kits to ""hundreds and thousands and millions."" The United States is set to significantly expand its testing capabilities in the coming days and weeks, but Dobbs is correct that the country has lagged behind other nations so far. ""It is true that diagnostic capacity in the U.S. has been lower than in some other countries, but that is changing,"" said Caitlin Rivers, an epidemiologist at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security. It’s hard to pinpoint how many people have been tested for the coronavirus, both in the U.S. and around the world. The World Health Organization doesn’t track the number of tests administered in each country, and the numbers that are available are constantly updating. In a statement to PolitiFact, a Fox News spokesperson representing Dobbs cited data from the WorldOMeter, a real-time tool that ""shows estimated current numbers based on statistics and projections from the most reputable official organizations,"" according to its website. Using estimates derived from official government sources, the WorldOMeter says at least eight countries — South Korea, Italy, Austria, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, Finland, Vietnam and Turkey — have given more tests relative to the size of their populations than the United States. That lines up with experts’ analyses and with what multiple news outlets have reported. Marc Lipsitch, professor of epidemiology at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, said South Korea ""has screened at least thousands, and Guangdong, China, has screened at least hundreds of thousands,"" citing a WHO report on the outbreak in China, where the virus was first detected. South Korea ramped up testing by building drive-thru screening clinics for speedy assessments, according to local reports. Other countries, like Switzerland, the United Kingdom and Italy have also conducted thousands of diagnostic tests. ""We have done nothing like what other countries have done,"" Lipsitch said, noting that the U.S. had, until recently, limited not only the number of labs that were allowed to conduct tests on suspected cases, but also the number of patients that were eligible to be screened. It’s difficult to say just how far behind the U.S. has fallen, due to the murkiness around the number of administered tests. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention stopped releasing a public count of tests on March 2. The administration’s public statements haven’t cleared it up. On Feb. 29, the CDC reported testing 472 Americans. A day later, Azar told ABC News the U.S. had tested over 3,600 people. And a spokesperson for HHS, Azar’s agency, told us on March 3 that the CDC had tested samples from more than 1,200 patients. ""I don't know how to track U.S. tests any more,"" Lipsitch said. Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar speaks at the White House about the coronavirus on Feb. 28, 2020, in Washington. (AP/Vucci) The CDC stopped posting testing data as more state and local public-health labs have been brought into the fold, said Nancy Messonnier, a top CDC official, said during a March 3 briefing. ""With more and more testing done at states, these numbers would not be representative of the testing being done nationally,"" she said. An HHS spokesperson told us that the department doesn’t know how many additional tests have been administered by those state and local labs, adding that those labs can now test up to 15,000 people and are expected to be able to test as many as 75,000 people by March 6. The U.S. test count should rise into the millions as IDT, a commercial manufacturer, and other commercial and academic labs begin producing their own tests soon, according to HHS. The government’s initial testing effort was hindered by flaws with the CDC’s early test kits and restrictions that had limited which labs could run the tests and which patients could be tested. When the first U.S. coronavirus was detected, the country brushed aside the WHO test used by other nations and leaned on the CDC to develop and mass produce a more complicated test capable of detecting other viruses in addition to the coronavirus, according to reports. The test kits went out in early February. But some state labs that received them reported that flaws in the tests were triggering inconclusive results. Those states had to ship samples out to the CDC’s offices in Atlanta for results until the CDC fixed the problem weeks later. Since then, the Food and Drug Administration has given labs and hospitals across the country the go-ahead to administer their own tests before the FDA finishes reviewing them, so long as those tests are proven to work. That should lead to more testing, experts said. The CDC also modified its screening criteria to expand testing for some people with severe respiratory symptoms who did not travel to China or come into known contact with a coronavirus patient. Previously, travel to China or exposure to the virus were preconditions for screening. Adequate testing is essential to getting an accurate count of U.S. cases, experts said. Testing is also key for treating patients and identifying people who might be infected but don’t show symptoms, said Richard Watanabe, professor of preventive medicine at the University of Southern California. ""The latest data suggests the incubation period for COVID-19 can be as long as a couple of weeks,"" Watanabe said. Despite the recent acceleration, Lipsitch said U.S. testing is happening ""very slowly and at a level that is still paltry"" compared with some other countries. Dobbs said that the United States is ""actually screening fewer people (for the coronavirus than other countries) because we don’t have appropriate testing."" Experts told us that to date, the United States has lagged behind other countries, though numbers are imprecise. An error with the CDC’s early test kits contributed to the United States’ relatively low screening numbers. The administration has taken steps to make testing more widely available. With that additional information." Claim: The United States is “actually screening fewer people (for the coronavirus than other countries) because we don't have appropriate testing.
The CDC has stopped publicly reporting the number of tests it’s administered. So far, the United States has lagged behind other nations in terms of coronavirus testing. It has recently taken steps to ramp up its testing capabilities. Until recently, the U.S. had insisted that only the CDC’s test could be used — despite flaws in some early kits — and that only certain patients could get tested.

Paragraph: Samoa declared a national emergency last month and mandated that all 200,000 people living on the South Pacific island nation get vaccinated. The government has closed all schools and banned children from public gatherings. In all, 53 people have died in the outbreak since late October, including one adult and two older teenagers. Most of those who have died have been babies and young infants, including 23 children aged less than 1 and 25 children aged between 1 and 4. The government said more than 1,100 people have been admitted to hospitals since the outbreak began and about 180 people remain hospitalized. Among those hospitalized are 19 children who are in critical condition. Samoan authorities believe the virus was first spread by a traveler from New Zealand. New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said Monday that her country was doing everything it could to help curb the epidemic, including sending more than 50 medical professionals and thousands of vaccines to Samoa. Other countries including Britain have also sent teams and supplies. Ardern said the natural curve of infection rates meant that “sometimes things can be worse before they are better.” Figures from the World Health Organization and UNICEF indicate that fewer than 30% of Samoan infants were immunized last year. That low rate was exacerbated by a medical mishap that killed two babies who were administered a vaccine that had been incorrectly mixed, causing wider delays and distrust in the vaccination program. The government said about 33,000 people were vaccinated before last month and since then, another 58,000 people have been vaccinated. The World Health Organization has set a target of wiping out measles from most of the world by next year. It says the disease is entirely preventable thanks to a safe vaccine that has been in use since the 1960s, and that measles deaths worldwide decreased by 84% between 2000 and 2016 to about 90,000 annually thanks to better immunization. Claim: 50 children killed by measles in Samoa as outbreak worsens.
Samoa’s government said Monday that another five children had died within the past day from a measles outbreak, bringing the death toll from the epidemic to more than 50 as authorities race to vaccinate the entire population.

Paragraph: The story does not provide the cost of varenciline (which must be taken twice daily), or cost comparison with existing treatments. The story frames the data appropriately. The story avoids the use of only relative risk that the company emphasizes in its press release. The drug was given priority status and fast-tracked for approval due to the “significant improvement” over existing therapies for smoking cessation, which weren’t all that signficant. Nausea is the only harm discussed, though there is no mention of the rate or severity of nausea in the treatment and placebo groups, or if participants dropped out of the study due to this side effect. Other side effects of the medication included headaches, insomnia and stomach problems, which are also not mentioned in the story. The story only briefly mentions clinical evidence, and provides an incomplete discussion of the design of the Chantix trials. The numbers were from two fairly well-designed, randomized, double-blind trials (2000 participants), which the story fails to note. Abstinence rates were evaluated between varenicline (Chantix), bupropion (Zyban) and placebo groups at 12 weeks, then continuous abstinence for another 40 weeks. Incidence of nausea, the most common side effect, is not mentioned. There is acknowledgment in the story that the long-term success rate for smoking cessation may be due to a number of combined therapies, including non-drug behavioral treatment. The drug was given priority status and fast-tracked for approval due to the “significant improvement” over existing therapies for smoking cessation, which weren’t all that signficant. There does not seem to be evidence of disease mongering. The story uses federal agency data to describe prevalence of smoking and numbers desiring to quit. The study was funded by Pfizer, which is noted in the story. The story mentions that the inventor of the drug is an employee of Pfizer, so his testimonial on its effectiveness may be somewhat biased. The story mentions other drug treatments such as nicotine replacement therapies and bupropion. There is some discussion of non-drug methods of smoking cessation (e.g. behavioral counseling ) with regards to long-term abstinence. The story mentions recent FDA approval of varenicline for smoking cessation, however, we don’t know if it is available (presumably not as there is no price yet) or when it will become available. The story explains how this drug differs from nicotine replacement, and that it is different from bupropion. Varenicline binds to the nicotine receptor and only partially activates it so there is less stimulation than by nicotine itself. One of the downstream events from nicotine receptor binding is dopamine release in the parts of the brain wired for reward. There is no evidence that the story relied solely on a press release. The author cites, responsibly, multiple national experts who put the drug in perspective. Claim: FDA OKs Pfizer Anti-Smoking Pill

This news story covers the recent FDA approval of the drug varenicline for smoking cessation. This drug may help quell nicotine cravings by binding to the nicotine receptors in the brain and only partially activating them, so there is less stimulation than by nicotine itself. Varenicline (trade name Chantix) was given priority status and fast-tracked for approval due to the “significant improvement” over existing therapies for smoking cessation; however, the long-term benefit of this drug over existing anti-smoking therapies is not that impressive. This drug’s performance is not much better than smoking cessation rates for bupropion (marketed as Zyban) versus placebo in other randomized controlled studies. Varenicline may be an option for people who have not been able to quit smoking using bupropion or other anti-smoking therapies, however, there is more information on the long-term safety of bupropion. The recent approval of varenicline was largely based on two double-blind, randomized studies of 2000 smokers in which the drug was compared with bupropion and a placebo. The studies were both funded by Pfizer, maker of varenicline. The story correctly avoids the use of only relative numbers (which Pfizer emphasizes in its press release) and presents longer-term (one year) abstinence rates, which are important for evaluating smoking cessation therapies. However, reports of side effects in this story are very limited. The incidence and severity of nausea, the most common side effect and the only one listed in this story, is not mentioned. There is also no comparison of how tolerable were the side effects from varenicline and bupropion. There is acknowledgment in this story that the long-term success rate for smoking cessation may be due to a number of combined therapies, though there is also a warning that varenicline should not be taken with other smoking-cessation products. While counseling and other behavioral support are briefly mentioned as aiding smoking cessation, it is not explained if counseling was part of the long-term follow up treatment in studies evaluating varenicline. The Pfizer press release announcing the recent FDA approval of this drug also mentions plans to offer users an interactive smoking cessation support program. There is no discussion of the cost of this anti-smoking therapy (which must be taken twice daily) or a cost comparison with existing treatments; however, projected sales for Pfizer are mentioned.