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.

[EX Q]: Paragraph: Authorities have urged South Koreans to stay home and maintain social distancing, as imported cases and new outbreaks around small clusters continued to emerge while an overall tally in new infections has been declining. Restrictions on high-risk events such as religious, sports and entertainment gatherings took effect on Sunday, requiring facilities to ensure space between the attendees and allowing local governments to conduct on-site checks and issue fines. “Our fight against the virus is a three-legged race,” President Moon Jae-in said on Sunday, referring to the need for the community to work in step with the government. “It doesn’t matter even if you are not sick and doing well by yourself.”  Most churches have turned to online services over the past few weeks, but local media said there were several that pushed ahead with physical gatherings on Sunday, prompting scuffles with police and protests by residents calling for disbanding. At the Sarang Jeil Church in Seoul, several attendees tried to force out a dozen police officers, domestic newswire Yonhap reported. A video uploaded by a purported member of the church on YouTube showed a woman lying on the ground while another was heard shouting “Why are you doing this? Is this North Korea?”  Yonhap quoted a city official as saying the church did not follow rules and ensure sufficient space among the attendees. Reuters was not immediately able to reach the police or the Seoul city government for comment and calls to the church for comment were unanswered. Elsewhere, Yonhap news photos showed a group of residents staging a rally in front of the Yonsei Central Baptist Church in Seoul, holding up a sign calling for a halt to services for the safety of neighbors. More than half of South Korea’s cases were traced to a fringe Christian church in the hard-hit southeastern city of Daegu. This week, some 60 members of a Protestant church in Seongnam, south of Seoul, have also tested positive this week. The Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (KCDC) reported 98 new coronavirus cases, bringing national infections to 8,897. The death toll rose by six to 110. The daily tally marked the 11th day in a row the country has posted new infections of around 100, compared with the peak of 909 cases recorded on Feb. 29. The KCDC renewed caution for overseas travelers on Sunday, after the government toughened border checks and imposed a two-week mandatory quarantine for all long-term arrivals from Europe due to a spike in returnee cases. At least 15 travelers tested positive on Saturday, the KCDC said, eight of them from Europe and three from the United States. Most of them were South Koreans. “We’re implementing intensive social distancing over the next 15 days,” KCDC deputy director Kwon Jun-wook said at a briefing. “After that, we will open schools and return to a regular life cycle in the face of the battle on the coronavirus.” Claim: South Korean churchgoers scuffle with police as virus curbs on gatherings kick in.
[EX A]: Members of a South Korean church scuffled with police on Sunday, media reported, as government restrictions on religious services and other gatherings due to the spread of the coronavirus took effect.

[EX Q]: Paragraph: "The story does not discuss the costs of annual mammography screening, or even provide a range of costs. The story does not discuss any health care policy cost repercussions of breast cancer screening recommendations. The story does not discuss the cost of unnecessary biopsies or other treatments for women who have a false positive diagnosis via mammography (greater in women 40-49). The story highlights the 26 percent difference in breast cancer death rates, but fails to include any information about the overall risk. The researchers reported that based on their results you would have to screen 1252 women for a decade in order to prevent one breast cancer death. In other words, for the remaining 1251 women, a decade of mammograms did not alter their breast cancer mortality. Although this story does not go into detail about the potential harms of screening mammography, it does include comments from independent experts who point out that the scans do lead to the diagnosis and treatment of women whose tumors would never have become life-threatening. This story briefly explains key features of this study. It also includes critiques from independent experts who note limitations of the study design and analysis – although the statement that the researchers ""did not compare the broader breast cancer death rates"" in the counties"" is unclear. Overall, there is much more the Times could have done to analyze methodological questions surrounding the Swedish study. (For example, read our blog on this matter.) Interviews with Peter Gotzsche and with Donald Berry saved the story. But so much more could have been done – another reason why more than 471 words should have been devoted to the reporting. The story does not discuss the prevalence of breast cancer among women in their 40s. That omission would not usually be considered disease mongering, but since surveys indicate most people overestimate the risk of breast cancer among women in their 40s, failing to mention the actual rates leaves those misconceptions intact. The story does include comments from experts who raise concerns about overdiagnosis; that is, the number of breast tumors discovered that are not actually life-threatening. A strong point of this story is the inclusion of comments from several independent experts with a variety of perspectives on the meaning of the latest study results. The story does not mention any potential conflicts of interest, but the researchers did not list any in their journal article. Although not discussed in detail, the story does mention that the United States Preventive Services Task Force has questioned the value of screening mammograms for women younger than 50, thus implying that not being screened is an option to consider. The availability of mammography was not explicitly addressed, but we can’t criticize the story for that. Instead, we give a Not Applicable score for this criterion. This story could have done a better job explaining how this study – and its methods – are different from earlier research on the topic.But two things lead us to give it a barely satisfactory score. First, there was a brief attempt to mention the unique ""circumstances"" of the Swedish study. Second, the story also pointed out that there’s a historical ideological pattern in the study authors’ work – noting that they ""have long been advocates of mammography screening."" It’s clear that the story was not based on a news release." Claim: Mammogram Benefit Seen for Women in Their 40s
[EX A]: This story includes strong comments from independent experts that can help readers get a broader understanding of the results of a study that compared breast cancer death rates among women in their 40s who lived in areas of Sweden that did or did not offer routine mammography. However, because the story reports only the percentage difference in death rates, without including absolute numbers or the number of women who need to be screened to prevent one death, readers may get the impression that the effect of mammography was larger than what the researchers actually reported. People commonly overestimate the risk of breast cancer death among women in their 40s. By not including any information about the absolute numbers of deaths among women in this study or in the population at large, the story misses an opportunity to correct common misconceptions.

[EX Q]: Paragraph: But Michel Yao, head of emergency operations for WHO Africa, said that was a tentative projection which could change and noted worst-case predictions for the Ebola outbreak had not come true because people changed behaviour in time. “This is still to be fine-tuned,” he told a media teleconference. “It’s difficult to make a long-term estimation because the context changes too much and also public health measures when they are fully implemented, they can actually have an impact.”   The world’s poorest continent has seen more than 17,000 confirmed cases of the COVID-19 disease and about 900 deaths so far - relatively little compared to some other regions. But there are fears that could balloon and overwhelm shaky health services. “We are concerned that the virus continues to spread geographically, within countries,” said Matshidiso Moeti, director for WHO’s Africa region, which comprises 46 sub-Saharan nations and Algeria. “The numbers continue to increase every day.”  Infections in South Africa, which has the highest number of cases, have slowed after it began a strict lockdown, but other nations - like Burkina Faso, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Algeria - have seen higher than average fatalities. The WHO is working with authorities there to improve patient care and reduce fatalities, Moeti said. She warned that President Donald Trump’s withdrawal of U.S. funding for the WHO could harm both the fight against against other killers like polio, HIV and malaria. “The impact, potentially, of this decision will be quite significant on areas such as polio eradication,” said Moeti, just when Africa was close to being declared polio-free. Trump accused the Geneva-based WHO on Tuesday of promoting Chinese “disinformation” about the new coronavirus, saying this had probably worsened the outbreak and that he would stop its funding even as he defended his own handling of the crisis. More than 2 million people have been infected globally, with the largest number in the United States. Washington is the biggest donor to the WHO, which tackles specific diseases and also strengthens national health systems. The United States contributed more than $400 million to the WHO in 2019, roughly 15% of its budget. “We are very much hoping (suspension of funding) will be re-thought because the U.S. government is an important partner not only in financial terms but also it is an important strategic partner,” Moeti said. She also told the media teleconference that the organisation requires $300 million to help African governments respond to the pandemic. Claim: Africa may see millions of coronavirus cases, tentative WHO forecast shows.
[EX A]:
Coronavirus cases in Africa could shoot up from thousands now to 10 million within three to six months according to very provisional modelling, a regional World Health Organization (WHO) official said on Thursday.