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.

Example Input: 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 is putting 20,000 more police on the streets.
Example Output: 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.

Example Input: Paragraph: As criticism spread against United States President Donald Trump’s administration for its response to the COVID-19 pandemic in mid-March 2020, one graphic disseminated on social media listed his multiple attempts to downplay the disease:In this case, the graphic is completely accurate. The various statements are correctly attributed to Trump, and each has been verified in independent timelines compiled by news outlets.“We’re ordering a lot of supplies. We’re ordering a lot of, uh, elements that frankly we wouldn’t be ordering unless it was something like this. But we’re ordering a lot of different elements of medical.” — Trump on the coronavirus pic.twitter.com/id6YLzbmRE— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) February 28, 2020A video with similar content, posted by writer Lindsay Holst and featuring audio of several of Trump’s remarks alongside a graph showing the spread of the disease, has been shared thousands of times on Twitter:57 days later. pic.twitter.com/umsfZHyBuo— Lindsay Holst (@LindsayLHolst) March 17, 2020On March 17 2020, journalists asked Trump why his tone had shifted so quickly and dramatically regarding the epidemic. He told reporters, “I’ve always known this is a real — this is a pandemic. I felt it was a pandemic long before it was called a pandemic. I’ve always viewed it as very serious.” Claim: United States President Donald Trump made several statements downplaying the nature of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Example Output: ‘Timeline of Trump’s COVID-19 Statements’ Meme

Example Input: Paragraph: No mention was made of costs, but anyone who has been to a drugstore knows that aspirin is cheap. The story cites a 27 percent decrease among low-dose aspirin users who had taken the drug for five years or more. It also notes the incidence of the disease among different populations, and even gives readers a link to a risk calculator to determine their individual risk. Of course, we almost always prefer stories to use absolute risk reductions over the relative risk reduction reported here (technically an odds ratio — not a “risk” reduction per se). But in a case-control study such as this one, the issue can be complicated. We’ll give the benefit of the doubt. The story is straightforward in saying that all NSAIDs carry risks. “Long-term use can cause gastrointestinal bleeding, for example, so the potential reduction in colon cancer risk needs to be balanced against potential side effects, the authors warn.” It would have been easy to also mention cerebral vascular bleeds, but that’s a minor point. The story cites “several limitations” of the study, including the fact that the researchers did not include patients who bought their aspirin or other NSAIDs without a doctor’s prescription, and that the authors were not able to adjust for some risk factors, such as obesity, diet, alcohol use and family history of colorectal cancer. The study type (retrospective case control) could also have been mentioned along with the relative weakness of this type of study compared with a randomized controlled trial. In addition, the story in several places uses language suggesting a cause and effect relationship between aspirin and colon cancer — e.g. “taking low-dose aspirin continuously for at least five years appeared to reduce the risk of colorectal cancer” — and it quotes an independent source who says flatly that aspirin “reduces the risk of colorectal cancer.” Such a strong statement wasn’t justified by anything we saw in this study — and the paper didn’t point to any other definitive evidence that would warrant such a statement. But despite these concerns, we think that the story overall did enough to merit a Satisfactory rating here. There is no attempt to inflate the incidence or severity of the disease. If anything, the severity of the disease was underplayed by not mentioning death rates. The story includes comment from Dr. Gurpreet Singh-Ranger, who apparently was not involved with the study, so we’ll give it a pass. The story would have been stronger had it told the reader what made him an authority on the topic. The story makes no reference to colonoscopy as a means of identifying and removing polyps before they become cancerous. Other screening approaches that could have been mentioned include sigmoidoscopy and fecal blood tests. The ubiquity of low-dose aspirin is so well known that it did not need to be mentioned. High up in the story, the reader is told what is new about this study: “Earlier studies had suggested that aspirin and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) such as ibuprofen may help protect against colorectal cancer, but it wasn’t clear how much had to be taken, and for how long, to achieve those benefits.” The fact that the story includes comments made directly to Reuters Health shows that it does not rely on a news release. Claim: An aspirin a day – for years – may keep colon cancer away
Example Output:
A strong story that describes in clear terms the findings as well as the strengths and weaknesses of this study. It covered potential biases that could not be controlled, mentioned harms, and was overall very cautious. It would have been even stronger had it mentioned that the study was observational in nature and therefore not capable of telling us whether the aspirin, or some other factor, is responsible for the benefit that was seen. It also did not mention alternatives for colorectal cancer prevention such as proven effective screening practices. But these are relatively minor omissions in coverage that was otherwise quite exemplary. Though evidence has long indicated that low-dose aspirin was associated with a reduced incidence of the disease, this is the first report to say how long the regimen needs to be followed. That information is important because, this year, some 132,700 new cases of colorectal cancer will be diagnosed in the United States, and about 49,700 people will die from it, according to the National Cancer Institute. Such cancers represent 8.0 percent of all new cancer cases in the country.