TASK DEFINITION: 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.
PROBLEM: Paragraph: In April 2019, several news articles from around the world reported that the Australian government had a plan to cull millions of feral cats using poisoned sausages dropped by air. CBS News published an article with the headline “Australia is Trying to Kill Millions of Stray Cats by Airdropping Poisoned Sausages,” which went on to report that: “The Australian government wants to kill two million feral cats by next year — and it wants to do it by airdropping poisonous sausages. There are currently an estimated 2 to 6 million free-roaming cats across the country, and officials say they are threatening native wildlife populations.”  On 29 April, the UK Independent published an article with the headline “Australia Plans to Kill Millions of Feral Cats by Airdropping Sausages Laced With Poison” and on 26 April CNN reported that: “Australia is at war — with feral cats. By 2020, the government wants to kill two million free roaming cats, a large chunk of the total feral cat population, which is estimated to be between 2 and 6 million.” We received multiple inquiries from readers about the accuracy of these reports, and in particular about the claim that the primary or exclusive culling method was to be sausages laced with poison. The Australian government has indeed begun an initiative aimed at culling millions of feral cats, which they have described as “one of the greatest threats to Australia’s land-based mammals” and blamed for driving some species into extinction. However, the culling project was first announced in 2015 and was already well underway when reports happened to emerge about it in April 2019. In 2015, Australia’s government launched the Threatened Species Strategy. One of its four key strategies related to feral cats, and the policy outlined a target of culling 2 million such cats by the year 2020 and eradicating feral cats entirely from five of Australia’s islands, among other goals. A government report launching the initiative stated that: “The scientific evidence is unequivocal that feral cats are one of the greatest threats to Australia’s land-based mammals. They have been a major contributor to the extinction of at least 27 mammals since they were first introduced to Australia. Today, they imperil at least 142 species or more than one third of our threatened mammals, reptiles, frogs and birds. As an extinction driver for so many of our native animals, and a threat that has been relatively neglected in the past, tackling the threat of feral cats is the highest priority of this Action Plan.” By the end of 2016, researchers from RMIT University in Melbourne reported that an estimated 211,000 feral cats had been culled as part of the initiative, but also estimated that 83 percent of those animals had been shot, rather than poisoned. More up-to-date figures were not included in the progress report relating to the period ending in December 2017. In order to achieve the goal of eradicating 2 million feral cats, the first action listed by the government was the “development and deployment of Curiosity, the new humane feral cat bait.” Australia’s Department of Environment and Energy had spent years developing and testing Curiosity, a new form of sausage bait that, according to the government, is less likely than existing baits to be consumed by other animals: The Curiosity bait for feral cats has been a long-term $5.1 million project to develop a humane, broad-scale toxic bait to control feral cats in conservation areas. The Curiosity bait for feral cats comprises a small meat-based sausage containing a small hard plastic pellet encapsulating a humane toxin. Cats do not have molar teeth and tend to chew their food less so they may swallow portions of the sausage including the pellet. Most Australian native animals nibble and chew their food and are likely to reject the pellet. The pellet is designed to dissolve in the cat’s stomach and deliver a rapid dose of the toxin. The Curiosity bait for feral cats uses a new humane toxin called para-aminopropiophenone, or PAPP, which is considered best-practice world-wide. In brief, the toxicant, PAPP, converts the animal’s red blood cells to a form that cannot carry oxygen, causing death through oxygen starvation to the brain and other vital organs. It is considered to be humane and death takes minutes to hours. The RSPCA [Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals] have indicated that PAPP is a clear improvement in humaneness over previous toxins. The mode of action means that secondary poisoning of any other animals from consuming a carcass of a cat that ate a Curiosity bait containing PAPP is much less likely than when using previously employed toxins. (Although the excerpt serves to explain the Australian government’s reasoning in favoring the Curiosity bait, it does contain a factual error: cats do have molar teeth, albeit only two, and they are used for tearing flesh rather than grinding, so the overall claim that cats tend to chew less and swallow more readily than other animals, appears to stand). In government-commissioned field trials of Curiosity, the bait has been distributed on the ground in target areas using both aircraft and ground vehicles. As of April 2019, the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority was still assessing the PAPP variant of Curiosity. But the national government appeared confident it would be registered as a pest-control product, because in November 2018 the Department of the Environment and Energy solicited applications for a commercial partner to manufacture and sell the bait. Although no significant developments in relation to the culling program took place in the spring of 2019, interest in the initiative was revived by a 25 April article published by The New York Times, which bore the headline “Australia is Deadly Serious About Killing Millions of Cats,” and mentioned the existing use of another kind of sausage-borne cat bait containing the active ingredient sodium fluoroacetate, known as “1080.”  In February 2019, a group of Australian scientists questioned the basis of the government’s target of culling 2 million feral cats by 2020, in part saying the government had not given a clear metric or scientific rationale for that number; had failed to indicate how or whether the cull would lower the overall population of feral cats (given the rapid rates at which they reproduce) and also increase the populations of endangered species; and because estimates vary widely over how many feral cats actually live in Australia. In a paper published in the journal Conservation Letters, the researchers wrote: Claim: The Australian government's Threatened Species Strategy has as one of its aims the culling of 2 million feral cats by 2020, largely using a sausage bait carrying a lethal toxin. 

SOLUTION: “The focus on killing cats runs the risk of distracting attention away from other threats to biodiversity, most prominent of which is widespread, ongoing habitat loss, which has been largely overlooked in the Threatened Species Strategy. The culling target is a highly visible symbol of a broader campaign around feral cat research and management in Australia, rather than a direct indicator of conservation action and success. We are concerned that progress toward the 2 million target could be misinterpreted as progress toward conserving threatened species, when the link between the two is not clear.”

PROBLEM: Paragraph: The Alpine republic with a population of 8.8 million has tested around 28,400 people so far with nearly 4,900 cases and 28 deaths confirmed. It was one of the first European countries to put severe restrictions on movement and close shops and schools in response to the developments in neighboring Italy and a strong increase in coronavirus infections in its western regions. In coming weeks, Austria plans to test up to 15,000 people per day, the chancellor said. “We will also launch rapid tests, to test hundreds of thousands of people, as quickly as possible,” Kurz told a news conference. He referred to brand new tests that are comparably cheap but take longer than laboratory tests used up until now. Broad testing is key to getting a clear picture of the real infection rate and an idea of how many people have developed immunity against the virus, the chancellor said. Top priority was to delay the peak of infections as long as possible to avoid a situation like in Italy or Spain, where the health systems are overwhelmed. “Our goal is that the number of infections doubles only every 14 days and not every two, three or five days and that we will set the right measures to keep it that way once we ramp up social life again,” Kurz said. Austria’s strict measures are in place until April 13, and Kurz said there was hope that a gradual withdrawal could start the day after. A government task force developing scenarios for the “ramp up” was currently dealing with questions such as in which order schools, businesses and production should restart. Lessons from other countries showed that it was crucial to remain disciplined and to make use of “big data”. Asked what he meant by “big data”, Kurz said: “We are currently working with the Red Cross and other enterprises on ideas that could be implemented in Austria and in Europe, and which are suitable for our system and our democracy.”   Austria’s Red Cross is promoting a so-called “Stop Corona” app, which enables a user to digitally store who he meets and when. If a person shows symptoms of corona disease, these contact persons can be notified. Austria’s mobile carrier A1 Telekom Austria  is already sharing results from a motion analysis application that visualizes the movement flows of groups of people with the health authority. Claim: Austria bets on mass testing to manage coronavirus spread.

SOLUTION: Austria will massively expand coronavirus testing in coming days to locate and isolate infected people and avoid an Italian-like overload of its health system, Chancellor Sebastian Kurz said on Tuesday.

PROBLEM: Paragraph: Roehl, of Mandan, was 64 years old and had a state health insurance plan that covered the life-saving medication minus a $10 copay. But when he turned 65 and enrolled in Medicare, the price of the drug skyrocketed to $2,400 for a 30-day supply. Roehl, a retiree living on a fixed income, couldn’t afford the medication, so he stopped taking it. He was warned the leukemia — which was in remission — would come back. Then, a brochure came in the mail from a Canadian pharmacy advertising the drug for a fraction of the price — $684 for 30 days. He purchased a three-month supply and got it in the mail days later. “There are just so many inequities (in prescription drug prices),” he said. “To go from paying $10 to $2,400, that’s a tough pill to swallow.” Roehl joins an unknown number of North Dakotans who seek out lower drug prices in other countries, particularly Canada. Buying his medicine from across the border saves Roehl roughly $20,000 a year, The Bismarck Tribune reported. The pharmaceutical industry has long maintained that high drug prices are necessary to fund expensive research and development of new drugs. Federal and state legislation has been proposed in recent months to combat the rising cost of prescription drugs and to increase price transparency. In Congress, it remains to be seen what, if any, legislation could pass. Members of North Dakota’s all-Republican congressional delegation have signaled their support for various bipartisan measures making their way through Congress aimed at lowering prescription drug prices. These include the Prescription Drug Pricing Reduction Act, introduced by Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, and the Lower Health Care Costs Act, introduced by Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tennessee, and Sen. Patty Murray, D-Washington. North Dakota Sen. John Hoeven said in a statement that two bills he co-sponsored to increase prescription drug price transparency and to “close existing loopholes hindering the development of generic drugs” were included in Alexander’s legislation. North Dakota Sen. Kevin Cramer said he also supports Alexander’s and Grassley’s bills, and Rep. Kelly Armstrong said he also has backed similar drug-pricing legislation in the House. None of these bills have made it to a floor vote. Buying from Canada Roger and Vicki Roehl thought they prepared for retirement. Both had successful careers: Roger Roehl headed the mapping section for the state Department of Transportation, and Vicki Roehl was a high school English teacher and a counselor. They had saved up for retirement and hoped to travel the world. “Haven’t done much of that,” Roger Roehl said. His leukemia diagnosis brought their travel plans to a halt. But the chemotherapy drug Gleevec has brought him and his wife newfound optimism. Roger Roehl is in “hematological remission,” meaning: “The blood is normal and will stay normal as long as I take this pill,” he said. “It’s working. It’s the silver bullet of leukemia,” he said, adding he’s been taking the pill for three years. Roger and Vicki Roehl now have to budget for a three-month supply of the drug and tap into their savings to afford it, even with the north-of-the-border savings. Purchasing prescriptions drugs from Canadian pharmacies is a phenomenon not commonly talked about in the United States. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration prohibits importing prescription drug medication, except for people who buy drugs in small amounts for personal use. The cost of prescription drugs is lower in Canada and some other countries because their governments run their health care systems and are able to negotiate prices with drug manufacturers. In researching buying prescription medications from Canada, Roger Roehl found that other North Dakotans do it, as well. He said he’s aware of a bus in Minot that takes groups of people across the border. Some states have enacted laws that allow for prescription drug importation from other states, but no such law exists in North Dakota. In July, the Trump administration announced plans to allow for pilot projects developed by states, pharmacies or drug manufacturers to import certain prescription medications from Canada. It’s unclear when these programs could be implemented, as the administration has to go through a rulemaking process that could take months to years. Price transparency In North Dakota, lawmakers are looking to jump-start legislation related to prescription drug price transparency. During an interim Health Care Committee meeting last week, the group’s chairman, Rep. George Keiser, R-Bismarck, proposed a bill draft modeled after drug transparency legislation that passed in Texas this year. The bill draft requires information be reported by drug manufacturers, pharmacy benefit managers and health insurance companies. Pharmacy benefit managers, or PBMs, are referred to as middlemen in the prescription drug supply chain who negotiate prices with drug manufacturers for health care companies. The bill would require manufacturers to report every time the price of their drugs rises more than 10% in a year or 40% or more over five calendar years. PBMs also would be required report data annually, including the amount of “rebates” they collect from manufacturers, and health insurance companies also would have to report data on prescription drug costs. The information would be submitted to the state Board of Pharmacy and then published on a public website. Committee members last week mostly expressed support for the proposed legislation, which still has a long way to go before it’s introduced during the 2021 legislative session. Keiser told the Tribune the bill likely will go through a number of amendments. “What this is attempting to do is begin to bring transparency to the marketplace and the justification for (increasing drug prices),” Keiser said. “The key to this legislation — the most important element for me — is, you want to increase (the cost of) a drug 10% within a year, that’s fine, just tell us why.” The data will in turn help state health policymakers understand the problem and look for solutions, according to Keiser. “The public doesn’t know what’s involved. But until we can provide information for policymakers and the public, we can’t take the next step,” he said. Several states have enacted laws in recent years related to prescription drug prices, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Keiser said his bill draft is the first of its kind in North Dakota. Lobbyists for the pharmaceutical industry contend that drug-pricing and transparency bills don’t result in actual savings for consumers, and that others in the supply chain, such as PBMs, contribute to price increases. ‘An important first step’ Josh Askvig, state director of AARP North Dakota, spoke in support of Keiser’s bill draft at the committee meeting last week. Prescription drug prices are “a very high priority” for his group and a recurring issue he hears among its members. Askvig cited data from his organization that shows the average annual cost of prescription drugs in North Dakota increased 58% from 2012 to 2017, while the average income for North Dakotans increased only 6.7%. AARP recently launched a nationwide campaign aimed at lowering prescription drug prices. Askvig said his organization and its members have been advocating for a number of reforms at the state and national level. “We know that states can’t solve the problem alone, but knowing this committee’s willingness to dig into this, we think, is an important first step,” Askvig said. ___ Information from: Bismarck Tribune, http://www.bismarcktribune.com Claim: Some North Dakotans turn to Canada for prescription pills.

SOLUTION:
Roger Roehl four years ago found the “silver bullet” for leukemia — a medication called Gleevec.