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: "Republican House leaders fanned out on the Sunday shows to defend a stop-gap measure to fund the Department of Homeland Security in their ongoing fight against President Barack Obama's executive action on immigration. They did not stray from talking points. TV audiences Sunday heard one specific number several times as hosts pressed the GOP lawmakers to justify the chaos over funding for the Department of Homeland Security. ""The president said 22 times, 22 times, that he couldn't do what he eventually did,"" House Speaker John Boehner said on CBS’ Face the Nation. Both Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy and Majority Whip Steve Scalise repeated the ""22 times"" talking point on NBC’s Meet the Press and Fox News Sunday, respectively. Even Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, one of 52 Republicans who opposed a three-week funding plan, used the figure to defend his House Freedom Caucus’ actions on CNN’s State of the Union. PolitiFact wanted to see where the number comes from and just how accurate it is. What we’re talking about The controversy stems from Obama’s Nov. 20, 2014, announcement that he would delay deportations of unauthorized immigrants who have lived in the country for more than five years but have children who are citizens or have green cards. More than 4 million people could qualify. An applicant could qualify for a work permit and avoid being deported for three years at a time if he or she can pass a background check and pay a fee. The decision is bound for higher court battles after a Texas federal judge issued a temporary injunction on the action, saying it may have violated procedural rules for using executive power. This action came on top of Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program in 2012, an executive action to protect ""dreamers,"" or people brought here illegally as children and have not committed crimes. That move, too, was viewed by critics as an abuse of power, but supporters said it helped provide a path to citizenship for hundreds of thousands of residents. After Obama’s post-midterm elections announcement on immigration, Boehner’s office unleashed a Buzzfeed-style blog post detailing ""22 Times President Obama Said He Couldn’t Ignore or Create His Own Immigration Law."" What’s on Boehner’s list Our PolitiFact Texas colleagues dissected Boehner’s list for similar fact-checks of U.S. Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, the Republican who led the legal challenge of Obama’s actions when he was still attorney general. PolitiFact Texas tracked down each of the citations in Boehner’s post, comparing what they said Obama said with transcripts and news stories. In a nutshell, the majority of the examples are of Obama saying he did not have power to do more on immigration without Congress. Others, as we’ll explain in a moment, say something more nuanced or aren’t specific to immigration. We won’t go through every quote that supports Boehner’s point here, but here are a few we culled from a document created by PolitiFact Texas: In September 2012, Obama was asked if he would follow up his recent protective move for students by doing something similar for non-criminal immigrants such as the parents of U.S.-born children. Obama replied that ""as the head of the executive branch, there’s a limit to what I can do… we’re still going to, ultimately, have to change the laws in order to avoid some of the heartbreaking stories that you see coming up occasionally,"" as in parents deported. (No. 13 on Boehner’s list.) At a presidential debate in October 2012, Obama and Mitt Romney were asked: ""What do you plan on doing with immigrants without their green card that are currently living here as productive members of society?"" Obama said: ""I've done everything that I can on my own."" (No. 14 on Boehner’s list.) In a January 2013 Telemundo interview, Obama was asked why he couldn’t protect mothers living here without authorization from deportation as he had served law-abiding students. ""I’m not a king,"" Obama replied, akin to his response the same month to a similar query from Univision. ""You know, my job as the head of the executive branch ultimately is to carry out the law. And-- you know, when it comes to enforcement of our immigration laws-- we’ve got some discretion. We can prioritize-- what we do. But we can’t simply ignore the law."" (No. 16 on Boehner’s list.) So clearly there are examples of Obama saying he couldn’t do more with executive action, then later doing exactly that. That’s why PolitiFact previously rated Obama’s claim that ""my position hasn’t changed"" as False. What should not be counted But also included on Boehner’s list of 22 are quotes where Obama was either suggesting his executive powers did not have hard limits or was silent on his executive power on immigration. Here are a few problems with quotes included on Boehner’s list. In two instances during his 2008 presidential campaign, Obama criticized ""signing statements"" used by President George W. Bush that interpret laws, but he did not bring up immigration. Immigration was also not part of his reply to a question at a 2010 MTV/BET event when he said, ""I can’t simply ignore laws that are out there,"" in response to a question about ""don’t ask, don’t tell."" (Nos. 1, 2 and 5.) In September 2011, with his deferred-action plan on the horizon, Obama reiterated that he cannot just change laws unilaterally in response to a question about possible administrative relief for students who don’t have legal residency. But he hinted that there might be room within his authority, saying, ""what we can do is to prioritize enforcement, since there are limited enforcement resources."" (No. 12 on Boehner’s list.) Obama’s July 2013 Univision interview hit similar notes when he was asked if he could grant amnesty to the undocumented population. He called for a legislative solution and said ""probably not,"" adding, ""I can do some things and have done some things that make a difference in the lives of people by determining how our enforcement should focus."" (No. 18 on Boehner’s list.) In August 2014, Obama told reporters he may ""scour our authorities to try to make progress"" without congressional cooperation. Obama said, ""We’re going to make sure that every time we take one of these steps that we are working within the confines of my executive power. But I promise you the American people don’t want me just standing around twiddling my thumbs and waiting for Congress to get something done."" (No. 22 on Boehner’s list.) Asked why Boehner continues to cite 22 examples, spokesman Michael Steel told PolitiFact ""we obviously stand by"" the count. Pressed to explain why, he said, ""Obviously, we're just going to agree to disagree about the ‘22 times’ figure, which we feel is accurate."" The bigger picture Whether the real number is 22, 15 or something less than that is more complicated by the specifics of Boehner’s claim. Boehner's claim is Obama said he couldn’t do ""what he eventually did."" Experts we talked to noted that Obama was not always so specific in the comments Boehner and his team cited. Boehner’s count factors in both instances of Obama talking about how he could not legalize or deport the entire undocumented population as well as more limited executive actions to relieve smaller populations. ""It gives me a headache,"" said Anna O. Law, a CUNY Brooklyn College political science professor, of the post, ""because they’re playing semantics."" Alex Nowrasteh, a Cato Institute immigration analyst, said he did not know what to make of the ""very political"" claim. Ultimately, much of it depends on your specific interpretation of each quote. Our ruling Boehner said, ""The president said 22 times, 22 times, that he couldn't do what he eventually did."" Boehner's broader point -- that Obama said one thing about executive action but did another -- is accurate. But he should refrain from the rhetorical flourish of saying Obama said it 22 times. Clarification: This item was updated on March 2, 2015, to better explain the ruling of a federal judge in Texas." Claim: "On immigration, ""the president said 22 times, 22 times, that he couldn't do what he eventually did."
[A]: "Boehner said, ""The president said 22 times, 22 times, that he couldn't do what he eventually did."" Boehner's broader point -- that Obama said one thing about executive action but did another -- is accurate. But he should refrain from the rhetorical flourish of saying Obama said it 22 times."


[Q]: Paragraph: The story notes the an additional $20 per mammogram with CAD when billed to Medicare. With the newer technology, costs to public health would increase via additional screening and unnecessary biopsies, and treatment would increase for cancers that may never become problematic (i.e. some forms of DCIS or ductal carcinoma in situ). The story provides data that there was little positive difference between radiologists' and CAD detection of cancer via mammogram images. However, the story does not mention results of any other evaluations of the technology (e.g. how it has been used in UK and other countries where results did show benefit in terms of increased detection of cancer). The story mentions that the newer technology may result in over treatment as there are more false positives with the CAD technology vs. radiologists' analysis alone. In a recent study published in the New England Journal of Medicine, there was 20% increase in biopsy rates after mammographers used the CAD software. The article does not present the study well. It was an observational study of select practices in the US – not randomized, not controlled and there was no information about how representative these samples were, especially the centers that used CAD. The story presented some key results but virtually nothing about the study design. The story does not engage in disease mongering or suggest that women should opt for mammograms at centers that have the new CAD technology. The story provides many clinical perspectives on the CAD technology. The reporter interviews not only the study author and the author of an accompanying NEJM editorial, but also clinicians and radiologists who talk about use of CAD in practice. Interviews with clinicians who provide their rationale for not using the CAD technology provide excellent balance to the story. The story discusses the continued benefit of mammography for early detection of breast cancer. The story highlights that computer-assisted screening does not replace human judgment in interpretation of radiological films. The story mentions that about 30% of mammography centers use computer-aided detection (CAD) technology. The story mentions that CAD is a newer method of reading mammographies, but in a recent observational trial it was no better–and may have produced more false positives–than images read and interpreted by radiologists alone. The story does not rely solely on a press release for information, and there is independent reporting and sources cited not affiliated with the recently published data on CAD. Claim: Doubts on mammogram software
[A]: This story provides readers with a balanced discussion of the potential downside of incorporating newer technologies into routine practice too soon. Specifically, the story reports evidence recently published in the New England Journal of Medicine that computer-aided detection (CAD), a newer method of reading mammographies, was no better–and may have produced more false positives–than images read and interpreted by radiologists alone. There was 20% increase in biopsies after mammographers used the CAD software, and many of these women had non-malignant lesions. The article did not adequately describe the study. It was an observational study of select practices in the US – not randomized, not controlled and there was no information about how representative these samples were, especially in the centers that used CAD. The story reported on key results, but without adequately explaining how they were arrived at. The story provides multiple perspectives on the CAD technology in breast cancer detection. The reporter interviews not only the lead author of the NEJM study, but also the author of an accompanying editorial on this newer technology, as well as radiologists who talk about CAD in their practice. Interviews with clinicians who offer a rationale for not using the CAD technology give excellent balance to the story and provide an often overlooked perspective: newer and more high-tech devices are not necessarily better. The story notes the additional $20 per mammogram cost to Medicare with CAD. With the newer technology, costs to public health would increase via additional screening and unnecessary biopsies, and treatment would likely increase for cancers that may never become problematic (i.e. some forms of DCIS or ductal carcinoma in situ). Importantly, the story discuses the continued benefit of mammography for early detection of breast cancer. The story highlights that computer-assisted screening does not replace human judgment in interpretation of radiological films. More screening centers with the CAD technology are available; however, the new technology may not serve women any better. Traditional mammography with a radiologist interpreting the results may be more accurate and result in fewer unnecessary tests and biopsies.


[Q]: Paragraph: Tokyo’s nightlife districts of Shibuya, Akasaka and Ginza areas were much quieter than usual overnight as the state of emergency took effect, but cities have not shut down and many workers are still commuting to offices by day. The central bank warned that the coronavirus pandemic had created an “extremely high” level of uncertainty for the world’s third-largest economy, with regional economies facing their worst conditions since the global financial crisis a decade ago. Japanese authorities are hoping to contain the outbreak without imposing a mandatory lockdown that could deal a major blow to an economy already struggling to cope. The state of emergency gives local governors stronger legal authority to urge people to stay home and businesses to close. In contrast to lockdowns in some countries enforced by fines and arrests for non-compliance, Japan is relying more on peer pressure and a tradition of respect for authority. Japan, where a cruise ship offshore was once the biggest source of infections outside China, had early success in limiting the coronavirus. But authorities have become more alarmed in recent weeks by a surge in local transmission. The number of infections rose by 384 on Thursday to 5,356, while the death toll edged up by 1 to 106, according to NHK. During a daily live YouTube broadcast, Tokyo Governor Yuriko Koike said the capital had 181 new cases on Thursday, the highest daily jump. “I am asking for your cooperation to protect your life, protect your family, protect your colleagues and society” she said. While Tokyo and the central government have been discussing what kind of businesses they will ask to close, Koike is considering making her own decision if they fail to reach an agreement, Kyodo news agency reported. Hideaki Omura, governor of Aichi prefecture, which includes the city of Nagoya and hosts Toyota Motor Corp, said he would declare a state of emergency on Friday even if the central government did not add it to the national list. “If we watch what’s happened in the last week it doesn’t look good and so we’re making preparations,” he said. Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga said in an afternoon press briefing that there was no need now to add Aichi and other areas to the national list. Even with less stringent restrictions compared with other countries, analysts polled by Reuters expect Japan to slip into a deep recession this year. While aggressive central bank actions across the globe have eased financial market tensions somewhat, corporate funding strains were worsening, Bank of Japan Governor Haruhiko Kuroda told a quarterly meeting of regional branch managers. “The spread of the coronavirus is having a severe impact on Japan’s economy through declines in exports, output, demand from overseas tourists and private consumption,” he said. “For the time being, we won’t hesitate to take additional monetary easing steps if needed, with a close eye on developments regarding the coronavirus outbreak.”  The BOJ cut its assessment on all of Japan’s nine regions for the first time in 11 years, saying their economies were weakening or under strong downward pressure. “The situation is quite severe. Business sentiment is souring. Firms dealing with inbound tourism and consumption are seeing sharp declines in sales,” Yasuhiro Yamada, the BOJ’s Osaka branch manager overseeing the Kinki western Japan region, told a news conference. Orders for machine tools in March dropped 40.8% from a year earlier, preliminary data from the Japan Machine Tool Builders’ Association (JMTBA) showed on Thursday. The orders, regarded as a leading indicator on future spending on factory equipment, were especially dragged down by overseas demand, which fell 43.8% from a year earlier. Overseas orders hit their lowest level since January 2010, a JMTBA spokesman told Reuters. Shares of Oriental Land Co fell on Thursday after the operator of Tokyo Disneyland said it would keep the amusement park shut until mid-May. Entertainment facility operator Uchiyama Holdings  said it was closing 43 karaoke shops and 11 restaurants until May 6. Fast Retailing said sales at its Uniqlo outlets were down 27% in March from a year earlier. But retail group Seven & i Holdings Co reported a 3% rise in annual operating profit, thanks to robust sales of food and other daily necessities. At its policy meeting later this month, the BOJ is likely to make a rare projection that the economy will shrink this year, sources have told Reuters. The BOJ eased monetary policy in March by pledging to boost purchases of assets ranging from government bonds to commercial paper, corporate bonds and funds investing in stocks. The government rolled out a nearly $1 trillion stimulus package. Claim: Japan state of emergency mutes nightlife but cities still open as infections rise.
[A]:
The total number of Japanese novel coronavirus infections hit more than 5,300 on Thursday, NHK public broadcaster said, showing no signs of slowing despite a state of emergency being imposed this week on Tokyo and six other areas.