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: The idea that the domestic dog descended from the grey wolf was originally established in 1993 using comparisons of wolf and dog mitochondrial DNA. This investigation showed that no other living animal was more closely related to the domestic dog than the grey wolf: “The domestic dog is an extremely close relative of the grey wolf, differing from it by at most 0.2% of [mitochondrial DNA].” Mitochondrial DNA is passed down by the mother (without any genetic contribution from the father) and changes only through random mutations that occur from generation to generation. Scientists use this much smaller and separate DNA sequence to estimate when populations of animals first diverged and to estimate the evolutionary relationships between organisms. By the mid-2000s, new technology allowed scientists to map the much longer DNA sequence found on the chromosomes of wolves and dogs — the genes that actually code for physical traits and behaviors. These studies demonstrated a 99.9% similarity (technically 99.96%) between dog and grey wolf, as covered in a 2007 review paper on the topic: In general, the domestic dog is an extremely close relative of the grey wolf, from which it differs by only ~0.04% in nuclear coding-DNA sequence, and no dog [mitochondrial DNA] sequences have been found that show closer kinship to other canid species. This similarity is so profound that hybridization often occurs between dogs and wolves. By the biological definition of species, this would mean that the domestic dog is a subspecies of the grey wolf (canis lupus familiaris). There remains some debate, however, as to what the appropriate classification for the domestic dog would be, with some arguing that the domestic dog should be its own distinct species (canis familiaris). Claim: Dogs and wolves are genetically 99.9% identical.
These advances in genetic analysis have allowed scientists as well to pin down the probable timing of the split between these two canid lineages. A study published in 2015, which compared the whole genome sequence of dogs to a 35,000 year old Siberian wolf specimen, suggested the split likely occurred between 27,000 and 40,000 years ago, and that domestic dogs are likely themselves the descendants of a now extinct descendant of grey wolves.

Paragraph: The National Health Commission on Sunday also issued a notice asking for improvement in testing capacity and quality nationwide. Nine of the new cases were imported infections, data from commission showed. Authorities reported that total confirmed cases across mainland China had risen to 82,735 with 4,632 deaths as of April 18. The northeastern province of Heilongjiang has seen a rise in infected travellers arriving from Russia in recent weeks, and is now battling to contain a flare-up in local cases. Heilongjiang has reported 39 new local cases in the past 10 days, or more than 50% of all new 73 locally transmitted cases reported in the mainland during the same period. Most were related to one imported case in the provincial capital, Harbin. On Friday, 18 officials in Harbin, including a vice mayor, were punished. To help contain the outbreak, the Heilongjiang government is cautioning against family gatherings, cross infections at hospitals, and slow reporting in epidemic investigations, it said on the provincial government’s website. “The biggest political task at present is to stop the rebound and spread of the epidemic,” Wang Yongkang, vice governor of Heilongjiang, was quoted as saying. Elsewhere in mainland China, all areas in central Hubei province including Wuhan, the epicentre of the outbreak in China, are now considered low risk. However, a Beijing central district is seen as high-risk, according to a social media post by the State Council, or Cabinet. On April 15, the Chinese capital reported three local cases, all of which were linked to an imported infection. Areas that are considered of medium-risk in China include two districts in Harbin, the city of Suifenhe in Heilongjiang, two districts in the southern city of Guangzhou and Jiaozhou city in eastern Shandong province. Separately, authorities reported 44 new asymptomatic cases of coronavirus, including three which were imported. Such cases, where patients test positive but show no clinical symptoms such as a cough or fever, are excluded from China’s tally of confirmed cases. In urging better testing, the National Health Commission said all large general hospitals need to set up laboratories that meet certain requirements and can conduct coronavirus testing independently. Since March, an average 54,000 tests have been conducted a day in Hubei province and that rose to 89,000 tests on April 17, Liu Dongru, a Hubei health commission official, told a news conference on Sunday. In Beijing, the number of institutions able to conduct nucleic acid testing has risen to 50 from 17 in early February, a municipal health commission official said on Sunday. In areas under great pressure, especially at land borders, local governments should help county-level medical institutions obtain nucleic acid testing capability, the commission said. Testing should be conducted by qualified medical institutions and independent medical laboratories, it said, adding that training for medical staff should be stepped up and testing operations standardised to reduce problems with the accuracy of testing. Claim: China's new coronavirus cases fall, eyes on northeastern province.
China on Sunday reported 16 new coronavirus cases but no deaths while authorities remained on guard against a major resurgence and monitored the spread of cases in Heilongjiang province.

Paragraph: "A comment about the overall cost of endoscopic sinus surgery, as well as insurance coverage and likely out-of-pocket expenses for patients, would have been appropriate in this story. In addition, the costs associated with the equipment and upkeep are also important considerations. However, the story didn’t mention costs. This story focuses almost exclusively on the experience of one patient, a practice we generally think should be avoided. In this case, however, the patient in question was a health columnist with the Boston Globe who brings a well-informed and appropriately skeptical perspective to the story. Whereas many stories seek out patients who embody the best possible outcome for a new technology or procedure, this patient describes an incremental benefit that was ""disappointing"" in size but in the end, still worth the trouble. Instead of getting 5 or more sinus infections per year, she now gets 3 or 4 infections that are not as bad as before. In addition, the story emphasizes that surgery is ""rarely a cure"" and should be viewed as a ""last resort"" for most patients with sinus problems. We wish more stories were this measured in their assessment of medical benefits. The story refers off-handedly to the possibility of ""poking through to the brain or into the orbit of an eye,"" but it fails to explain that these events are very rare but real risks of the surgery. While extremely unlikely, it’s possible for surgeons to accidentally damage the optic nerve, resulting in blindness, or to puncture the base of the skull, resulting in cerebrospinal fluid leakage. Other less serious, but more common complications are also possible. The story didn’t mention any of them. While we appreciated this story’s carefully calibrated tone and conspicuous lack of hype, we felt its discussion of the evidence was inadequate. The story  quotes a surgeon who says that endoscopic surgery improves quality of life for patients ""probably in over 90 percent of the cases."" But we’re not given enough information to determine how this estimate was formulated or if it is representative of typical patient outcomes. The surgeon might be talking about his own personal experience treating patients, which could be much better than average if he’s an experienced surgeon working at a top-tier institution. Adding to our concerns, there is at least some published evidence suggesting that endoscopic sinus surgery is less effective than this story indicates. For example, a systematic review of randomized controlled trials couldn’t find evidence that the procedure was more effective than medical therapy. Granted, this review included only 3 studies and could have involved slightly different procedures than the one discussed in this story. But if there is more persuasive evidence to substantiate the procedure’s benefits, the story should have referred to it directly instead of passing along the surgeon’s second-hand estimates. There was no disease-mongering in this story. The story makes it clear that the surgery being described is a last-ditch approach for people with intractable problems. The story relies heavily on the perspective of Judy Foreman, the health columnist and patient, and her surgeon, Ralph Metson, neither of whom have any conflicts of interest that we could identify. While it would have been nice to hear from an expert who wasn’t involved in this particular case, the story does enough to satisfy the criterion. The story’s sidebar gives detailed descriptions of alternatives to surgery, including nasal irrigation and corticosteroid nasal sprays. The story states that about 300,000 people a year undergo sinus surgery, making it one of the most commonly performed procedures in the U.S. However, it does not provide statistics on the number or percentage of those procedures that are performed endoscopically and the type of hospital setting in which they are done. Enodoscopic surgery with CT guidance as described in the story may be out of the reach of smaller community based practitioners. We’ll call this satisfactory, but some additional detail would have been appropriate. The story didn’t attempt to oversell the novelty of this procedure. It is clear that this story didn’t rely on a news release." Claim: Surgery For Sinus Misery: Better, But Still No Cure

"While we typically wouldn’t advise reporters to focus exclusively on a single patient’s experience, as this story about endoscopic surgery for treating sinus infections did, the result here is a winner thanks to the patient’s familiarity with the subject and unusually dispassionate perspective. She is the relatively rare patient in a health story who acknowledges being disappointed with the outcome of a new treatment. Notable strengths of the story include its measured tone, its extensive discussion of nonsurgical alternatives, and its emphasis on the incremental benefits experienced by most patients (e.g. surgery is ""rarely a cure""). The story could have provided a bit more information about the different types of sinus problems people suffer from (e.g. sinusitis with and without polyps, etc) and what kinds of studies support endoscopic surgery for chronic sinus infections. It also failed to provide enough detail regarding the costs and harms of the treatment. Chronic sinusitis is a common problem that has a significant impact on quality of life. Chronic sinus infections can be painful, result in significant medical expenditures, and lead to lost productivity due to work absences. Although endoscopic sinus surgery has some advantages over older, more invasive techniques that caused scarring and required longer recovery periods, it is important for patients to have realistic expectations about the benefits of surgery and whether they are worth the risks. As this story makes clear, the benefits of surgery remain marginal enough that they are worthwhile only for the most severe cases."