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.

Let me give you an example: Paragraph: "Although the story didn't cite the cost of appendectomy emergency or urgent surgery and we wish it had, we nonetheless will give it a satisfactory score because it at least cited what the editorial writer wrote, ""A secondary benefit is the savings to the hospital generated by minimizing staff and anesthesiologist presence late in the evening and during the wee hours of the morning."" As with our harms score above, although the story didn't give absolute numbers, in this case we think it was sufficient for it to report that ""The scientists found no significant difference among the groups in the patients' condition 30 days after surgery or in the length of their operation or hospital stay."" Although the story didn't give absolute numbers, in this case we think it was sufficient for it to report that ""The scientists found no significant difference among the groups in the patients' condition 30 days after surgery or in the length of their operation or hospital stay."" Despite running less than 300 words, this story did an adequate job in explaining the quality of the evidence, including pointing out limitations. No disease-mongering here. The story meets the bare minimum requirement for this criterion in that it at least cited what an editorial stated. The focus of the story was on a study comparing emergency appendectomy with surgery done up to 12 hours later or beyond. This is the whole focus of the story and one we applaud when it begins: ""Appendectomy is the most common emergency surgery in the world, but it doesn't have to be."" There were no claims made about the novelty of this research, and we may have wished for a bit more context on this. Nonetheless, the potential for guiding future care decisions was made clear. Not applicable. Given that the story only pulled excerpts from the journal article and the accompanying editorial, and didn't include any fresh quotes from interviews, we can't be sure of the extent to which it may have been influenced by a news release.". Claim: Some appendicitis cases may not require 'emergency' surgery
The answer to this example can be: We really don't understand why only a handful of mainstream news organizations reported this story. (At least in what we found.) The most common emergency surgery in the world. Rushing to emergency surgery may not carry any benefit. Waiting a few hours may be safer and less expensive. Why is that not a story? We applaud USA Today for finding time and space and clearly it didn't need to free up much space to do a good job telling the story. The story explains that as many as 300,0 appendectomies are done each year in the US. That figure alone explains why this is an important study to report.
Here is why: The output is an analysis of the claim while considering the paragraph as a reference. The output highlights the key features presented in the paragraph and explains the claim accordingly.

OK. solve this:
Paragraph: India is the world's largest producer of hydroxychloroquine, sales of which have soared across the world including in the United States, especially after President Donald Trump touted it as a potential weapon against COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus. New Delhi had last month put a hold on exports of hydroxychloroquine to secure supplies for itself, before agreeing this month to supply it to some of its neighbours as well as "nations who have been particularly badly affected by the pandemic". "On 14 April, India has given permission for Malaysia to import 89,100 tablets," Malaysia's Deputy Foreign Minister Kamarudin Jaffar told Reuters. "We will try to get more hydroxychloroquine tablets from India, which is also subject to stock availability." India's Ministry of External Affairs did not respond to requests for comment from Reuters. Malaysia has been using hydroxychloroquine for mild to severe COVID-19 cases along with other drugs, according to its treatment protocol seen by Reuters. Doctors and pharmacists from more than half a dozen large healthcare systems in New York, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Ohio, Washington and California have also told Reuters they are routinely using hydroxychloroquine on patients hospitalised with COVID-19. At the same time, several said they have seen no evidence that the drug had any effect on the virus. In one small French study, some COVID-19 patients showed improvements but there was no way to know if the drug was the reason. Results published in April from another study in France and one in China found no benefit in patients treated with the drug. Dozens more clinical studies are under way around the world. Malaysia's Health Ministry told Reuters it had "faced challenges" in securing the drug, which it said may be able to reduce the progression of the disease and lung inflammation. It said the drug has been used in Malaysia for the treatment of COVID-19 since January. Malaysia had asked India for more than 1 million hydroxychloroquine tablets, two sources with direct knowledge of the matter told Reuters, requesting anonymity as they were not authorised to speak with the media. "I am not sure if that much can be given," one of the sources said. "India is also giving hydroxychloroquine to some less developed countries. In Africa." Malaysia has the third highest number of infections of COVID-19 in Southeast Asia with more than 5,000 cases, 83 of whom have died. India's decision to sell the sought-after drug to Malaysia signals a turnaround in relations between the countries that had soured because of repeated criticism of some Indian policies by Mahathir Mohamad, before he resigned as Malaysia's prime minister in February. The tension had also affected palm oil trade between the countries. "Broadly, nations will need each other to fight this pandemic," said an Indian source with direct knowledge of the discussions with Malaysia. "Globally, there will be a new alignment of relationships." Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, IPCA Laboratories and Cadila Healthcare are among India's leading suppliers of hydroxychloroquine. Cadila said last week it had increased production tenfold to 30 tonnes per month and was ready to produce more if needed. Claim: Exclusive: India agrees to sell hydroxychloroquine to Malaysia to help fight COVID-19.
Answer:
India has agreed to sell hydroxychloroquine tablets to Malaysia for use in the treatment of COVID-19 patients, a Malaysian minister told Reuters on Wednesday, with New Delhi partially lifting its bar on exports of the anti-malarial drug.