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: "During this election season, Republicans have been hammering Democrats over cuts they say were made to Medicare as part of the health care bill. Now, in a television ad in the Kentucky Senate race, Democrat Jack Conway is turning the tables, attacking Republican Rand Paul over Medicare deductibles. Here's the transcript of the ad, released Sept. 28, 2010: Narrator: ""More from Rand Paul."" Footage of Rand Paul: ""The real answer to Medicare would be a $2,000 deductible."" Man: ""A $2,000 deductible?"" Man: ""Rand Paul wants us to pay $2,000 just to get Medicare?"" Woman: ""That's crazy."" Woman: ""I can't afford that."" Footage of Rand Paul: ""The real answer to Medicare would be a $2,000 deductible."" Man: ""I don't know what planet he's from."" Woman: ""Rand Paul is off the wall with the $2,000 deductible."" Man: ""He knows we can't afford that."" Woman: ""The more we hear about Rand Paul, the worse it gets."" Conway: ""I'm Jack Conway, and I approved this message."" The grainy footage of Paul is real. It comes from a talk that Paul, an ophthalmologist and longtime libertarian, gave to the Center-Right Coalition, a conservative group, in Lexington, Ky., on June 19, 2009. A longer excerpt from Paul's talk has been posted on YouTube. To see whether Conway's ad takes Paul's remarks out of context, we transcribed the portion of his speech in which he talks about Medicare. ""What's the problem in medicine?"" Paul began. ""No price fluctuation. If you're over 65 and go to a doctor in this country, you pay the exact same price with every doctor in the whole country. So when they want to blame ... that on capitalism, we have to be smart enough and say, 'We don't have capitalism. We already have socialism.'"" He continued, ""Medicare is socialized medicine. People are afraid of that because, 'Oh, you'll say you're against Medicare.' No, I say we have to do something different. We can't just eliminate Medicare. But we have to figure out how to get more to a market-based system. It's counter-intuitive to a lot of people, but you have to pay for things if you want prices to come down. So you really need higher deductibles. And the real answer to Medicare would be a $2,000 deductible, but try selling that one in an election. But that's the real answer is, you have to pay for things. And when you do, but you also get rid of price controls. So you raise the deductible, you get rid of price controls, and you allow more competition. And you may have to allow more competition from other parties. Nurse practitioners, we already have some. Pharmacists. There have to be ways to allow medicine to come down."" His comment was no one-time slip of the tongue. The Conway campaign released another ad with footage of at least five other occasions in which Paul spoke publicly about his preference for high deductibles for Medicare, sometimes even invoking the same $2,000 figure. Indeed, Paul has been caught on camera being open about the political hazards of making such a proposal. In the Lexington talk featured in the first ad, Paul immediately followed his mention of the $2,000 figure with the addendum, ""but try selling that one in an election."" And in the follow-up ad, a clip shows him acknowledging the political risk with striking frankness. ""The hard part,"" he said, ""is how do you present this on national TV? I mean, what's going to happen to me in a statewide race if I tell people I think the Medicare deductible is going to be higher? Am I going to be booted out of the room? I don't know. I'm willing to take a risk because I think it's the right thing to do, and because the other answer is to become just like Canada."" We did not receive a response from the Paul campaign for this article, but the campaign has responded through TV ads. On Oct. 7, the liberal website Talking Points Memo published a side-by-side comparison of the Paul campaign's two response ads and found subtle but noteworthy differences. In the first, the Paul campaign says that Paul ""never supported higher Medicare deductibles."" In the second, the ad was changed to say that Paul ""doesn't support higher Medicare deductibles."" Had they stuck with the first ad, it would have been undermined by a half-dozen film clips. Paul refined his policy toward Medicare during an appearance on Fox News on Oct. 6. Paul said that he did not want to impose deductibles on current Medicare beneficiaries but rather on future beneficiaries, possibly starting with those who are currently 55 or younger. So even Paul now acknowledges that he thinks Medicare deductibles are worth considering. But does Conway's ad fairly portray the views Paul had espoused at the time? They come close, but we do offer one caveat. We think that the general impression Conway's ad gives -- and in particular the line where the man says, ""Rand Paul wants us to pay $2,000 just to get Medicare?"" -- is that what Paul wants to do is slap seniors with a $2,000 deductible, even though his plan is much more comprehensive. Paul's ideas for Medicare may be good or bad, but the ad is somewhat misleading when it reduces them to a simple $2,000 deductible. That said, we see it as a relatively minor exaggeration. Paul has advocated for a $2,000 deductible in multiple settings." Claim: "Rand Paul ""wants us to pay $2,000 just to get Medicare."
Example Output: Jack Conway says Rand Paul backs a $2,000 deductible for Medicare

Example Input: Paragraph: Scientists at Vienna University medical school's Institute of Hygiene and Applied Immunology came to the conclusion after analyzing the water quality at 21 "holy" springs and 18 fonts at churches and chapels at various times of year. Only 14 percent of the water samples from holy sources showed no fecal contamination, and none of the springs could be recommended as a source of drinking water, the study presented to a conference in Vienna this week found. The springs held not only fecal contamination - likely the result of poor hygiene - but many also had agricultural nitrates and bugs that can cause inflammatory diarrhoea. "We need to warn people against drinking from these sources," microbiologist Alexander Kirschner said in the study. Kirschner said the healing effects ascribed to holy sources arose from the hygienic conditions of the Middle Ages, when water quality in urban areas was generally so poor that people constantly contracted diarrhoea or other conditions. "If they then came across a protected spring in the forest that was not as polluted and drank from it for several days, their symptoms would disappear. So although in those days they were drinking healthier water, given the excellent quality of our drinking water today, the situation is now completely reversed." The study noted some ways to help address the problem, including regularly replacing holy water in church fonts. One Italian priest has invented a holy water dispenser that dispenses drops of holy water rather than having the faithful dip a hand in, it noted. Claim: Holy water in Austria unsafe to drink: researchers.
Example Output: Holy water at religious shrines and churches in Austria is often contaminated with fecal matter and bacteria, researchers have found, advising the faithful not to drink it, especially in hospital chapels.

Example Input: Paragraph: In a study in the medical journal The Lancet, they said the patients, with strains of TB known as extensively-drug resistant (XDR) and totally drug resistant (TDR) TB, have exhausted all available treatment options and are sent home. "These patients can survive for months or even years and are contributing to the community-based spread of XDR-TB," said Keertan Dheda, who led the study at the University of Cape Town's department of medicine. Tuberculosis infects the lungs and can spread through coughing and sneezing. In recent years, drug-resistant strains have spread around the world, batting off standard antibiotics and posing an increasingly urgent public health threat. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that in Eastern Europe, Asia and South Africa, 450,000 people have MDR-TB, and around half of these will fail to respond to existing treatments. Dheda's team followed 107 patients with XDR-TB from three provinces in South Africa between March 2008 and August 2012 to establish their fate. They also took samples from 56 patients and tested them to find out which and how many of 10 first- and second-line anti-TB drugs they were susceptible to. Despite being treated intensively with an average of eight anti-tuberculosis drugs, many of the patients fared poorly, with high rates of treatment failure and death. Five years after treatment initiation, only 12 of the patients had favorable outcomes and 74 percent had died. The researchers found that almost two-thirds of the tested patients had resistance to at least eight drugs, and there was one case of totally drug-resistant TB that was not susceptible to any of the 10 drugs tested. More worrisome, Dheda said, was that of the XDR-TB patients discharged into the general community, some 42 percent had failed to get better on treatment and were testing positive for active TB, and of these almost a third were at high risk of transmitting the disease. The patients also survived in the community for an average of 20 months - plenty of time to infect others. When people with lung TB cough, sneeze or spit, they propel the TB germs into the air. Another person needs to inhale only a few of these germs to become infected. "Alarmingly, we have shown for the first time that... treatment failure and discharge of such patients into the wider community is occurring systematically on a country-wide level in South Africa," Dheda said in a statement about the findings. In one case where the researchers followed a genetic trail of transmission, they found that a patient with XDR-TB who was discharged after failing treatment went on to infect his brother, who also eventually died. Dheda said the reason many TB patients are being sent away from hospitals appeared to be lack of bed space in designated tuberculosis hospitals. "And alternative long-term residential and palliative care facilities are scarce." Commenting on the findings in The Lancet, Max O'Donnell from New York's Albert Einstein College of Medicine in the United States said they should serve as an "urgent alarm". "MDR-TB (multi-drug-resistant TB) in all its forms is an out-of-control problem with potentially vast and devastating consequences for global public health," he wrote. "The situation regarding MDR and XDR-TB is bleak." Claim: South Africa risks spreading totally drug-resistant TB: study.
Example Output:
Patients with contagious and highly drug-resistant tuberculosis (TB) are being routinely discharged from hospitals across South Africa, exposing others in their communities to potentially deadly infections, researchers said on Friday.