instruction:
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.
question:
Paragraph: "Patients used to pay $10,000 a year for cancer drugs, but now they're paying $10,000 a month, according to HBO talk show host Bill Maher. That's a message circulating on Facebook recently, promoted by the""Bill Maher Fanpage."" A reader asked us to check it out. The quote comes from the Oct. 2 episode of Real Time with Bill Maher, where Maher discussed Turing Pharmaceuticals, the company that jacked up the cost of a life-saving drug from $13.50 to $750 essentially overnight. ""Not that (Turing CEO Martin) Shkreli is unusual for the pharmaceutical industry,"" Maher said on his show. ""Fifteenyears ago, cancer drugs cost an average of $10,000 a year. Now it's $10,000 a month because this cartel owns the U.S. government every bit as much as Mexican drug lords own theirs."" It's well known that the cost of health care is on the rise,but has the annual cost of cancer drugs really increased so dramatically in just a decade and a half? Maher's team sent us links to some news articles about the rising cost of cancer drugs, and we tracked down information that speaks to his claim. The best information we could nail down is the cost of anticancer drugs at launch,the initial price when the Federal Drug Administration approves a drug. These are the sticker prices set by the pharmaceutical companies, not the prices patients actually pay out of pocket, which are reduced by insurance payments, patient assistance programs and other discounts. Costs increases, though, are often passed on to consumers. Maher has a point that cancer drug costs are on the rise. We charted the launch costs of cancer drugs the FDA approved since 1999, using a list compiled by Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. The second half of Maher's statement -- that cancer drugs now cost about $10,000 a month -- is also on solid ground. Of drugs approved in 2015, the monthly average cost is $11,319. And experts in the field often cite that $10,000 figure themselves. Because many cancer drugs are not administered to patients for a full year, it's difficult to determine an average annual cost, so the first half of Maher's statement -- that they cost about $10,000 a year 15 years ago -- is hard to nail down. To his point, though, the monthly cost of a new drug was dramatically lower in 2000 than what it is now at about $4,634. One of the news articles that Maher's team sent us is an academic article in the Journal of Oncology Practice that supports his statement. The report reads, ""The average cancer drug price for approximately one year of therapy or a total treatment duration was less than $10,000 before 2000."" Maher's statement is ""in the ballpark,"" if not an understatement, said Rena Conti, a health economist at the University of Chicago who researches cancer drug prices. In a 2015 paper Conti authored with three other leading health economists, she examined the launch cost of anticancer drugs controlled for inflation and the benefit to the patient (how much it prolongs life expectancy). For example, in 1995, anticancer drugs cost $54,100 for an additional year of life, the study found. In 2005, drugs cost $139,100 for the same benefit, and the price grew to $207,000 in 2013. In the United States, pharmaceutical companies set their own drug prices. What's pushing them to increase the costs? It's not necessarily that cancer drugs are getting better and are thus worth more. Conti's research concluded that just about one-fifth of the cancer drug cost increase can be attributed to a better product. There are two primary forces behind annual cancer drug cost increases, Conti said: First, pharmaceutical companies estimate a ""zone of indifference"" -- based on last year's prices, how much more would buyers be willing to pay? Second, rebates and discounts for drugs have also increased over time, and this creates an incentive for drug companies to increase their costs alongside the discounts. Pharmaceutical companies defend drug price increases by emphasizing that the revenue funds innovative research and that drugs lower overall health care costs by treating illnesses. Because there's no formal price regulation and competition in the industry is rare, ""It really is a system where there's no downward pressure on drug prices,"" said Peter Bach, director of the Memorial Sloan Kettering Center for Health Policy and Outcomes in an interview with Fortune. Our ruling Maher said, ""15 years ago, cancer drugs cost an average of $10,000 a year. Now it's $10,000 a month."" The average annual cost of a drug isn't easy to calculate, given the way cancer drugs are scheduled; many drugs aren't used every month for an entire year. So the first half of the statement is hard to verify,though we did find one academic source that cites a similar figure. However, Maher has a point that the cost of cancer drugs has increased dramatically since 2000, when the average monthly price of a cancer drug, when it first hit the market, was about $4,600. In 2015, the monthly cost is over $10,000. Maher's numbers are a little squishy, but they're in the ballpark." Claim: 15 years ago, cancer drugs cost an average of $10,000 a year. Now it's $10,000 a month.
answer:
"Maher said, ""15 years ago, cancer drugs cost an average of $10,000 a year. Now it's $10,000 a month."" The average annual cost of a drug isn't easy to calculate, given the way cancer drugs are scheduled; many drugs aren't used every month for an entire year. So the first half of the statement is hard to verify,though we did find one academic source that cites a similar figure. However, Maher has a point that the cost of cancer drugs has increased dramatically since 2000, when the average monthly price of a cancer drug, when it first hit the market, was about $4,600. In 2015, the monthly cost is over $10,000. Maher's numbers are a little squishy, but they're in the ballpark."

question:
Paragraph: Cuomo's cautiously upbeat report at a daily briefing came as the daily death toll across the state, the epicenter of the pandemic in the United States, dropped to 540 on April 17, down from 630 a day earlier and the lowest in more than two weeks. The governor said total hospitalizations of patients being treated for COVID-19, the respiratory illness caused by the coronavirus, came to 16,967, a drop of more than 1,300 over the past three days. Intubations and admissions to intensive care units also continued on their downward trend. "If you look at the past three days, you could argue that we are past the plateau and we're starting to descend which would be very good news," Cuomo said. He said, however, that about 2,000 infected people were newly admitted to hospitals on Friday, which he characterized as "still an overwhelming number," and reiterated that he would take a cautious approach to reopening businesses and schools. Cuomo repeated a call for the federal government to help coordinate and provide funding for the mass testing that he and other governors have said is needed to determine when it is safe for people to go back to work. Providing new details on the challenge, Cuomo said a survey of labs in his state revealed an inability to procure the chemical reagents needed to run the tests on machines supplied by private manufacturers like Roche Holding AG. "They bought the machine, they have the machine, they have the test, but they need the reagents to do a higher volume of tests," Cuomo said, adding that makers like Roche are struggling to get the reagents from China. "That's the logjam we are in." New York disclosed 7,090 new positive cases over the last 24 hours for a total of 236,732 cases, while deaths increased by 540 to 13,362, marking by far the largest number of fatalities of any state. Even with stabilizing numbers, Cuomo said the pandemic was taking a severe emotional and economic toll on people, and estimated the impact on society would prove to be the biggest challenge facing the country since World War Two. "On every level this is a terrible experience, Cuomo said. "It is as tumultuous a time as we have ever seen." Claim: New York Governor sounds optimistic note as coronavirus numbers improve.
answer:
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo said on Saturday that a recent drop in hospitalizations and other improving metrics indicated the state may be past the peak of its coronavirus crisis and on a path toward stabilizing its battered healthcare system.

question:
Paragraph: "The pre-Christmas slaughter of 20 elementary school children and six adults at a Connecticut elementary school has renewed public debate over how to prevent future mass killings with guns. On Jan. 14, members of the Congressional Black Caucus, now chaired by Warrensville Heights Democratic Rep. Marcia Fudge, weighed in on that question by delivering a series of speeches on the House of Representatives floor that decried a U.S. ""culture of violence."" Newly elected Columbus Democratic Rep. Joyce Beatty used the opportunity to deliver her first oration on the House of Representatives floor. In it, she lamented that ""mass killings have gone from being an extremely rare occurrence to a common occurrence,"" and suggested the U.S re-examine its funding for mental health services, place adequate controls on ammunition and ""ensure proper and tighter access to firearms."" ""According to Harvard Health Policy Review, each year approximately 30,000 people in the United States die as a result of gunfire, and about 80,000 people are wounded,"" the former Ohio state legislator noted, applauding President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden for ""proactively taking the necessary steps to address this critical issue."" We wondered whether Beatty's statistics were accurate, so we decided to track them down. We soon found an article in the Fall 2001 issue of Harvard Health Policy Review, titled The Costs and Benefits of Reducing Gun Violence, that begins with the exact wording used by Beatty - ""Each year, approximately 30,000 people in the United States die as a result of gunfire and about 80,000 are wounded."" But the date of that article gave us pause. The numbers it cited were more than a decade old. We wanted to find more recent numbers. We turned to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention statistics to verify the information. The latest available version of its data says there were 31,672 firearms deaths in the United States during 2010, a ratio of 10.3 deaths per 100,000 people. That number is a bit higher than the number Harvard Health Policy Review cited in 2001, although it is certainly in the ballpark. The second set of CDC data we examined tracks non-fatal gun injuries. By the CDC's reckoning, there were 73,883 non-fatal firearm injuries in 2011, a rate of 23.7 injuries per 100,000 people. That number is a bit lower than the number Beatty cited from the Harvard Health Policy Review, although it isn't too far off. If the number of non fatal injuries from BB or pellet guns were added into the mix, the number of injuries from 2011 would exceed Harvard's estimate of 80,000 yearly wounds from gunfire. According to CDC, 16,451 people in the United States were hurt by pellet guns - about 5.3 incidents per 100,000 people. Beatty accurately represented the statistics printed in Harvard Health Policy Review, even though its tally was more than a decade old. More recent data indicates those numbers haven't changed much over the years." Claim: Joyce Beatty Says each year approximately 30,000 people in the United States die as a result of gunfire, and about 80,000 people are wounded.
answer:
Rep. Joyce Beatty says about 30,000 people die from gunfire each year in the U.S.