Given the task definition, example input & output, solve the new input case.
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: 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
Output: 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.
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.

New input case for you: Paragraph: Genetic testing for dogs has surged in recent years, fueled by companies that echo popular at-home tests for humans, offering a deep dive into a pet's genes with the swab of a canine cheek. More than a million dogs have been tested in little over a decade. The tests' rise has stirred debate about standards, interpretation and limitations. But to many dog owners, DNA is a way to get to know their companions better. "It put some pieces of the puzzle together," says Lisa Topol, who recently tested her mixed-breed dogs Plop and Schmutzy. Plop was the top-scoring mixed-breed, and Schmutzy also competed, in Saturday's agility contest at the Westminster Kennel Club dog show . Judging toward the coveted best in show prize began Monday. A test by Embark which this fall became Westminster's first DNA-testing partner confirmed Topol's guess that her high-octane pets are more Australian cattle dog than anything else. But Schmutzy's genetic pie chart had surprise ingredients, including generous amounts of Labrador retriever and Doberman pinscher. Huh? Topol thought at first. And then: Maybe Schmutzy's love of water and fetching is her inner Lab coming out. And doesn't she walk a bit like a Doberman? "They are the dogs that they are ... They're unique, and they're special," said Topol, a New York advertising executive. But the testing "makes me understand them better." Canine DNA testing for certain conditions and purposes goes back over two decades, but the industry took off after scientists mapped a full set of dog genes and published the results in 2005. Wisdom Health, part of pet care and candy giant Mars Inc., launched a breed-identification test in 2007, added a health-screening option a few years later and says it has now tested over 1.1 million dogs worldwide. Numerous other brands are also available. Mass-market tests have fueled research and helped animal shelters attract adopters by providing more information about prospective pets. DNA can back up purebred dogs' parentage and help breeders try to eliminate certain diseases. The technology has been used to identify dogs whose owners don't pick up their droppings, to pursue accused biters and to free a Belgian Malinois from dog death row after he was accused of killing a Pomeranian in Michigan. And some veterinarians feel DNA testing enhances care. "I want to know as much about my patients as possible," says Dr. Ernie Ward, a veterinarian and TV personality in Ocean Isle Beach, North Carolina. He recommends testing all puppies. But qualms about the dog DNA boom spilled into the prestigious science journal Nature last year. "Pet genetics must be reined in," a Boston veterinarian and two other scientists wrote. Their commentary opened with a troubling story: a pug being euthanized because her owners interpreted DNA results to mean she had a rare, degenerative neurological disorder, when in fact her ailment might have been something more treatable. "These (tests) should be used in a limited way until we get a lot more information," says co-author and vet Dr. Lisa Moses. One concern is that tests can show genetic mutations that are linked to disease in some breeds but have unknown effects in the breed being tested. It also may be unclear how often dogs with the mutation ultimately get sick. That means tests, in themselves, can't necessarily tell pet owners how much they should worry. Or tell breeders whether a dog shouldn't reproduce. Some in dogdom fear that DNA test results could keep animals from passing on otherwise good genes because of an ambiguous possibility of disease. "The risk for overinterpretation is great," but DNA testing can be useful along with other tools, says veterinarian Dr. Diane Brown, the CEO of the American Kennel Club Canine Health Foundation. It has invested almost $20 million in genomic and molecular research and supports an international effort to promote standardization for dog DNA tests. The initiative, led by the nonprofit International Partnership for Dogs, provides searchable data on test labs' procedures and breed-specific health test information. Test companies say their work can help researchers address the unknowns and provides immediately useful information, such as whether a dog's genes suggest bad reactions to certain medications. Companies including Embark and Wisdom have veterinarians assigned to help people understand worrisome results. "We're here to help you care better for your dog," says Embark Veterinary Inc. CEO Ryan Boyko, whose company has breed-and-health-tested nearly 100,000 canines in its 3 years. The alliance with Westminster for which Embark is paying an amount neither would disclose stands to give the company exposure, particularly to breeders. Longtime Belgian sheepdog breeder Lorra Miller, who has had dogs compete at Westminster, was initially skeptical about consumer-oriented canine DNA tests. They struck her as a novelty for mixed-breed pets. Now she hopes they can help Belgian sheepdog fanciers build up a body of genetic data to spark more research on the protective herders. "Even if I don't get immediate benefit ... it's for the future of the breed," says Miller, who lives near Monroe, Washington. For Rennie Pasquinelli, the benefit is a new perspective on her dog, Murray. He was pegged as a border collie-Boston terrier mix when she adopted him. But an Embark test last month detected just a smidgen of border collie mixed with six other breeds, mainly American pit bull terrier. And no Boston terrier at all. "Obviously, I don't love him more, or less," said Pasquinelli, a graduate student in cognitive science at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore. "It's like when you know something new about someone. That doesn't negatively or positively change your opinion on them, but you still look at them in a different way." ___ More AP sports: https://apnews.com/apf-sports and https://twitter.com/AP_Sports Claim: Dog DNA testing takes off, and generates debate.
Output:
As people peer into DNA for clues to health and heritage, man's best friend is under the microscope, too.