Given a paragraph, generate a claim that is supported by the given paragraph. 1) The claim must contain information from within the paragraph. 2) A sentence within the paragraph can be used as a claim. 3) The claim should not have contradictions within the paragraph. 4) The claim should be at most one sentence long.

The public-private partnership includes the World Health Organization, UNICEF, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the World Bank, among others. The funding announcement was made after a meeting of GAVI's board. GAVI said the investment, which it called an estimate, will be provided between now and 2025. Since the current outbreak in eastern Congo was identified last August, health officials have immunized more than 255,000 people with a recently licensed vaccine made by Merck. To date there have been nearly 3,200 confirmed Ebola cases, including more than 2,200 deaths, in what has become the second deadliest Ebola outbreak in history. Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, chair of Gavi's board, called the creation of the Ebola vaccine stockpile a "historic milestone in humanity's fight against this horrific disease." GAVI said "a coordinating mechanism" to decide how and when vaccines will be used will be established with partner organizations. There are similar stockpiles for vaccines against yellow fever, meningitis and cholera. Those limited shots are doled out to developing countries by WHO, UNICEF, the Red Cross and Doctors Without Borders after receiving technical advice from others. The Ebola vaccine stockpile will be available to all countries, but only developing countries will be able to get vaccines for free in addition to support for the logistical costs of mounting vaccination campaigns. Jason Nickerson, a humanitarian affairs adviser at Doctors Without Borders, said the new stockpile would change how officials respond to future Ebola outbreaks. "Knowing how many doses of the vaccine exist in the world, and then being able to get a supply of them to high-risk countries in a very quick way, gives us another tool to respond to these outbreaks," he said. Earlier this year, the medical charity publicly called for an independent committee to oversee Ebola vaccination efforts in Congo, saying WHO sometimes used arbitrary criteria to determine who would get immunized. It said the fact that Ebola was continuing to spread despite the large number of people vaccinated was a damning assessment of the response. Containing this outbreak has been complicated by violence and misunderstandings in a part of Congo that had never reported an Ebola case before. Last week, response activities were suspended after attacks killed four Ebola responders, including a member of a vaccination team. Multiple rebel groups operate in eastern Congo and the region has been described as a war zone. WHO has warned continued attacks on health workers and Ebola clinics could undermine attempts to curb Ebola and prompt a resurgence of the disease.
Vaccine group announces creation of Ebola vaccine stockpile.

"The Clinton Foundation might be committed to doing good around the world, but Hillary Clinton's critics see it as a ripe target to bring down the presumptive Democratic nominee. Republican Donald Trump recently charged that some countries who gave money to the foundation received favorable treatment in return. For anyone who hasn't heard about the Clinton Foundation, it's the signature project to reduce poverty and improve global health created by former President Bill Clinton. It is part matchmaker, helping wealthy donors connect with doers, and part active participant, directly running programs, especially in health care. In an interview with Hillary Clinton, CNN's Anderson Cooper quoted Trump and asked if her husband would break all ties with the foundation, should she become president. Clinton said she would cross that bridge ""if we come to it,"" and proceeded to give a full-throated defense of the foundation. ""I'm proud of the work that it has done,"" Clinton said in the June 8, 2016, interview. ""Nine million people have lower-cost HIV/AIDS medicine because of the work of the Clinton Foundation and my husband. We have women across the country, from Latin America and Africa -- across the world, I mean -- getting good jobs, and being able to support themselves for the first time."" We'll focus on the first part of that statement and explore if the Clinton Foundation actually had a hand in making HIV/AIDS drugs more affordable for 9 million people? The foundation's work on HIV/AIDS treatment dates back to 2002 with the creation of the Clinton Health Access Initiative. That was a time when some countries were paying $1,000 or more to treat each AIDS patient. The basic goal was to bring in bulk-buying to lower costs. The program consolidated both the supply of raw materials to make the drugs and the bidding to supply the finished product. The result was lower production costs and lower drug prices. Today, the initiative tracks the going price for a menu of treatments and posts them to help health departments around the world as they negotiate with drug companies. In 2014, the World Health Organization reported that by the end of 2013, more than 11.7 million people were on antiretroviral therapy in low- and middle-income countries. While the kinds of drugs have changed, the WHO said ""in the past decade the price of individual antiretroviral formulations has decreased considerably."" The treatments used in the early days have fallen from a median cost of about $600 in 2003 to about $100 a decade later. A more advanced drug combination introduced in 2005 saw a similar decline. Importantly, the WHO listed the Clinton Health Access Initiative as one of a handful of organizations collaborating on ensuring a steady supply of drugs. The partners in that effort include the biggest players, including several United Nations agencies, PEPFAR (the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief) and UNITAID, a project created by Brazil, Chile, France, Norway and the United Kingdom. UNAIDS announced at the end of May that the number of people under treatment is now closer to 17 million. Technically, the Clinton Health Access Initiative has been a separate nonprofit since 2010, but it is still integrated within the Clinton Foundation and the foundation press office still offers comments on its behalf. Clinton Health Access Initiativespokeswoman Maura Daley told us that Clinton used an old figure for the people being served by the initiative. ""The total number of patients benefitting is 11.8 million,"" she told us. Not everyone getting treatment is counted as benefiting from the initiative's efforts. Beyond working to reduce drug costs, it also coordinates with nongovernmental organizations inside countries to distribute the drugs once they arrive. Clearly, the Clinton Health Access Initiative did not accomplish all of this on its own, but Clinton didn't say that. Two experts in HIV/AIDS treatment, Jennifer Kates at the Kaiser Family Foundation, and Ellen 't Hoen call the initiative an important player. 't Hoen was the first executive director of the Medicines Patent Pool, a group that streamlines the production of generic antiretroviral drugs. ""Without the work of the MPP it would have been much harder for organizations like CHAI to access generic antiretrovirals,"" she said. The initiative has been faulted for failing to fully report donations from foreign governmentsand has filed amended returns for 2012 and 2013. Our ruling Clinton said 9 million people have lower-cost HIV/AIDS medicine thanks to the efforts of the Clinton Foundation and her husband. Bill Clinton started the foundation and its first big project was the Clinton Health Access Initiative. The program focused on using market mechanisms to reduce treatment costs. Costs have fallen dramatically and the initiative remains a key global player in maintaining a steady supply of affordable drugs. If anything, Clinton understated the number of people who have benefited from the program.
Nine million people have lower-cost HIV/AIDS medicine because of the work of the Clinton Foundation and my husband.

The study could scratch one item off a long list of complications plaguing President Barack Obama's launch of his sweeping health care law, also known as Obamacare, which kicked in January 1. About half of U.S. states have opted to expand Medicaid eligibility to poor Americans under the law, raising concerns those states could attract low-income people from elsewhere, increasing the burden on state budgets. "This is known as the welfare magnet hypothesis," according to the study from the Harvard School of Public Health, which said its research into previous state medical aid expansions "found no evidence of significant migration effects." The Harvard study used U.S. migration data from 1998 to 2012 to focus on the impact of medical insurance expansions in Arizona, Maine, New York, and also Massachusetts - whose own health care reforms served as a model for the Affordable Care Act. "These results suggest that migration will not be a common way for people to obtain Medicaid coverage under the current expansion and that interstate migration is not likely to be a significant source of costs for states choosing to expand their programs," according to the study. "Our findings are relevant for forecasting the cost and coverage consequences of states' decisions about expanding Medicaid eligibility," it said, noting four states - New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Missouri, and Utah - are still considering whether to expand Medicaid under the law. Arguments in favor of expanding Medicaid eligibility have tended to focus on improving access to medical care for the poor and bringing in federal dollars to bolster states' social programs, while counterarguments have focused on the potential unintended costs to state budgets. A joint Harvard-MIT study released last week focusing on Oregon's expanded Medicaid program, for example, showed adults covered by Medicaid used emergency rooms 40 percent more than those in similar circumstances who are uninsured. MIT led another study in 2013 focusing on Oregon that showed "Medicaid coverage generated no significant improvements in measured physical health outcomes in the first 2 years" but "did increase use of health care services, raise rates of diabetes detection and management, lower rates of depression, and reduce financial strain." The latest Harvard findings come after a rocky start for the Affordable Care Act, which relies on a website that suffered repeated crashes, glitches, and security concerns that hampered enrollment. After some fixes, more than 2 million people have been able to enroll for coverage under the law, the most sweeping social program since the 1960s. President Obama has also been criticized for telling Americans they would be able to keep their old insurance plans under the new law if they wanted to - an assertion that turned out to be false in many cases. The law was passed in 2010 to help millions of uninsured and under-insured Americans, but Republicans have opposed the reform as an unwarranted expansion of the federal government and say it is too costly and eliminates healthcare choices for many.
Americans unlikely to move to get better Medicaid benefits: study.