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: "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
Example 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.
Example explanation: 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.
Q: Paragraph: Eastern Virginia Medical School announced Tuesday that it plans a news conference and will make a written report of the investigation public. The school's statement included no details about what the investigation found out about Northam's 1984 yearbook page, which includes a photo of a man in blackface standing next to someone in Ku Klux Klan clothing. Northam's office declined to comment. The medical school in Norfolk hired the law firm McGuireWoods, which is also a top lobbying firm, to conduct an independent investigation. Virginia politics was turned upside down in a matter of hours in early February after a conservative website posted a picture online of Northam's medical school yearbook page. The Democratic governor issued two apologies within hours, initially indicating that he was one of the people in the picture. By midnight it appeared his entire political base was gone, with the Virginia Legislative Black Caucus, other key Democratic groups and top allies calling on him to resign. Northam reversed course at a news conference the next day, saying he was convinced it was not him in the picture, while revealing that he did in fact wear blackface once decades ago, to look like Michael Jackson for a dance contest. Defying calls to resign, he said he wanted to focus his remaining three years in office on addressing longstanding racial inequities. While he was all but invisible in February and much of March, the governor is making routine public appearances again. And he's won praise from black lawmakers and others for several recent policy moves. Those include a halt to suspending the suspension of driver's licenses for motorists with unpaid court fines and costs, and a review into how public schools teach our nation's racial history. The heat for Northam to resign significantly lessened after scandal enveloped his potential successors. Two women publicly accused Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax of sexual assault, which he denies, and Attorney General Mark Herring announced he'd also worn blackface in college, just days after he too called on Northam to resign. Both Fairfax and Herring also resisted calls to resign. And other politicians around the South soon had their own explaining to do over yearbook images taken long ago. But the incident will forever mark Northam's time in office, and opponents still use it against him. House Majority Leader Del. Todd Gilbert recently said Northam had chosen to "repair his own racist legacy," rather than protect victims of domestic abuse after the governor vetoed a bill requiring a mandatory jail term for repeat domestic abusers. The photo on Northam's yearbook page was one of at least three blackface photos in the 1984 publication, which was reviewed by an Associated Press reporter. One of the others shows a man in blackface who is dressed up as a woman wearing a wig. A caption reads: "'Baby Love,' who ever thought Diana Ross would make it to Medical School!" Calling the photos "shockingly abhorrent," school leaders commissioned an investigation into past yearbooks and the school's culture. Thousands of letters and emails were sent to alumni asking for information as part of the investigation. Former students who worked on the 1984 yearbook have disagreed over whether the photo could have been mistakenly placed on Northam's page. Dr. Giac Chan Nguyen-Tan, a physician practicing in Connecticut, said earlier this year that a page he laid out for the yearbook was changed without his knowledge before publication. But fellow yearbook staffer Dr. William Elwood disagreed that any photos were mixed up and said it was unlikely someone could have pulled a prank, because a limited number of people had keys to the yearbook room. __ Suderman reported from Richmond, Virginia. Claim: Virginia gov's yearbook: Probe of racist photo completed.
A:
A law firm has completed its investigation into how a racist photo appeared on Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam's yearbook page 35 years ago, and is expected to release the results on Wednesday.