An author claims that "Athletes caught using performance-enhancing drugs should be sentenced to prison." The author provides the following reason as support:

Question

anonymous · Answer

In 2013, the TV show Sport-Zone surveyed 2,000 athletes. 73 percent admitted knowing a teammate who took performance-enhancing drugs. Huang Kroll, spokesperson for the International Olympic Committee, was interviewed during the program. "Using illegal substances to gain an advantage is a huge issue," he explained. "Unless stronger laws are passed—laws that result in prison rather than suspension from competition—the problem will continue to grow."

anonymous · Answer

@LynFran

anonymous · Answer

Which choice best describes the reason the author provides? 

It is effective. It supports the claim clearly and logically. 

It is irrelevant. It discusses a fact that is off topic and does not support the claim. It is unreliable. 

It does not give any details to prove that the source can be trusted. 

It is unverified. It does not cite a source to show where the information was located.

anonymous · Answer

I think its da 1 one

lynfran · Answer

how do we know if the source can be trusted.... either the 3rd or 1st one to me..

lynfran · Answer

ok i would go with the 1st option

anonymous · Answer

thx