The evidence showed is neither relevant nor sufficient because there are several reasons why the antibiotics could be failing to attack the ear infection that Eli has, and it´s not sufficient because you can´t make a claim like that based on a single case, you need a recopilation of several cases where antibiotics were prescribed to patients even if they are not working, and in this case Eli´s ear infection hadn´t been treated with antibiotics prior to this, so how would the doctor know that they weren´t working?.
The answer is: The evidence is relevant but not sufficient.
The evidence is relevant enough to getting into an argument/ debate, and to question the claim, but it's not sufficient to win the claim. The claim is an statement in this case.
Things like heroin and do not get off topic with different types of drugs express 3-4 drugs and their effects explaining why youths shouldn't use them.
