Two statements describe a new wave of Olympic doping cases; based on them, which of the given conclusions about reports and the commonness of doping logically follow?

Introduction / Context:
This is a statements and conclusions question based on Olympic doping incidents. You must treat the two given statements as absolutely true and then decide whether each conclusion necessarily follows, without using outside information or personal opinions about sports and doping.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Statement I: Twenty eight athletes are facing legal cases due to doping incidents.
• Statement II: The new wave of Olympic doping cases is based on evidences.
• Conclusion I: The report of doping is based on tests that happen.
• Conclusion II: Doping practice is very common these days among athletes.
• We must decide which conclusions must hold whenever both statements are true.

Concept / Approach:
In such questions, a conclusion follows only if it is impossible for the statements to be true and the conclusion to be false at the same time. If we can imagine even one situation where the statements hold but a conclusion fails, that conclusion does not logically follow. We therefore try to construct counterexamples rather than rely on real world impressions.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: The statements talk about twenty eight athletes with legal cases and say that the cases are based on evidences. They do not specify the type of evidence. Step 2: Conclusion I introduces the idea that the report is based on tests. However, evidence could also come from witnesses, documents, or digital records. Tests are not mentioned, so this added detail is not guaranteed. Step 3: Conclusion II states that doping practice is very common among athletes. Knowing that twenty eight athletes have cases does not tell us how many athletes there are in total, so we cannot judge whether the practice is common or rare. Step 4: Since both conclusions can be false in some situations where the statements remain true, neither conclusion logically follows.

Verification / Alternative check:
Imagine there are thousands of athletes and only twenty eight doping cases. Then doping could still be relatively uncommon, and conclusion II would be false. Also imagine that the evidence in these cases is entirely video footage and confessions, with no lab testing. In such a case conclusion I would be false. Yet both situations do not contradict the original statements, confirming that neither conclusion is forced.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Options A, B and D each claim that at least one conclusion follows. As shown, both conclusions can fail without affecting the truth of the statements, so those options overstate what can be inferred. Option E suggests that at least one of the two must follow, which is also not guaranteed. Only the option that says neither conclusion follows matches the logical analysis.

Common Pitfalls:
A frequent mistake is to let general knowledge about doping scandals influence the answer, for example thinking that doping is common or that tests are always used. Another error is to treat any reasonable sounding statement as a valid conclusion even if it introduces new information not present in the statements.

Final Answer:
The correct evaluation is that neither conclusion I nor conclusion II follows from the given statements.