+ All Categories
Home > Documents > 2004 National Household Survey

2004 National Household Survey

Date post: 29-Oct-2014
Category:
Upload: rochelle-esteban
View: 106 times
Download: 1 times
Share this document with a friend
Popular Tags:
56
Chapter I THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND This Chapter presents the introduction that includes the basic assumption on the problem, the statement of the problem, the significance of the survey, its scope and delimitation, and the operational definition of terms. Introduction Earlier studies made by the Dangerous Drugs Board have shown that in spite of the government’s all out campaign against drug abuse and illicit drug traffic, the problem remains unabated. A safe assumption can, therefore, be drawn that behind the massive efforts expended, and the gains made, by the government and the private sector in combating the problem, there will still be a continued increase in illicit drug use among our population at risk. Past studies and experiences have established that Marijuana and cough syrup preparations were the most commonly abused drugs. However, the emergence of Methamphetamine Hydrochloride (Shabu) in 1985 further compounded the existing dangers posed by illicit drug use. Since then, Shabu and Marijuana persist to be the main drugs of choice among our drug user population. Statement of the Problem In the household survey conducted by the Dangerous Drugs Board in 1999, it was estimated that there were 1.8 million regular users and 1.6 occasional users in the country. Five years have passed and yet, the same data are still being referred to as baseline information. With the government’s earnest desire to address the drug problem, there is a serious need to continuously assess the magnitude and extent of drug use among our population. Significance of the Survey The data that will be acquired from the survey will be very useful for policymakers, drug abuse prevention and control workers as well as the general public in ascertaining and coming up with unique programs, new strategies, and relevant measures that would have to be taken to counter drug use, specifically in the identified problem areas. A continuing stream of information regarding the myriad of aspects relating to the problem is imperative, and must always be available for an objective multi-faceted approach both on drug demand and drug supply reduction. Objectives of the Survey Generally, the objective of the survey is to determine the number and national estimates of the lifetime prevalent and current users in the country. Its specific objectives are: 1. To determine the patterns of drug use in terms of the following: 1.1 Dangerous drugs commonly used; 1.2 Frequency of drug use; 1.3 Sources of dangerous drugs; 1.4 Amount spent per drug intake;
Transcript
Page 1: 2004 National Household Survey

Chapter I

THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

This Chapter presents the introduction that includes the basic assumption on the problem, the statement of

the problem, the significance of the survey, its scope and delimitation, and the operational definition of terms. Introduction Earlier studies made by the Dangerous Drugs Board have shown that in spite of the government’s all out campaign against drug abuse and illicit drug traffic, the problem remains unabated. A safe assumption can, therefore, be drawn that behind the massive efforts expended, and the gains made, by the government and the private sector in combating the problem, there will still be a continued increase in illicit drug use among our population at risk. Past studies and experiences have established that Marijuana and cough syrup preparations were the most commonly abused drugs. However, the emergence of Methamphetamine Hydrochloride (Shabu) in 1985 further compounded the existing dangers posed by illicit drug use. Since then, Shabu and Marijuana persist to be the main drugs of choice among our drug user population. Statement of the Problem In the household survey conducted by the Dangerous Drugs Board in 1999, it was estimated that there were 1.8 million regular users and 1.6 occasional users in the country. Five years have passed and yet, the same data are still being referred to as baseline information.

With the government’s earnest desire to address the drug problem, there is a serious need to continuously assess the magnitude and extent of drug use among our population.

Significance of the Survey

The data that will be acquired from the survey will be very useful for policymakers, drug abuse prevention and control workers as well as the general public in ascertaining and coming up with unique programs, new strategies, and relevant measures that would have to be taken to counter drug use, specifically in the identified problem areas.

A continuing stream of information regarding the myriad of aspects relating to the problem is

imperative, and must always be available for an objective multi-faceted approach both on drug demand and drug supply reduction.

Objectives of the Survey Generally, the objective of the survey is to determine the number and national estimates of the lifetime prevalent and current users in the country. Its specific objectives are:

1. To determine the patterns of drug use in terms of the following:

1.1 Dangerous drugs commonly used;

1.2 Frequency of drug use;

1.3 Sources of dangerous drugs;

1.4 Amount spent per drug intake;

Page 2: 2004 National Household Survey

2

2

1.5 Routes of administration or use;

1.6 Reasons for current use;

1.7 Effects of drug use to marital relationships, schooling, and employment;

1.8 Activities (to include crimes and social deviancy committed) relative to drug use;

1.9 Effects of abstinence from drug use;

1.10 Ability to control drug taking behavior; and

1.11 Actions/Interventions taken due to drug use.

2 To determine the knowledge and perception of the respondents with regard to the:

2.1 The prevailing socio-economic problems and the degree of the drug problem in their respective barangays;

2.2 The presence of users, pushers, and clandestine drug laboratories in their barangays;

2.3 Awareness of the drug abuse programs being implemented in their barangays;

2.4 The conduct of the anti-drug campaign in their barangays and 2.5 Suggestions or recommendations, if any, to address the drug problem.

Scope and Delimitation of the Survey

The Household Survey on the Nature and Extent of the Drug Abuse Problem in the Philippines was designed to elicit information on the incidence on drug use and the estimates of lifetime prevalence and current usage, and to report the patterns and consequences of drug use as derived from one thousand (1,000) households in each survey area covered within the National Capital Region, Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao. The sample population consisted of those aged from 10-44 years. Three (3) household members belonging to the age brackets: 10-19 years, 20-29 years, and 30-44 years served as the respondents. These age groups were considered because the same were identified to be the high-risk age groups for drug abuse, as gathered from the DDB Integrated Central Case Registry and Monitoring System. The data gathering activities were prolonged for a period of five months (September 2004—January 2005) due to fund unavailability. Data gathering was conducted in close collaboration and coordination with the local government units in the survey sites.

The survey was limited to the variable, survey sites, and methods as defined in the project proposal. However, the prevailing circumstances, socio-economic climate, and other intervening variables were not controlled as the duration of the data-gathering phase of the survey had to be extended, subject to availability of fund. As the conduct of the survey progressed, certain other constraints were encountered. These include the inadequate number of desired age sample group of 10-19 years; the unwillingness and apprehension of some to participate in the survey; the difficulty/delay in the distribution and retrieval of survey questionnaires, the inaccessibility of some of the selected barangays, the presence of the insurgency problem within a few of the chosen survey sites, and the complacency of, and lack of cooperation from some barangay officials.

Page 3: 2004 National Household Survey

Operational Definition of Terms

As used in this survey report, the following terms refer to:

Abstinence from drugs - the act of the drug user of refraining from drug taking after a period of continuous use;

Current Users - those who are taking drugs during the last six (6) months prior to and at the time of the conduct of the survey; Drug Use – the deliberate administration of drugs and chemical substances to one’s self for purposes other than treating sickness and if done continuously, will often lead to great harm; Gainful Occupation – at the time of the interview, the respondents were studying or working, whether as an employee or self-employed, or otherwise engaged in worthwhile activities; Lifetime Prevalent Users - those who have tried drugs at least once in their lifetime to include the current users; Population Estimates - the inferred number of drug users classified as lifetime prevalent and current users based on the National Statistics Office Projected Population of 2004, issued in June 1999 (Manila); Probability Factor – is the percentage stated in decimal form; Projected Population – the 2004 estimation of the National Statistics Office (NSO) of the Philippine population, under study, belonging to the ages 10 to 44 years old; Ratio – the expression of the relationship between two quantities in terms of number; (Training Manual on Project Monitoring, National Statistical and Research Center, 2002) Route of use/administration - the manner by which the drug is taken into the body by the drug user either through inhalation, sniffing, oral means, and/or injection; Rural areas – all areas not falling under the classification of the urban areas; Social deviancy – behavior or actions contrary to law and public order like petty thievery, disturbance of peace, etc.; and Urban areas – are places classified by the National Statistics Office (NSO Census of Population and Housing Final Report 2000) as having the following characteristics:

1) In their entirety, all cities and municipalities having a population density of at least 1,000 person per sq km.;

2) ―Poblaciones‖ or central districts of municipalities and cities, which have a population density at least 500 persons per sq. km.;

3) ―Poblaciones‖ or central districts (not included in 1 and 2), regardless of the population size which have the following:

a. Street pattern, example: network of streets in either parallel or right angle orientation; b. At least 6 establishments (commercial, manufacturing, recreational and or personal services; c. At least 3 of the following: i) a town hall, church or chapel with religious services at least once a

month; ii) a public plaza, park or cemetery; iii) marketplace or building like school, hospital, bureau culture and health center or library.

4) Barangays, having at least 1,000 inhabitants, which meet the conditions set forth in no. 3 above, and

when the occupation of the inhabitants is predominantly non-farming or non-fishing.

Page 4: 2004 National Household Survey

4

4

Chapter II

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

This Chapter discusses the specification of the research design consisting of the selection of the survey

sites and samples to include the formulae used, the instrumentation, and the statistical treatment applied.

The design of this survey is a combination of two basic designs, namely: 1) descriptive (since it also attempts to outline the relationships between the selected variables); and 2) exploratory (as it aims to discover new insights about the nationwide profile and trends on drug use). These particular methods and techniques were chosen because of their appropriateness to the problem. They supplied both factual and practical information that could be used to evaluate conditions and to propose recommendations on how to better address the drug problem.

Sampling Design

The multi-stage sampling design was employed in the conduct of the survey. The stratification of the

study sites and target respondents included the:

1. Regions; 2. Provinces; 3. Cities/municipalities; and 4. Barangays.

Formulae: The formulae used in the selection of the barangay survey sites are as follow:

a. For the Provinces

Urban brgy. 1

1 City/Municipality

Rural brgy. 2

Brgy. 1 Population = % x no. of household = sample in brgy. 1

Total

Brgy. 2 population = % x no. of household = sample in brgy. 2

Total

Biggest population of barangay + smallest population of barangay = Total

Page 5: 2004 National Household Survey

b. For the NCR brgy. small biggest district Survey Site brgy. big brgy. small smallest district brgy. Big Biggest population of barangay + smallest population of barangay =Total Biggest population of brgy. = % x no. of household (sample) Total Smallest population of brgy. = % x no. of household (sample) Total

Total refers to the sum of population of biggest barangay and smallest barangay;

Number of household refers to the total number of household for the selected city/municipality (based on NSO figures)

The above formula was similarly used for the districts and barangays in the NCR.

In the case of Pasay City, being a lone district, the sampling was initiated directly within the barangay level.

1. Sampling

The samples used in the survey consisted of one thousand (1,000) households per survey area covered within the National Capital Region, Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao. The control variable in the selection of the household respondents was the age. The age brackets used in the selection of the samples, as earlier stated, are 10-19 years, 20-29 years, and 30-44 years.

Page 6: 2004 National Household Survey

6

6

The Distribution of Samples in the Histogram

As shown in the distribution of samples in the histogram, the sample falls within the 95% level of confidence with a +-2 standard error. Sample Size The proportionate sampling technique was applied to obtain the desired sample size for each city and municipality in the study sites at the desired margin of error at + - .02. The sample size is 4,000 households equally distributed at the four (4) sites, namely: NCR, Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao. To get the sample size (1,000/survey area), the formula n/N (1,000) (3) was used and the following steps were undertaken: Where N = the total number of household population in all the study sites/region; n = the household population in each sample city/municipality/district/barangay, 1,000 = the total number of household samples per survey site; and 3 = the number of samples of household members per household 1. Basing on the NSO Household Population, get the number of households for each survey site. 2. Compute the sum of the total number of households (n) of sample city or municipality after stratification. 3. Divide the household population of each study site (city/municipality) by the total (N) and multiply by the desired number of household sample (1,000) to get the proportion (n or the proportion of the household sample) then multiply by 3 (household members with age range of 10-19, 20-29, and 30-44 years old.) 4. Repeat the procedure until the desired sample (1,000) for each study site (NCR, Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao) is met. Ex. North and South Luzon = 1,000 households Computation for Batangas Lipa City = 41,962/250,373 x 1,000 = 175 x 3 = 525 San Jose = 10,123/250,373 x 1,000 = 42 x 3 = 126

Age

45.042.540.037.535.032.530.027.525.022.520.017.515.012.510.0

Freq

uenc

y

1600

1400

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

0

Std. Dev = 9.70

Mean = 25.4

N = 12000.00

Page 7: 2004 National Household Survey

REGION XI

Compostela Valley Compostela 61,667 12,151 35 105

Nabunturan 60,543 12,930 34 102

Davao del Sur Davao City 1,147,116 240,057 642 1,926

New Corella 67,317 13,881 38 114

CARAGA

Agusan del Sur Butuan City 267,279 50,273 149 447

Cabadbaran 50,612 9,384 28 84

Surigao del Norte Surigao City 118,534 22,541 66 198

Sison 12,886 2,554 8 24

--------------———— --------------———— --------------————

TOTAL 363,771 1,000 3,000

SAMPLE CITY TOTAL NO. OF HOUSEHOLD RESPONDENTS

MUNICIPALITY POPULATION HOUSEHOLDS SAMPLING (x 3)

CAR

Benguet Baguio 252,386 52,302 201 603

La Trinidad 67,963 13,658 54 162

Abra Bangued 38,965 7,971 31 93

Bucay 14,881 2,943 12 36

REGION II

Isabela Ilagan 119,990 24,085 96 288

Cabagan 41,536 7,250 33 99

Cagayan Tuguegarao 120,645 22,311 97 291

Piat 20,524 3,975 17 51

REGION IV

Laguna San Pablo 207,927 44,166 167 501

Sta. Cruz 92,694 19,627 75 225

Batangas Lipa City 218,447 41,962 175 525

San Jose 51,965 10,123 42 126

-------------------------- -------------------------- --------------------------

TOTAL 250,373 1,000 3,000

Page 8: 2004 National Household Survey

8

8

REGION VII

Cebu Cebu City 718,821 147,600 573 1,719

Carcar 89,199 17,312 72 216

Negros Oriental Dumaguete City 102,265 21,582 82 246

Zamboangita 23,338 4,691 19 57

REGION VIII

Leyte Tacloban City 178,639 34,758 142 426

Alang-alang 41,245 8,188 33 99

Samar Catbalogan City 84,180 16,100 79 237

-----------------------------------------------------------------—-

TOTAL 250,231* 1,000 3,000

*Actual number is 253,274, however due to some constraints was changed to 250,231

NCR

Manila 1,581,082 333,547 272 816

Pasay City 354,908 78,180 62 186

Quezon City 2,173,831 480,624 375 1,125

Caloocan City 1,177,604 249,567 204 612

Pasig City 505,058 107,835 87 261

--------------———— --------------———— --------------————

TOTAL 1,249,753 1,000 3,000

Page 9: 2004 National Household Survey

2. Selection of Survey Sites

In each survey site, the simple random sampling (through drawing of lots) was used in identifying the regions, provinces, cities, municipalities, and barangays included in the survey. The selection of the sample was patterned after the 1999 Household Survey sampling design. A desired sample of 1,000 households was chosen per survey area.

3. Selection of Households

In the selection of households, the simple random sampling was likewise employed. However, in cases where the three (3) respondents were not present in a single household or if the identified household was uncooperative because of the sensitivity of the nature of the survey, the next household was considered until the desired sample size was satisfied. In cases where a certain household has more than one eligible member, belonging to the identified age groups, the same was taken in as subject, until the desired sample was completed. However, due to the unavailability of respondents in certain age groups, the desired sampling size was not fully met, yet, the outcome was still within the accepted margin of error.

4. Research Instrument

The major data collection tool used was the survey questionnaire and the basic instrument was an interview schedule. A total of thirty-eight questions were constructed which targeted and elicited information from the respondents in the following areas: their personal data; their awareness of the prevailing socio-economic problems on the national and barangay levels; the degree of the drug problem within the respective barangays of the respondents; the knowledge on drug users, drug pushers, clandestine drug laboratories and emerging chemicals or plants of abuse in their localities; trends on lifetime prevalence and current drug use as well as effects on marital relationships; studies; and employment/business; the commission of drug-related crimes and deviant behavior; the interventions/actions taken due to drug use; and the awareness of the government’s anti-drug campaign. The questionnaire was pre-tested in selected barangays in Metro Manila and was revised accordingly to better elicit the desired responses . It consisted of eight (8) parts: Part 1 solicited information on the demographic profile of the respondents particularly sex, civil status, highest educational attainment, gainful occupation (if any), and monthly family income. Part 2 listed ten (10) socio-economic problems, of which the respondents were asked to identify the prevailing ones in the country and their respective barangays. Multiple responses were encouraged. Part 3 elicited information on the degree of the drug problem in the respondents’ barangays. A scale of 1-5 was used to assess the rating of the respondents, with a rating of 5 as having the ―most serious problem.‖ Similarly, the knowledge or awareness on the following areas were determined: a) the existence of drug pushers and drug users in their barangays; b) the most commonly abused drugs in their barangays; c) the new drug/s or plant/s being abused; d) the existence of clandestine drug laboratory/ies within their barangays; and e) the practice of injecting drug use.

1.1.1 SURVEY SITES 1.1.2 HOUSEHOLD

NCR 1,000

Luzon 1,000

Visayas 1,000

Mindanao 1,000

Page 10: 2004 National Household Survey

10

10

THE DATA-GATHERING ACTIVITIES

14

In Brgy. Mercedes,

Catbalogan, Samar

(Visayan Region)

In Bangued, Abra

(Cordillera Autonomous

Region)

Coordination with barangay

officals and field interview-

ers of Brgy. 20, Parola,

Tondo, Manila

(National Capital Region)

Interview with 10-19 age group in

Brgy,

Bangued, Abra,

(Cordillera Autonomous Region)

Orientation meeting with

field interviewers

in Brgy. Mercedes,

Catbalogan, Samar

(Visayas Region)

Page 11: 2004 National Household Survey

15

In Brgy. Matina,

Davao City

(Mindanao Region)

In Brgy Libertad,

Butuan City

(CARAGA) in

Mindanao.

Coordination meeting

with barangay officials in

Brgy. Matina, Davie City

(Mindanao Region)

Briefing of field interviewers on

the conduct of the survey in

Brgy.Libertad, Butuan City,

(CARAGA) in Mindanao

Coordination with a field inter-

viewer in Brgy. Alno,

La Trinidad, Benguet (CAR)

Page 12: 2004 National Household Survey

12

12

Part 4 listed questions on lifetime prevalence and current drug usage (drug use during the period of the survey) and identified trends and practices on drug use.

Part 5 listed six (6) items each regarding the effects of drug use on the current-user respondents’

marital relationships, schooling, and employment/business. As to the commission of drug-related crimes and deviant behavior, and the physical and psychological effects of drug use, the current user-respondents were made to select from only five (5) items, where multiple responses were allowed. The respondents were made to identify which of those were true to their situation.

Part 6 elicited information of the possible actions and interventions taken by the current-user-

respondents as to their drug use. They were also asked whether they were capable of controlling their drug use by means of a scale from 1-5, with 5 as having the meaning of ―very controllable.

Part 7 solicited information on whether or not their respective barangays are undertaking any anti-drug

campaign. Part 8 encouraged the respondents to give their suggestions and/or recommendations on how the

drug problem can be properly addressed.

5. Procedure for Data Gathering

The Policy Studies, Research, and Statistics Division (PSRSD) of the Dangerous Drugs Board developed and pre-tested the survey instrument. The data gathering activities were prolonged for a period of five months (September 2004—January 2005) due to fund unavailability. Data gathering was conducted in close collaboration and coordination with the local government units in the survey sites and the assistance of their field coordinators and interviewers also utilized by the Department of Health and the National Statistics Office in their respective census. These field interviewers were provided with a comprehensive orientation and training on the mechanics of the household survey and lectures on the drug problem. They worked under the direct supervision of the DDB research teams and were given minimal honoraria (US $ 5.50) for their efforts aside from the payment of P 10.00 (US $0.05) per questionnaire satisfactorily completed. The questionnaires were administered individually with the subjects’ anonymity being well assured.

6. Statistical Treatment

The PSRSD staff then collated the accomplished questionnaires, processed and analyzed the data gathered, and prepared the final survey report. The statistical tool, ―Statistical Packages for Social Sciences (SPSS)‖, was used in the processing of data, The following were also employed in the treatment and analysis of the data: a) frequency distribution, b) measures of central tendencies d) ratio – the expression of the relationship between two quantities in terms of number; e) cross tabulations of variables, and f) inferential statistics on the projections.

Basis for the estimates was the publication of the National Statistics Office, ―1995 Census–Based

National, Regional and Provincial Population Projections.‖ (Manila: 1999) (Please refer to ANNEX A)

For the purpose of interpreting the range of responses in the assessment of the degree of the drug

problem in the barangays and the ability to control drug use, variations of the five-point Likert Scale were used as earlier described.

Page 13: 2004 National Household Survey

Chapter III

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This Chapter contains the analysis and interpretation of the data gathered from the survey. The

presentation was done in accordance to the outline shown in the beginning of this Chapter.

The presentation of the data is structured according to the following: a) Demographic profile of the total respondents; b) Demographic profiles of the lifetime prevalent and current users;

c) Patterns of drug use in terms of: c.1. Dangerous drugs commonly used; c.2. Frequency of drug use; c.3. Source/s of drugs; c.4. Amount spent per drug intake; c.5. Route/s of administration/use; c.6. Reason/s for initial and continued use; c.7. Activities relative to drug use (to include the commission of crimes and social deviancy); c.8. Effects of drug use on marital relationships, studies, employment/ business); and the c.9. Degree of control over drug-taking behavior.

d) Knowledge and Perception of the respondents with regard to the: d.1. Prevailing socio-economic problems of the country and their barangays; d.2. Degree of the drug problem in their barangays; and d.3. Emerging chemicals or plants of abuse in their barangays.

e) Actions / Interventions Taken or to be Taken on the drug problem of the Current user- respondents:

e.1. Consultation and medical/counseling assistance sought; and e.2. Possible actions/interventions to be taken for drug use.

f) Knowledge and awareness of the respondents as to the government’s anti-drug campaign and the rating of its implementation: f.1 Within the barangay level; and

f.2. Within the national level.

g) Suggestions and recommendations of the respondents on how to address the drug problem ; and h) Projections of the number and national estimates of the lifetime prevalent and current users in the country, per region, as well as their age groupings.

Page 14: 2004 National Household Survey

14

14

AGE FREQUENCY PERCENT

10 - 19 4,077 33.98

20 - 29 3,989 33.24

30 - 44 3,934 32.78

SEX

Male 6,873 57.28

Female 5,127 42.72

CIVIL STATUS

Single 6,257 52.14

Married 4,512 37.60

Live-in 541 4.51

Separated 435 3.62

Widow/er 254 2.12

Divorced 1 0.01

HIGHEST EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

Post Graduate 4 0.03

College Graduate 772 6.43

College Level 2,278 18.98

Vocational 75 0.63

High School Graduate 1,500 12.50

High School Level 3,758 31.32

Elementary Graduate 638 5.32

Elementary Level 2,174 18.12

Others:

No Formal Education 41 0.34

Not Specified 760 6.33

GAINFUL OCCUPATION (IF ANY)

Students 3,385 28.21

Laborers 2,113 17.61

Self-Employed 1,386 11.55

Private Employees 940 7.83

Government Employees 448 3.73

Public Transport Drivers 217 1.81

Entertainers 14 0.12

Others:

Unemployed 2,389 19.91

Out-of-School Youth 854 7.12

Pensioners 3 0.03

Not Specified 251 2.09

AVERAGE MONTHLY FAMILY INCOME PhP 5,577.00 (US $ 103.28 @54.00 exchange rate)

PLACE OF RESIDENCE

Urban 10,605 88.38

Rural 1,395 11.62

TABLE 1 – DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF THE TOTAL RESPONDENTS

(N=12,000)

Page 15: 2004 National Household Survey

With the distribution of the respondents into the three age groups, 10-19, 20-29, 30-44 years old, the

most number of respondents came from the age bracket 10-19 years with 4,077 (or 33.98%). Following closely are those within the 20-29 age group with 3,989 (or 33.24%). The age bracket, 30-44 years, has the least number of respondents with a total of 3,934 (or 32.78%). Their mean age is 25.2 years and the median is 24.32 years.

Six thousand eight hundred seventy three (6,873) or 57.28% of the respondents were males while five thousand one hundred twenty seven (5,127) or 42.73% were females. Region wide, the National Capital Region (NCR), Regions 11, and 7 have the most number of male respondents with an aggregate total of four thousand two hundred twenty three (4,223) or representing 61.44% of the total male survey population. Likewise, the same regions have the most number of female respondents with a total of three thousand two hundred sixty one 3,261 (or 63.60% of the total female survey population).

Six thousand two hundred fifty seven (6,257) or 52.14% comprised the unmarried respondents while the married respondents represented four thousand five hundred twelve (4,512) or 37.60%. Of the total respondents, two hundred fifty four (254) or 2.12% were either widows or widowers. Four hundred thirty five (435) or 3.62% were separated from their spouses while five hundred forty one (541) or 4.51% have live-in partners. On the regional level, the National Capital Region (NCR) has the most number of single respondents with one thousand five hundred forty nine (1,549) or 12.91% followed by Region 7 with one thousand one hundred seventy four (1,174) or 9.78 %. Ranking third is Region 11 with one thousand one hundred ninety eight (1,198) or 9.32%. Region 2 has the least number of single respondents with three hundred ninety four (394) or 3.28%.

With regard to the highest educational attainment of the respondents, less than one third, 3,758 (or

31.32%) reached the high school level, followed by those in the college level - 2,278 (or 18.98%) while 2,174 (or 18.12%) were in the elementary level.

As to gainful occupation, 28.21% (3,385) of the total respondents were students, followed by the

laborers with 17.61% (2,113), and on the third slot, the self-employed with 11.55% (1,386). A significant number of the total respondents were unemployed, 19.91% (2,389).

Majority of the respondents (10,605 or 88.38%) were from the urban areas while the rest (1,395 or

TABLE 1(a) – COMPUTATION OF MEAN AGE

AGE GROUP FREQUENCY MID-

POINT Fx (f) (x)

10 – 19 4,077 14.5 59,116.5

20 – 29 3,989 24.5 97,730.5

30 – 44 3,934 37 145,558

TOTAL 12,000 302,405

x = ? fx

= 302,405 = 25.2 years

N 12,000

Page 16: 2004 National Household Survey

16

16

11.62%) were from the rural areas.

TABLE 2 - DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY MONTHLY FAMILY INCOME (N=12,000)

As to the m on t h l y family income, 44.78% (5,374) of the respondents belonged to the income group of P 5,999.00 and below. However, the average monthly income of the total respondents was P 5,577.00 while the most frequent (mode) family income is P5,000.00.

TABLE 3 - DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY REGION ACCORDING TO THE PREVAILING SOCIO-ECONOMIC PROBLEMS

F/N(12,000) x 100=%)

The respondents were asked about the prevailing socio-economic problems of the country and their respective barangays. Their responses could be more than one (1). Thus, the total number of responses could exceed the number of respondents of the survey.

Table 4 - Distribution of Respondents by Monthly Family Income N=12,000

Frequency %

PhP 5999 and below 5,374 44.78

6000 to 10999 2,244 18.70

11000 to 15999 336 2.80

16000 to 20999 135 1.13

21000 to 25999 37 0.31

26000 to 30999 35 0.29

31000 to 35999 3 0.03

36000 to 40999 16 0.13

41000 and above 17 0.14

Not Specified 3,803 31.69

TOTAL PhP 12,000 100.00

Monthly IncomeTOTAL

PROBLEM*

F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F %

Poverty 2,781 23.18 758 6.32 670 5.58 1,276 10.63 1,722 14.35 693 5.78 1,885 15.71 656 5.47 10,441 87.01

Unemployment 2,534 21.12 724 6.03 580 4.83 1,277 10.64 1,506 12.55 623 5.19 1,652 13.77 596 4.97 9,492 79.10

Drug Problem 2,215 18.46 543 4.53 323 2.69 1,071 8.93 1,590 13.25 525 4.38 1,409 11.74 401 3.34 8,077 67.31

Increasing Population 1,489 12.41 537 4.48 470 3.92 951 7.93 709 5.91 369 3.08 1,136 9.47 258 2.15 5,919 49.33

Housing 1,692 14.10 284 2.37 165 1.38 612 5.10 620 5.17 186 1.55 1,054 8.78 232 1.93 4,845 40.38

Food and Security 1,394 11.62 367 3.06 228 1.90 572 4.77 532 4.43 248 2.07 867 7.23 320 2.67 4,528 37.73

Peace and Order 1,209 10.08 460 3.83 232 1.93 526 4.38 629 5.24 207 1.73 664 5.53 179 1.49 4,106 34.22

Health and Sanitation 881 7.34 408 3.40 221 1.84 496 4.13 784 6.53 250 2.08 753 6.28 227 1.89 4,020 33.50

Terrorism 636 5.30 291 2.43 136 1.13 231 1.93 235 1.96 96 0.80 456 3.80 80 0.67 2,161 18.01

*Multiple Response

R E G I O N

NCR CAR II IV VII VIII XI CARAGA TOTAL

Page 17: 2004 National Household Survey

Their responses identified poverty (87.01%), unemployment (79.10%), and drug abuse (67.31%) as the top three problems of the country and their barangays. Another problem cited was that of health and sanitation with (33.50%). Terrorism was considered as the least problem with two thousand one hundred sixty-one (2,161) or 18.01%.

The respondents from the NCR, CAR, Regions 8, 11, and CARAGA ranked poverty, unemployment,

and drug abuse, in that order, as the prevailing problems in their barangays. Region 7 perceived drug abuse (13.25%) as second to poverty (14.35%) while Region 2 ranked drug abuse as fourth (2.69%). Increasing population (3.92%), which was on the third slot, was perceived to be more of a problem in the same barangays.

Four (4) key cities in the NCR - Manila (5.24%), Pasig City (1.74%), Pasay City (1.20%), and Quezon

City (7.99%), and two (2) cities in Region 11 - Davao City (10.56%) and New Corella (0.30%) ranked drug problem as number 3 in their barangays while Metro Cebu ranked it 2nd to unemployment and/or poverty. (See annex)

TABLE 4 - DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY REGION ACCORDING TO THE DEGREE OF THE DRUG PROBLEM IN THEIR BARANGAYS (F/N(12,000) x 100=%)

Generally, 33.46% of the respondents considered drug abuse as a slight problem in their respective barangays followed by those who perceived it as ―a problem‖ (25.44%). A low (7.32%) perceived drug abuse to be ―very serious.‖ The prevailing perception of respondents in the NCR (6.98%), Regions 4 (4.93%), 8 (3.29%), 11 (5.79%), and 13 or CARAGA (3.39%) was that drug abuse is ―slightly a problem‖ while Region 7 (5.16%) has a ―very serious‖ drug abuse problem in their barangays. It is worthy to note that respondents of Region 2 (2.56%), and the Cordillera Autonomous Region or CAR (3.08%), both in Luzon, perceived drug abuse as ―not a problem‖.

TABLE 5 - DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS ACCORDING TO THEIR KNOWLEDGE OF

DRUG PUSHERS IN THE BARANGAYS

RESPONSE

F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F %

Yes 1,611 13.43 73 0.61 107 0.89 459 3.83 1,029 8.58 223 1.86 300 2.50 173 1.44 3,975 33.12

No 1,355 11.29 821 6.84 614 5.12 908 7.57 1,181 9.84 532 4.43 1,914 15.95 580 4.83 7,905 65.88

N/S 34 0.28 0 0.00 8 0.07 10 0.08 27 0.22 8 0.07 33 0.28 0 0.00 120 1.00

TOTAL 3,000 25.00 894 7.45 729 6.08 1,377 11.48 2,237 18.64 763 6.36 2,247 18.73 753 6.27 12,000 100.00

CARAGA TOTAL

R E G I O N

NCR CAR II IV VII VIII XI

F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F %

No Problem 406 3.38 370 3.08 307 2.56 218 1.82 132 1.10 101 0.84 358 2.98 110 0.92 2,002 16.68

Slightly A Problem 838 6.98 243 2.03 237 1.98 592 4.93 608 5.07 395 3.29 695 5.79 407 3.39 4,015 33.46

A Problem 773 6.44 228 1.90 134 1.12 350 2.92 581 4.84 153 1.28 683 5.69 151 1.26 3,053 25.44

Serious Problem 748 6.23 32 0.27 43 0.36 157 1.31 619 5.16 70 0.58 330 2.75 53 0.44 2,052 17.10

Very Serious Problem 235 1.96 21 0.18 8 0.07 60 0.50 297 2.48 44 0.37 181 1.51 32 0.27 878 7.32

CARAGA TOTALDEGREE OF PROBLEM

R E G I O N

NCR CAR II IV VII VIII XI

Page 18: 2004 National Household Survey

18

18

Seven thousand nine hundred five (7,905) respondents or 65.88% indicated that they have no

knowledge of any drug pusher within their barangays while 3,975 or 33.12% said that they were aware of the presence of drug pushers in their barangays.

Region 11 has the most number of respondents who have no knowledge of pushers in their

barangays with 1,914 or (15.95%), closely followed by the National Capital Region, with 1,355 or (11.29%), and Region 7 with 1,181 or (9.84%). Region 8 has the least number of respondents 532 or (4.43%) who have no knowledge of any drug pusher in their barangays.

The regions with the most number of respondents who were aware of the presence of drug pushers in their barangays were the National Capital Region with 1,611 or (13.43%), followed by Region 7 with 1,029 or (8.58%), and Region 4 with 459 or (3.83%).

TABLE 6 – DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS ACCORDING TO THEIR KNOWLEDGE OF DRUG USERS IN THEIR BARANGAYS

I n

general, sixty-two percent (62.05%) of the household respondents were aware of the presence of drug users in their respective barangays. The average number of users they know is (15), the mode is (10) with a minimum frequency of 1 and a maximum of 50.

The National Capital Region reported the largest percentage of known drug users with nearly twenty percent

(18.38%), followed by Region 7 (13.22%) and Region 11 with 11.09%. It is only in CAR and Region 2 where most of the respondents claimed that they did not know any drug user in their barangays

TABLE 7 – DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY REGION ACCORDING TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE MOST COMMONLY USED DRUGS IN THEIR BARANGAYS

F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F %

Yes 2,206 18.38 236 1.97 266 2.22 804 6.70 1,586 13.22 637 5.31 1,331 11.09 380 3.17 7,446 62.05

No 793 6.61 658 5.48 462 3.85 573 4.78 651 5.43 126 1.05 916 7.63 373 3.11 4,552 37.93

N/S 1 0.01 0 0.00 1 0.01 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0.02

TOTAL 3,000 25.00 894 7.45 729 6.08 1,377 11.48 2,237 18.64 763 6.36 2,247 18.73 753 6.28 12,000 100.00

RESPONSE

R E G I O N

NCR CAR II IV VII VIII XI CARAGA TOTAL

Table 10 - Distribution of Respondents According to their Knowledge of Drugs Commonly Abused by Region N=12,000

DRUGS*

F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F %

Shabu 2,068 17.23 154 1.28 169 1.41 776 6.47 1,615 13.46 439 3.66 814 6.78 355 2.96 6,390 53.25

Marijuana 1,154 9.62 179 1.49 236 1.97 412 3.43 620 5.17 373 3.11 968 8.07 271 2.26 4,213 35.11

Rugby 984 8.20 42 0.35 25 0.21 28 0.23 995 8.29 432 3.60 944 7.87 296 2.47 3,746 31.22

Cough Syrup

Preparations 144 1.20 17 0.14 12 0.10 90 0.75 173 1.44 50 0.42 173 1.44 47 0.39 706 5.88

Ecstasy 69 0.58 10 0.08 3 0.03 21 0.18 26 0.22 3 0.03 31 0.26 12 0.10 175 1.46

Nalbuphine

Hydrochloride

(Nubain) 12 0.10 2 0.02 1 0.01 91 0.76 7 0.06 16 0.13 7 0.06 136 1.13

Solvent 61 0.51 61 0.51

Cocaine 1 0.01 1 0.01 1 0.01 3 0.03

*Multiple Response

XI CARAGA TOTAL

R E G I O N

NCR CAR II IV VII VIII

Page 19: 2004 National Household Survey

Methamphetamine Hydrochloride or Shabu, as it is commonly termed, tops the list of drugs commonly abused in the barangays as indicated by 6,390 or (53.25%) of the respondents interviewed. ―Cannabis Sativa‖ or Marijuana ranks second (35.11%), and Rugby, a brand name for a kind of glue used by shoemakers, (31.22%) is on the 3rd slot. Per information gathered from the respondents, Shabu is the number one drug of choice in Regions 4 (6.47%), 7 (13.46%), 8 (3.66%), Region 13 or CARAGA (2.96%), and NCR (17.23%), while Marijuana ranks first in CAR (1.49%), and Region 11 (8.07%), and third in Region 13 or CARAGA (2.26%).

Knowledge on inhalant use, particularly that of solvent, which is another form of volatile substance like Rugby, is highest in Regions 7 (8.29%), 11 (7.87%), and the NCR (8.20%).

Methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA or Ecstasy), a related amphetamine derivative, is

reportedly being used in all the regions covered by the survey. Meanwhile, the abuse of Nalbuphine Hydrochloride or (Nubain), an injectable anesthetic, was reported

in all the survey-regions, except in CAR. It was recorded to be highest in Region 7. A small percentage (0.03%) of the respondents from the NCR, Regions 2, and 11, reported that

Cocaine is the least drug of abuse in their barangays.

TABLE 8 - DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS ACCORDING TO THEIR KNOWLEDGE OF THE NEW CHEMICAL OR PLANTS BEING ABUSED IN THEIR BARANGAYS

Table 8 shows the respondents’ knowledge of the presence of emerging chemical/s or plant/s of abuse in their respective areas of residence. Seemingly, Angel’s Trumpet, (Datura Arborea Linneaus) a wild flower with hallucinogenic effects, occupies the first slot (93 or 0.78%), followed by mushrooms that grow on animal dung (―magic mushrooms‖ or psilocybin) (10 or .08%), and Tuba leaves (5 or .04%). Angel’s Trumpet, or ―Talampunay‖ for the Tagalogs and ―Katsubong‖ or ―Katyubong‖ for the Visayans, has been reported in all survey sites except in Region 2. Its reported abuse is highest in Region 8 (47 or 0.40%). It may be of interest to note that 10 or 0.08% of the respondents from the NCR, Regions 7 and 8 have reported the abuse of magic mushrooms. Knowledge of its abuse within the barangay is highest in the NCR with 6 or 0.06%. Knowledge of the abuse of tuba leaves and seeds (common names: ―kamaisa/kamausa‖ among the Tagalogs, ―kamandag‖ among the Visayans and croton oil plants in English) was reported solely in Region 11 (5 or .04%). Its plant belongs to the family of spurge and a genus of herbs and shrubs with stellate-pubescent foliage and small dioecious flowers, usually used to cure rheumatic pains of the legs and wrists and snake bites (pounded fresh leaves as poultice) and also as insecticides. Meanwhile, awareness of the abuse of ―Lagundi‖ (scientific name is Vitex negundo) in the barangay

NCR CAR II IV VII VIII XI CARAGA TOTAL

F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F %

Angel's Trumpet 7 0.058 3 0.025 4 0.033 10 0.083 47 0.392 15 0.125 7 0.058 93 0.775

Comfrey 1 0.008 1 0.008

Magic Mushrooms 6 0.05 1 0.008 3 0.025 10 0.083

Golden guarana seeds 1 0.008 1 0.008

Lagundi leaves 2 0.017 1 0.008 3 0.025

Tuba leaves/seeds 5 0.042 5 0.042

Vulca seal 2 0.017 2 0.017

NEW CHEMICAL/PLANTS OF

ABUSE

Page 20: 2004 National Household Survey

20

20

has been reported by at least 3 respondents – 2 in Region 8 and 1 in CARAGA. This medicinal shrub is intended as a medicinal preparation for treating cough, phlegm, and asthma. Comfrey (Symphytum officinale), another emerging plant of abuse in the barangay, was reported in CAR (1 or .01%). This herbal plant is used to treat skin wounds, insect bites, chafing, and other skin irritations.

Worthy to mention is the abuse of golden guarana seeds (scientific name Paullinia cupana) as

reported in Region 11 (1 or .01%). It is a natural herb, which grows in the rainforests of Asia and America. The seed extracts of guarana have been used for centuries as a potent energy stimulant to maintain stamina and endurance. Furthermore, reports have shown that this herb enhances mood and improves mental clarity and concentration. Guarana seeds come in whole, liquid, and powder form. Guarana, sometimes called as the ―cola of Brazil‖, is extensively used by people throughout the Amazonian forests for its well-known natural ―get up and go‖ properties.

These plants except for golden guarana seeds, which grow in Brazil, can be found in the Philippines.

With the exception of Vulca seal, which is inhaled, all of the plants mentioned are taken orally.

TABLE 9 – DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS ACCORDING TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF CLANDESTINE DRUG LABORATORIES IN THEIR BARANGAYS (N=12,000)

Almost ninety-eight percent (97.54%) do not have knowledge of any clandestine laboratory in their barangays. However, 56 or 0.47% have reported such presence. Only a handful of the respondents have knowledge of drug laboratories in their vicinities with the exception of those from CAR and CARAGA. Respondents from Region 7 have the highest percentage (n=42 or .35%) of awareness on the presence of these laboratories in their areas. This maybe attributed to the reported discovery of the PDEA of 2 clandestine laboratories in Mandaue City, Cebu.

F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F %

Yes 1 0.01 0 0.00 1 0.01 4 0.03 42 0.35 1 0.01 7 0.06 0 0.00 56 0.47

No 2,975 24.79 894 7.45 714 5.95 1,320 11.00 2,146 17.88 750 6.25 2,153 17.94 753 6.28 11,705 97.54

N/S 24 0.20 0 0.00 14 0.12 53 0.44 49 0.41 12 0.10 87 0.73 0 0.00 239 1.99

TOTAL 3,000 25.00 894 7.45 729 6.08 1,377 11.48 2,237 18.64 763 6.36 2,247 18.73 753 6.28 12,000 100.00

II TOTALRESPONSE NCR XI CARAGA

R E G I O N

IV VIICAR VIII

Page 21: 2004 National Household Survey

TABLE 10 - DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS ACCORDING TO THEIR KNOWLEDGE OF THE PLACES WHERE THE CLANDESTINE DRUG

LABORATORIES CAN BE FOUND IN THEIR BARANGAYS (F/N(12,000) x 100=%)

Thirty nine (39) respondents from the Visayas region (37 from Cebu, 1 from Samar, and another from Tacloban) identified the places where the clandestine drug laboratories can be found in their barangays. There were six respondents from Davao, 3 from Laguna, and 1 from Pasig City who reported the presence of clandestine drug laboratories in their areas. Three respondents refused to specify the areas they know.

TABLE 11 – DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS ACCORDING TO THEIR KNOWLEDGE OF THE NUMBER OF CLANDESTINE DRUG LABORATORIES THAT

CAN BE FOUND IN THEIR BARANGAYS (F/N(12,000) x 100=%)

When asked on the number of clandestine drug laboratories they know, the minimum number

given was 1 and the maximum was 5. Respondents from Regions 2, 8, and the NCR have reported

F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F %

Bangkal, Matina, Davao 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.01 0 0.00 1 0.01

Barayco, Bankerohan, Davao 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.01 0 0.00 1 0.01

Camp Cabahog, Cebu 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.01 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.01

Carbon Bato, Cebu 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.01 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.01

Toril, Paras 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 3 0.03 0 0.00 3 0.03

Ermita, Cebu 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.01 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.01

Ma-a, Davao 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.01 0 0.00 1 0.01

Lopez, Cebu 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0.02 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0.02

Mandaue, Cebu 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 31 0.26 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 31 0.26

Octagon, Pasig 1 0.01 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.01

Pasil, Cebu 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.01 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.01

San Jose, Tacloban 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.01 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.01

San Juan, San Pablo, Laguna 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0.02 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0.02

Sta. Maria, Magdalena, Laguna 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.01 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.01

Warwick Barracks, Catbalogan,

Samar 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.01 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.01

Not Specified 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.01 1 0.01 1 0.01 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 3 0.03

TOTAL 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.01 4 0.03 39 0.33 1 0.01 6 0.05 0 0.00 52 0.43

CARAGA TOTALPLACE

R E G I O N

NCR CAR II IV VII VIII XI

F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F %

1 1 0.01 0 0.00 1 0.01 4 0.03 37 0.31 1 0.01 5 0.04 0 0.00 49 0.41

2 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.01 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.01

3 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.01 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.01

5 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.01 0 0.00 1 0.01

TOTAL 1 0.01 0 0.00 1 0.01 4 0.03 39 0.33 1 0.01 6 0.05 0 0.00 52 0.43

If Yes, How Many Drug Laboratories Do You Know? N=12,000

RESPONSE

R E G I O N

NCR CAR II IV VII VIII XI CARAGA TOTAL

Page 22: 2004 National Household Survey

22

22

the presence of at least 1 clandestine laboratory in their respective regions. In Region 11, five respondents reported the presence of at least one and another respondent reported five (5) clandestine drug laboratories.

37 respondents from Region 7 reported to have known at least one clandestine drug laboratory while

two (2) others each reported the presence of 2 and 3 clandestine drug laboratories operating in their

barangays, respectively.

TABLE 12 – DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS BY REGION ACCORDING TO THEIR KNOWLEDGE OF THE PRESENCE OF INJECTING DRUG USERS IN THEIR BARANGAYS

Only 232 (1.93%) of the general respondents admitted to have known injecting drug users (IDUs) in their respective barangays. Among those who responded affirmatively to knowing drug injectors in their barangays, the average number of known cases that they cited was 8, with a minimum of 1 and a maximum of 70 cases. Respondents from Region 7 represented the highest number with 159 (1.33%) followed by Region 8 (25 or 0.21%), and the NCR with 17 or 0.14%.

TABLE 13 - DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS PER REGION ACCORDING TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF

THE ANTI-DRUG CAMPAIGN BEING IMPLEMENTED IN THEIR BARANGAYS (F/N(12,000) x 100=%)

Forty-eight percent of the respondents (48.38%) were aware that anti-drug abuse programs are being implemented in their respective barangays. There were more respondents from the NCR (13.10%), CAR (3.7%), Regions 11 (9.83%), CARAGA (3.88%), and Region 8 (3.09%) who were not aware of any anti-drug campaign being undertaken in their localities while Regions 2 (3.14%), 4 (8.53%), and 7 (11.63%) admitted otherwise.

F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F %

Yes 17 0.14 1 0.01 1 0.01 6 0.05 159 1.33 25 0.21 16 0.13 7 0.06 232 1.93

No 2,937 24.48 893 7.44 706 5.88 1,199 9.99 1,764 14.70 656 5.47 2,112 17.60 746 6.22 11,013 91.78

N/S 46 0.38 0 0.00 22 0.18 172 1.43 314 2.62 82 0.68 119 0.99 0 0.00 755 6.29

TOTAL 3,000 25.00 894 7.45 729 6.08 1,377 11.48 2,237 18.64 763 6.36 2,247 18.73 753 6.28 12,000 100.00

CAR II IV VII

Table 12 - Distribution of Respondents According to their Knowledge of Injecting Drug Users by Region N=12,000

TOTALCARAGARESPONSE NCR

R E G I O N

XIVIII

F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F %

Yes 1,199 9.99 273 2.28 377 3.14 1,024 8.53 1,396 11.63 359 2.99 889 7.41 288 2.40 5,805 48.38

No 1,572 13.10 444 3.70 305 2.54 304 2.53 751 6.26 371 3.09 1,179 9.83 465 3.88 5,391 44.93

N/S 229 1.91 177 1.48 47 0.39 49 0.41 90 0.75 33 0.28 179 1.49 0 0.00 804 6.70

TOTAL 3,000 25.00 894 7.45 729 6.08 1,377 11.48 2,237 18.64 763 6.36 2,247 18.73 753 6.28 12,000 100.00

VIII XI CARAGA TOTALRESPONSE

R E G I O N

NCR CAR II IV VII

Page 23: 2004 National Household Survey

TABLE 14 – DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS PER REGION/CITY/MUNICIPALITY ACCORDING TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE ANTI-DRUG CAMPAIGN BEING

IMPLEMENTED IN THEIR BARANGAYS (N=12,000)

In spite of the conduct of anti-drug campaigns in their areas, majority of the NCR respondents were not aware of such (1,572 or 13.10%), except those from Caloocan City (326 or 2.72%) who reported that their local officials conduct the same. With regard to the Visayas region, majority of the respondents from the cities of Cebu, Carcar, Zamboangita, Tacloban, and Alang alang were aware that their barangay officals undertake anti-drug abuse campaigns with the exception of Dumaguete and Catbalogan. More than half of the respondents in six (6 ) cities/municipalities in Mindanao, namely Davao City and Nabunturan in Region 11, Butuan City, Cabadbaran, Surigao, and Sison in CARAGA were not aware if any such campaign is being undertaken in their barangays.

YES % NO % N/S % TOTAL %

326 2.72 128 1.07 158 1.32 612 5.10

330 2.75 454 3.78 32 0.27 816 6.80

93 0.78 138 1.15 30 0.25 261 2.18

74 0.62 112 0.93 0 0.00 186 1.55

376 3.13 740 6.17 9 0.08 1,125 9.38

1,199 9.99 1,572 13.10 229 1.91 3,000 25.00

167 1.39 274 2.28 162 1.35 603 5.03

70 0.58 77 0.64 15 0.13 162 1.35

29 0.24 64 0.53 0 0.00 93 0.78

7 0.06 29 0.24 0 0.00 36 0.30

273 2.28 444 3.70 177 1.48 894 7.45

61 0.51 38 0.32 0 0.00 99 0.83

202 1.68 75 0.63 11 0.09 288 2.40

4 0.03 46 0.38 1 0.01 51 0.43

110 0.92 146 1.22 35 0.29 291 2.43

377 3.14 305 2.54 47 0.39 729 6.08

422 3.52 77 0.64 26 0.22 525 4.38

San Jose 97 0.81 14 0.12 15 0.13 126 1.05

296 2.47 205 1.71 0 0.00 501 4.18

209 1.74 8 0.07 8 0.07 225 1.88

1,024 8.53 304 2.53 49 0.41 1,377 11.48

1,070 8.92 586 4.88 63 0.53 1,719 14.33

210 1.75 6 0.05 0 0.00 216 1.80

87 0.73 134 1.12 24 0.20 245 2.04

29 0.24 25 0.21 3 0.03 57 0.48

1,396 11.63 751 6.26 90 0.75 2,237 18.64

245 2.04 171 1.43 11 0.09 427 3.56

54 0.45 45 0.38 0 0.00 99 0.83

60 0.50 155 1.29 22 0.18 237 1.98

359 2.99 371 3.09 33 0.28 763 6.36

727 6.06 1,059 8.83 140 1.17 1,926 16.05

76 0.63 26 0.22 12 0.10 114 0.95

52 0.43 31 0.26 22 0.18 105 0.88

34 0.28 63 0.53 5 0.04 102 0.85

889 7.41 1,179 9.83 179 1.49 2,247 18.73

163 1.36 284 2.37 0 0.00 447 3.73

40 0.33 44 0.37 0 0.00 84 0.70

79 0.66 119 0.99 0 0.00 198 1.65

6 0.05 18 0.15 0 0.00 24 0.20

288 2.40 465 3.88 0 0.00 753 6.28

REGION CITY/MUNICIPALITYDo your barangay officials undertake anti-drug abuse campaign?

NCR Caloocan

Manila

Pasig

Pasay

Quezon City

TOTAL

CAR Baguio City

La Trinidad

Bangued

Bucay

TOTAL

II Cabagan

Ilagan

Piat

Tuguegarao

TOTAL

IV Lipa City

San Pablo City

Sta. Cruz

TOTAL

VII Cebu City

Carcar

Dumaguete

Zamboangita

TOTAL

VIII Tacloban City

Alang Alang

Catbalogan

TOTAL

XI Davao City

New Corella

Compostela Valley

Nabunturan

TOTAL

CARAGA Butuan

Cabadbaran

Surigao

Sison

TOTAL

Page 24: 2004 National Household Survey

24

24

TABLE 15 – DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS ACCORDING TO THEIR KNOWLEDGE OF THE TYPE OF ANTI-DRUG PROGRAMS THAT

ARE BEING IMPLEMENTED IN THEIR BARANGAYS (N=12,000)

The programs were classified into two major headings for the purpose of presentation: the Drug Demand Reduction and the Drug Supply Reduction. Topping the list of the drug demand reduction programs being implemented is the drug advocacy campaign done through the conduct of seminars, symposia, and house-to-house visits, and the putting up of posters with anti-drug abuse slogans (12.83%) in their respective barangays. Next is the conduct of regular activities by their Barangay Anti-Drug Abuse Councils (BADACs), GMAC, etc. and the organization of youth groups like Jr. Drug Watch, Kabataan Iwas Droga (KID Listo), and other existing organizations like Kill Droga, etc. Also noted was the holding of regular summer sports fests (5.51%) and other sports activities sponsored by the barangays such as the Liga ng Kabataan, Liga sa Barangay, etc. On the drug supply reduction aspect, barangay clearing activities in coordination with their local police have been undertaken. These include the setting up of checkpoints for individuals as well as vehicles entering and leaving their barangays (n=542 or 4.52%), conduct of drug surveillance and house raids of suspected drug pushers, etc. (n=32 or 0.27%). The assurance of barangay and police visibility on a 24- hour shift was also noted by 217 or (1.81%)

RESPONSE FREQUENCY %

A. Drug Demand Reduction Programs

- Conduct of advocacy campaigns 1,539 12.83

- Conduct of activities in the barangay BADAC/GMAC 902 7.52

- Organization of youth groups 777 6.48

- Conduct of sports activities 661 5.51

- Implementation of curfew hours 44 0.37

- Conduct of livelihood activities 38 0.32

- Provision of free education 14 0.12

- Rehabilitation of drug dependents 4 0.03

- Drug testing of barangay officials 2 0.02

B. Drug Supply Reduction Programs

1. Conduct of barangay clearing activities in

coordination with the police like:

- Setting up of checkpoints 542 4.52

- Conduct of drug surveillance 36 0.30

- Conduct of house raids of suspected drug 32 0.27

pushers, etc.

- Arrest of drug users & solvent boys 10 0.08

- Conduct of buy-bust operations 7 0.06

2. Assurance of barangay and police visibility day and 217 1.81

night such as Barangay Tanods Roving

Others :

Not Specified 1,784 14.87

Not Applicable 5,391 44.93

TOTAL 12,000 100.00

Page 25: 2004 National Household Survey

TABLE 16 - DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS ACCORDING TO THE SUGGESTIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS TO ADDRESS THE DRUG PROBLEM IN THEIR BARANGAYS

The suggestions and recommendations made by the respondents to address the drug problem were clustered into five (5) major categories. The same were grouped according to the process required and the sector of society that could best handle the given suggestions.

Suggestions on the areas of preventive education and treatment and rehabilitation got the highest

frequency with 36.99% of the respondents taking note of the need for the conduct of drug abuse prevention efforts, through massive anti-drug information dissemination campaigns, provision of livelihood programs for the youth and unemployed, and the conduct of regular sports activities.

A significant 25.22% of the total respondents gave suggestions intended for government officials at the

barangay, enforcement, executive, judicial and prosecution levels. Almost 10% of the respondents advised the individuals and their families on how to stay off drugs and

how to achieve a drug-free environment.

RESPONSES FREQUENCY %

A. Preventive Education, Treatment and Rehabilitation

- Provide free education for out-of-school youth 285 2.38

- Commit drug users for treatment and rehabilitation 340 2.83

- Conduct free drug testing 88 0.73

- Conduct symposiums/seminars on drugs 389 3.24

- Heightened/Massive anti-drug campaign 1,235 10.29

- Provide job opportunities, livelihood programs for the youth and the unemployed 1,114 9.28

- Conduct sports activities 664 5.53

- Construction of more rehabilitation centers 32 0.27

- Unite to fight drug abuse 258 2.15

- Encourage and involve the youth to campaign against drug abuse 23 0.19

- Help the youth who are drug users 11 0.09

SUB TOTAL 4,439 36.99

B. Legislation and Policy formulation

- Prioritize the drug abuse problem 156 1.30

- Resolve economic problems in the country 49 0.41

SUB TOTAL 205 1.71

C. Barangay Officials/Law Enforcement/Executive Branch/Judiciary/Prosecution

- Heightened arrest of drug syndicates 55 0.46

- Strictly implement the drug laws without fear and favor 198 1.65

- Barangay officials and household members should undergo drug test 30 0.25

- Police should help in controlling the drug problem,not protecting drug lords,etc. 21 0.18

- Remove officials involved in drugs 97 0.81

- Death penalty/Lethal injection for drug pushers,drug lords,manufacturers,etc. 207 1.73

- Harsh punishments for drug users like no bail,life imprisonment,etc. 39 0.33

- Conduct drug surveillance in the vicinity 226 1.88

- Investigate places where there are large drug incidence 8 0.07

- Arrest the drug pushers, drug protectors, etc. 1,462 12.18

- Undertake buy-bust operations 4 0.03

- Kill/Salvage drug pushers/suppliers 12 0.10

- Dismantle drug laboratories 229 1.91

- Designate narcotics unit in every barangay 68 0.57

- Maintain peace and order 40 0.33

- Assign BSDO officer in every street of the barangay 76 0.63

- Save the user and jail the pusher 14 0.12

- Destroy all confiscated drug paraphernalia 17 0.14

- Isolate/identify the barangay where there is high incidence of drugs 6 0.05

- Give rewards 11 0.09

- Increase salary of barangay tanod/workers 32 0.27

- Implement curfew hours 174 1.45

SUB TOTAL 3,026 25.22

D. Medical and Legal Concerns

- Add toxic substances like poison/cyanide to dangerous drugs and substances 11 0.09

SUB TOTAL 11 0.09

E. Individuals and Families

- Don't try drugs 185 1.54

- Maintain close family ties 9 0.08

- Be gainfully occupied in studies and work 40 0.33

- Stay away from drug pushers 230 1.92

- Avoid the company of bad peers and drug users 37 0.31

- Parents should guide the youth and children 244 2.03

- Instill self-discipline 50 0.42

- Be a concerned citizen by reporting drug users/pushers to the barangay 340 2.83

- Be religious and be a role model 29 0.24

SUB TOTAL 1,164 9.70

F. Not Specified 3,155 26.29

GRAND TOTAL 12,000 100.00

Page 26: 2004 National Household Survey

26

26

B. TABLE 17 - DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF LIFETIME PREVALENT USERS

(those who have tried dangerous drugs at least once in their lifetime including the current users)

(n=2,755 or 23%)

AG E F REQ UE NCY P ERC ENT

10 - 19 794 28.82

20 - 29 1,049 38.08

30 - 44 912 33.10

S EXM ale 2,172 78.84

Fem ale 583 21.16

CIVIL S T ATU S

S ingle 1,303 47.30

M arrie d 947 34.37

Liv e-in 241 8.75

S eparated 220 7.99

W idow/er 44 1.60

H IG HE ST EDUCA TIO NAL A TTAINM EN T

C olleg e Graduate 80 2.90

C olleg e Level 439 15.93

H ig h School G raduate 313 11.36

H ig h School Level 982 35.64

V ocat ional 13 0.47

E leme ntar y Graduate 136 4.94

E leme ntar y Level 669 24.28

O ther s :

N o Formal E duc ation 11 0.40

N ot Specified 112 4.07

G AINF UL O C CUP ATION (IF AN Y)Labor ers 588 21.34

S tudents 367 13.32

S elf- Em ployed 337 12.23

P rivate Em ployees 187 6.79

P ublic T ransport Drivers 137 4.97

G ov ernm ent Em ployees 49 1.78

E nter ta iners 13 0.47

O thers :

Unem ployed 672 24.39

Out -of- School Youth 356 12.92

Not S pec ified 49 1.78

AVE RAG E MO NT HLY FAM ILY IN CO ME Ph p 5 ,093.16 ( US $ 94.32 @ 54.00 exchange rate)

DR UG /S O F C HO IC ES habu 1,795 65.15

M ari juana 927 33.65

R ugby 402 14.59

S olvent 216 7.84

C ough Syr up P reparations 141 5.12

E cs tasy 24 0.87

N albuphine Hydrochloride 13 0.47

O ther Drugs 12 0.44

PLAC E OF RE SIDEN CEU rban 2,206 80.07R ural 549 19.93

Page 27: 2004 National Household Survey

Results of the survey show that, out of the 12,000 respondents that were interviewed, 2,755 or

(22.96%) were lifetime prevalent users. They were predominantly male (2,172 or 78.84%) while their female counterparts composed of 583 (21.16%). Their mean age is 26 years old.

The NCR has the highest number of lifetime prevalent users with (45.59%) followed by Region 7

(14.85%), and Region 11 (8.37%). Meanwhile, CARAGA registered (8.93 %) lifetime prevalent users, (8.31%) Region 8, (5.7%) Region 4, (3.81%) Region 2, and (2.14%) CAR.

The single or unmarried respondents dominated the distribution of lifetime prevalent users with 1,303

or (47.30%) followed by those who are married, living-in, and separated, with 947 or (34.37%), 241 or (8.75%), and 220 or (7.99%), respectively.

With regard to educational attainment, most of these respondents reached high school level with (35.64%). Ranking second (24.28%) are those who reached the elementary level while those who have reached college are on the third slot with (15.93%).

As to the gainful occupation of the total number of lifetime prevalent user-respondents, the laborers

comprised twenty-one percent (21.34%); students represented thirteen percent (13.32%); self-employed made up twelve percent (12.23%). The Public Transport Drivers, Government Employees and Entertainers belong to the bottom three of the distribution. Most of the respondents, though, were unemployed with twenty-four percent (24.39%), and several were Out-of-School youth with almost thirteen percent (12.92%).

More than fifty percent (65.15%) of the total number of lifetime prevalent user-respondents signified

that Shabu was their primary drug of choice; followed by Marijuana with almost thirty-four percent (33.65%) and Rugby with fifteen percent (14.59%). Another inhalant, solvent, was included in the respondents’ drug of choice with 7.84% and cough syrup preparations with 5.12%. Some of the lifetime prevalent users also admitted that Ecstasy and Nalbuphine Hydrochloride are also their drugs of choice.

TABLE 18- DISTRIBUTION OF LIFETIME PREVALENT AND CURRENT USERS

ACCORDING TO PRIMARY REASONS FOR INITIATION TO DRUG USE (n=2,755)

Most of the lifetime prevalent and current users identified the social/peer factors (910 or 33.03%) as

the major reasons for their initiation to drug use. The other reasons given were cravings for drugs/easy availability/‖pleasurable‖ effects of drugs ( 786 or 28.53%), family related problems (461 or 16.73%), personal problems with 174 or (6.32%), economic/financial factors (131 or 4.75%), work-related reasons (34 or 1.23%), medical/health reasons (25 or .91%) and school-related problems with 5 or (.18%). Those who did not have answers comprised 8.31%.

REASONS FREQUENCY %

Social/peer relationships (peer pressure,

unwholesome environment, etc.)910 33.03

Cravings for drugs, easy availability of

drugs/"pleasurable " effects of drugs786 28.53

Family related problems (include separated parents,

sibling rivalry, etc.)461 16.73

Personal problems (such as low self-esteem, means

of escape from problems)174 6.32

Economic/financial problems (poverty,

unemployment, etc.)131 4.75

Work related reasons (due to the nature of work, got

retrenched, etc.)34 1.23

Medical and health problems (depression, pain relief,

obesity, etc.)25 0.91

School related problems (dropped out or stopped

schooling, high academic expectations, etc.)5 0.18

Others :

Not Applicable 77 2.79

Not Specified 152 5.52

TOTAL 2,755 100.00

Page 28: 2004 National Household Survey

28

28

TABLE 19 – DISTRIBUTION OF LIFETIME PREVALENT USERS ACCORDING TO MOST COMMONLY USED DRUGS (n=2,755)

The top five (5) drugs of choice among lifetime prevalent users are Shabu (65.15%),

marijuana (33.65%), rugby (14.59%), solvent (7.84%), and cough syrup preparations (5.12%). At the bottom of the list are Ecstasy (0.87%) and Nalbuphine Hydrochloride (0.47%). Those who did not identify their drug of choice represented (0.44%).

R E G IO N /C IT Y / D R U G S O F A B U S E

M U N IC IP AL IT Y S H A B U M A R IJU A N A E C S T A S Y R U G B Y S O L V E N T O T H E R D R U G S

F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F %

N C R

C A L O O C A N C IT Y 1 1 0 .4 0 8 0 .2 9 1 0 .0 4

M A N IL A 5 8 5 2 1 .2 3 8 5 3 .0 9 5 0 .1 8 1 5 0 .5 4 1 6 7 6 .0 6 2 1 4 7 .7 7 2 0 .0 7

P A S IG 4 1 1 .4 9 3 0 1 .0 9 1 0 .0 4 1 0 .0 4 5 0 .1 8 7 0 .2 5

P A S A Y 2 4 0 .8 7 9 0 .3 3 1 0 .0 4 7 0 .2 5 3 0 .1 1

Q U E Z O N C IT Y 2 5 1 9 .1 1 1 4 1 5 .1 2 7 0 .2 5 2 0 .0 7 1 7 0 .6 2 1 8 0 .6 5 2 0 .0 7

T O T A L 9 1 2 3 3 .1 0 2 7 3 9 .9 1 1 3 0 .4 7 4 0 .1 5 4 4 1 .6 0 1 9 6 7 .1 1 2 1 6 7 .8 4 2 0 .0 7

C AR 0 .0 0

B A G U IO C IT Y 4 0 .1 5 1 9 0 .6 9 4 0 .1 5 2 0 .0 7

B A N G U E D 4 0 .1 5 1 4 0 .5 1

B U C A Y 1 0 .0 4 5 0 .1 8 0 .0 0 0 .0 0

L A T R IN ID A D 3 0 .1 1 1 2 0 .4 4 2 0 .0 7 1 0 .0 4

T O T A L 1 2 0 .4 4 5 0 1 .8 1 6 0 .2 2 3 0 .1 1

R E G IO N I I 0 .0 0

C A B A G A N , IS A B E L A 0 .0 0

IL A G A N 2 4 0 .8 7 6 1 2 .2 1

P IA T , C A G A Y A N 1 0 .0 4 0 .0 0

T U G U E G A R A O C IT Y 1 7 0 .6 2 1 5 0 .5 4 2 0 .0 7 2 0 .0 7

T O T A L 4 2 1 .5 2 7 6 2 .7 6 2 0 .0 7 2 0 .0 7

R E G IO N IV 0 .0 0

L IP A C IT Y 2 6 0 .9 4 1 7 0 .6 2

S A N J O S E 7 0 .2 5 1 0 .0 4

S A N P A B L O C IT Y 5 2 1 .8 9 1 1 0 .4 0 2 0 .0 7 1 0 .0 4

S T A . C R U Z 2 8 1 .0 2 3 8 1 .3 8 1 1 0 .4 0

T O T A L 1 1 3 4 .1 0 6 7 2 .4 3 2 0 .0 7 1 2 0 .4 4

R E G IO N V II 0 .0 0

C A R C A R , C E B U 8 0 .2 9 1 0 .0 4 2 0 .0 7

C E B U C IT Y 2 8 9 1 0 .4 9 6 4 2 .3 2 2 0 .0 7 1 0 .0 4 3 2 1 .1 6 6 6 2 .4 0

D U M A G U E T E C IT Y 1 5 0 .5 4 1 2 0 .4 4 1 0 .0 4 3 0 .1 1 5 0 .1 8 3 0 .1 1

Z A M B O A N G IT A 9 0 .3 3 1 7 0 .6 2 4 0 .1 5 6 0 .2 2

T O T A L 3 2 1 1 1 .6 5 9 4 3 .4 1 3 0 .1 1 4 0 .1 5 4 3 1 .5 6 7 5 2 .7 2

R E G IO N V II I 0 .0 0

A L A N G -A L A N G 1 8 0 .6 5 1 6 0 .5 8 1 0 .0 4 2 0 .0 7

C A T B A L O G A N , S A M A R 6 1 2 .2 1 1 9 0 .6 9 2 7 0 .9 8

T A C L O B A N C IT Y 5 2 1 .8 9 6 2 2 .2 5 2 0 .0 7 9 0 .3 3 1 4 0 .5 1 5 0 .1 8

T O T A L 1 3 1 4 .7 5 9 7 3 .5 2 2 0 .0 7 1 0 0 .3 6 4 1 1 .4 9 7 0 .2 5

R E G IO N X I 0 .0 0

C O M P O S T E L A V A L L E Y 7 0 .2 5 2 9 1 .0 5 1 0 .0 4 1 0 .0 4

D A V A O C IT Y 1 0 3 3 .7 4 1 1 0 3 .9 9 1 0 .0 4 7 0 .2 5 3 9 1 .4 2 2 0 .0 7

N A B U N T U R A N 0 .0 0 5 0 .1 8 1 0 .0 4

N E W C O R E L L A 1 0 .0 4 1 5 0 .5 4 1 0 .0 4 3 0 .1 1

T O T A L 1 1 1 4 .0 3 1 5 9 5 .7 7 1 0 .0 4 1 0 .0 4 1 2 0 .4 4 4 0 1 .4 5 2 0 .0 7

C AR AG A 0 .0 0

B U T U A N 9 3 3 .3 8 5 3 1 .9 2 3 0 .1 1 1 0 .0 4 6 0 .2 2 2 7 0 .9 8

C A B A D B A R A N 2 4 0 .8 7 1 1 0 .4 0 5 0 .1 8

S IS O N 4 0 .1 5 2 0 .0 7 1 0 .0 4

S U R IG A O 3 2 1 .1 6 4 5 1 .6 3 2 0 .0 7 1 0 .0 4 6 0 .2 2 1 2 0 .4 4 1 0 .0 4

T O T A L 1 5 3 5 .5 5 1 1 1 4 .0 3 5 0 .1 8 2 0 .0 7 1 2 0 .4 4 4 5 1 .6 3 1 0 .0 4

G R AN D T O T AL 1 ,7 9 5 6 5 .1 5 9 2 7 3 3 .6 5 2 4 0 .8 7 1 3 0 .4 7 1 4 1 5 .1 2 4 0 2 1 4 .5 9 2 1 6 7 .8 4 1 2 0 .4 4

C O U G H S Y R U P

P R E P A R A T IO N S

N A LB U P H IN E

H Y D R O C H L O R ID E

Page 29: 2004 National Household Survey

PROFILE OF LIFETIME PREVALENT USERS

> AGE : Mean age of 26 years old

> SEX : Ratio of male to female 3:1

> CIVIL STATUS : Single 47.30%

> EDUCATION : High School level 35.64%

GAINFUL OCCUPATION : Laborers 21.34%

AVERAGE MONTHLY FAMILY INCOME :

P 5,093.16

> DRUGS OF CHOICE : Shabu 65.15%

Marijuana 33.65%

> PLACE OF RESIDENCE : Urban 80.07%

Page 30: 2004 National Household Survey

30

30

C. TABLE 20 - DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF CURRENT USERS (n=1,673)

AGE FREQUENCY PERCENT10 - 19 573 34.2520 - 29 607 36.2830 - 44 493 29.47

SEXMale 1,291 77.17Female 382 22.83

CIVIL STATUSSingle 854 51.05Married 486 29.05Separated 159 9.50Live-In 151 9.03Widow/er 23 1.37

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENTCollege Graduate 25 1.49College Level 203 12.13High School Graduate 130 7.77High School Level 605 36.16Vocational 4 0.24Elementary Graduate 88 5.26Elementary Level 535 31.98 Others :No Formal Education 9 0.54Not Specified 74 4.42

GAINFUL OCCUPATION (IF ANY)Laborers 309 18.47Students 201 12.01Self Employed 185 11.06Public Transport Drivers 99 5.92Private Employees 90 5.38Government Employees 17 1.02Entertainers 13 0.78Others: Unemployed 471 Out-of-School Youth 255 15.24 Not Specified 33 1.97

AVERAGE MONTHLY FAMILY INCOME PhP 4,726.65 (US $ 87.53 @54.00 exchange rate)

DRUGS OF CHOICEShabu 1,235 73.82Marijuana 413 24.69Rugby 355 21.22Cough Syrup Preparations 88 5.26Solvent 80 4.78Ecstasy 21 1.26

PLACE OF RESIDENCEUrban 1,450 86.67Rural 223 13.33

Page 31: 2004 National Household Survey

C. TABLE 20 - DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF CURRENT USERS (n=1,673)

Results show that one thousand six hundred seventy three (1,673) of the 2,755 lifetime

prevalent users were still taking drugs at the time the survey was conducted. They have a mean age of 25.04, median of 24 and a mode of 18. They were predominantly male (77.17%) with the female registering (382) or 22.83%. Eight hundred fifty four (854) or 51.05% of them were single, followed by those who are married with four hundred eighty six (486) or 29.05%, and separated with one hundred fifty nine (159) or 9.50%. Most of them were from the urban areas (86.67%). Their top 3 drugs of choice are Shabu (73.82%), inhalants (26%), and Marijuana (24.69%).

The NCR maintains the number 1 slot with (54.03%) of the country’s current users. The

distributions for the other regions are: Region 7 (16.92%), Region 8 (9.56%), Region 9 (8.49%), CARAGA (5.08%), Region 4 (3.05%), Region 2 (2.63%) and CAR (0.24%) Of the total number of current users, majority (605) or 36.16% have attained high school level, closely followed by those who have reached elementary with 535 or (31.98%).

Majority of them were gainfully employed (914 or 54.63%) at that time of the interview. On the first of the list of the nationwide distribution of the current users were the laborers with 309 or (18.47%). Ranking second are the students with 201 or (12.01%), followed by the self-employed with 185 or (11.06%). The least frequency in the distribution of current users were the entertainers with 13 or (0.78%).

TABLE 21 – DISTRIBUTION OF CURRENT USERS BY URBAN/RURAL AREAS ACCORDING TO DRUGS OF CHOICE (n=1,673)

A comparison of the drugs of choice of the current users from the urban and rural areas yielded that Methamphetamine Hydrochloride or Shabu and Marijuana were their top two drugs of choice. There were 1,171 or (69.99%) Shabu users and 356 or (21.28%) Marijuana users in the urban areas while the rural areas have 64 or (3.83%) Shabu users and 57 or (3.41%) Marijuana users. It is interesting to note that there were 80 or 4.78% solvent users recorded in the urban areas while there is none in the rural areas.

F % F %

Shabu 1,171 69.99 64 3.83

Marijuana 356 21.28 57 3.41

Cough Syrup Preparations 75 4.48 13 0.78

Ecstasy 19 1.14 2 0.12

Rugby 337 20.14 18 1.08

Solvent 80 4.78 0 0.00

*Multiple Response

URBAN RURALDRUGS OF CHOICE*

Page 32: 2004 National Household Survey

32

32

TABLE 22 – DISTRIBUTION OF CURRENT USERS BY REGION/CITY/

MUNICIPALITY ACCORDING TO DRUGS OF ABUSE (n=1,673)

Most of the current user-respondents indicated that Shabu was their drug of choice with 1,235 (73.82%), followed by Rugby/Solvent with 435 (26%) and Marijuana with 413 (24.69%). Eighty-eight or (5.26%) said that their choice of drug is the Cough syrup

T Y P E O F D R U G S

REGION/CITY/MUNICIPALITYShabu % MJ %

Cough Syrup

Preparations % Ecstasy % Rugby % Solvent %

NCR

Caloocan City 6 0.36 3 0.18 1 0.06

Manila 481 28.75 56 3.35 11 0.66 5 0.30 176 10.52 79 4.72

Pasig City 26 1.55 18 1.08 1 0.06 1 0.06 4 0.24

Pasay City 15 0.90 6 0.36 5 0.30 1 0.06

Quezon City 157 9.38 57 3.41 13 0.78 1 0.06 14 0.84 1 0.06

Sub Total 685 40.94 140 8.37 30 1.79 7 0.42 196 11.72 80 4.78

C A R

Baguio City 1 0.06 2 0.12 1 0.06

Bangued, Abra 1 0.06

La Trinidad, Benguet 1 0.06 1 0.06

Sub Total 2 0.12 3 0.18 1 0.06 1 0.06

REGION II

Ilagan, Isabela 15 0.90 29 1.73 1 0.06

Tuguegarao City 9 0.54 10 0.60 4 0.24 2 0.12

Sub Total 24 1.43 39 2.33 5 0.30 2 0.12

REGION IV

Lipa City 9 0.54 6 0.36

San Jose, Batangas 5 0.30 1 0.06

San Pablo City 16 0.96 5 0.30 2 0.12

Sta. Cruz, Laguna 15 0.90 7 0.42

Sub Total 45 2.69 19 1.14 2 0.12

REGION VII

Cebu City 217 12.97 44 2.63 20 1.20 4 0.24 48 2.87

Carcar, Cebu 6 0.36

Dumaguete City 10 0.60 1 0.06 1 0.06

Zamboangita, Negros Oriental 7 0.42 8 0.48 5 0.30 2 0.12 11 0.66

Sub Total 240 14.35 53 3.17 26 1.55 6 0.36 59 3.53

REGION VIII

Tacloban City 46 2.75 49 2.93 5 0.30 13 0.78

Alang-alang, Leyte 11 0.66 13 0.78 1 0.06

Catbalogan, Samar 58 3.47 8 0.48 1 0.06 1 0.06 27 1.61

Sub Total 115 6.87 70 4.18 7 0.42 1 0.06 40 2.39

REGION XI

Davao City 51 3.05 35 2.09 4 0.24 2 0.12 36 2.15

New Corella, Davao del Norte 6 0.36 2 0.12

Compostela Valley 5 0.30 10 0.60 2 0.12

Nabunturan 1 0.06

Sub Total 56 3.35 52 3.11 8 0.48 2 0.12 36 2.15

CARAGA

Butuan 33 1.97 13 0.78 4 0.24 1 0.06 12 0.72

Cabadbaran 13 0.78 10 0.60 3 0.18 6 0.36

Sison, Surigao del Norte 2 0.12 1 0.06

Surigao City 20 1.20 13 0.78 4 0.24 2 0.12 3 0.18

Sub Total 68 4.06 37 2.21 11 0.66 3 0.18 21 1.26

T O T A L 1,235 73.82 413 24.69 88 5.26 21 1.26 355 21.22 80 4.78

Page 33: 2004 National Household Survey

preparations. Of the total number of current users, twenty-one (21) admitted to have tried and were still using Ecstasy (1.26%) at the time of the conduct of the survey.

TABLE 23 – DISTRIBUTION OF CURRENT USERS BY REGION

ACCORDING TO THE SOURCE OF DRUGS (F/n(1,673) x 100=%)

The top sources of drugs among the current users were the pushers (42.98%) while friends followed with (33.35%). Ranking next were the stores, hardwares, and relatives, with 6.04%, 3.95%, and 3.47%, respectively. Respondents from Regions 7, 8, and 11 answered that pushers were their source of drugs while those from the NCR, Regions 2, and CARAGA pointed to their friends.

NCR % CAR % II % IV % VII % VIII % XI % CARAGA %

FRIENDS/

PEERS 343 20.50 1 0.06 20 1.20 16 0.96 39 2.33 54 3.23 29 1.73 56 3.35 558 33.35

PUSHERS340 20.32 1 0.06 16 0.96 16 0.96 182 10.88 81 4.84 63 3.77 20 1.20 719 42.98

RELATIVES2 0.12 1 0.06 54 3.23 1 0.06 58 3.47

DRUGSTORE5 0.30 1 0.06 6 0.36

HARDWARE 48 2.87 17 1.02 1 0.06 66 3.95

STORE 76 4.54 8 0.48 12 0.72 3 0.18 2 0.12 101 6.04

OWN

PLANTATION 1 0.06 1 0.06

NOT SPECIFIED 90 5.38 2 0.12 7 0.42 19 1.14 13 0.78 28 1.67 5 0.30 164 9.80

TOTAL 904 54.03 4 0.24 44 2.63 51 3.05 283 16.92 160 9.56 142 8.49 85 5.08 1,673 100.00

SOURCE R E G I O N

TOTAL %

Page 34: 2004 National Household Survey

34

34

TABLE 24– DISTRIBUTION OF CURRENT USERS

ACCORDING TO THE AMOUNT SPENT ON DRUGS (F/n(1,673) x 100=%)

Most of the current users (507 or 30.30%) spend P 100 on drugs per use. Placing second (211 or 12.61%) are those who spend P 200 per use and third (104 or 6.22%) are those who spend P 50 per use.

F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F %

2.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0.12 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0.12

3.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06 0 0.00 1 0.06

4.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06 1 0.06 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0.12

5.00 2 0.12 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 12 0.72 0 0.00 2 0.12 0 0.00 16 0.96

10.00 5 0.30 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 3 0.18 0 0.00 1 0.06 1 0.06 10 0.60

15.00 4 0.24 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 5 0.30 0 0.00 0 0.00 9 0.54

16.00 1 0.06 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06

20.00 46 2.75 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 7 0.42 2 0.12 1 0.06 0 0.00 56 3.35

25.00 40 2.39 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06 1 0.06 42 2.51

30.00 64 3.83 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 3 0.18 3 0.18 0 0.00 70 4.18

35.00 14 0.84 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0.12 0 0.00 0 0.00 16 0.96

40.00 9 0.54 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06 0 0.00 10 0.60

41.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 16 0.96 0 0.00 16 0.96

42.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06 0 0.00 1 0.06

45.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06

50.00 68 4.06 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06 11 0.66 11 0.66 10 0.60 3 0.18 104 6.22

55.00 1 0.06 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06

60.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06

65.00 2 0.12 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0.12

70.00 2 0.12 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0.12

75.00 29 1.73 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06 0 0.00 30 1.79

80.00 2 0.12 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0.12

90.00 2 0.12 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 7 0.42 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 9 0.54

100.00 313 18.71 1 0.06 1 0.06 16 0.96 102 6.10 36 2.15 30 1.79 8 0.48 507 30.30

105.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06

120.00 1 0.06 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06

125.00 37 2.21 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 37 2.21

140.00 1 0.06 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06

150.00 39 2.33 0 0.00 1 0.06 2 0.12 6 0.36 6 0.36 9 0.54 5 0.30 68 4.06

175.00 3 0.18 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06 0 0.00 4 0.24

200.00 119 7.11 0 0.00 4 0.24 9 0.54 34 2.03 27 1.61 10 0.60 8 0.48 211 12.61

225.00 1 0.06 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06

250.00 3 0.18 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06 3 0.18 2 0.12 0 0.00 9 0.54

280.00 1 0.06 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06

300.00 20 1.20 0 0.00 3 0.18 3 0.18 4 0.24 8 0.48 6 0.36 8 0.48 52 3.11

350.00 1 0.06 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0.12

400.00 2 0.12 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06 2 0.12 0 0.00 0 0.00 5 0.30

450.00 1 0.06 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06

500.00 17 1.02 0 0.00 6 0.36 6 0.36 6 0.36 15 0.90 1 0.06 11 0.66 62 3.71

600.00 2 0.12 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0.12

800.00 1 0.06 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06

1,000.00 2 0.12 1 0.06 1 0.06 0 0.00 9 0.54 4 0.24 2 0.12 1 0.06 20 1.20

2,000.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.06

N/S 49 2.93 2 0.12 28 1.67 13 0.78 75 4.48 33 1.97 43 2.57 39 2.33 282 16.86

TOTAL 904 54.03 4 0.24 44 2.63 51 3.05 283 16.92 160 9.56 142 8.49 85 5.08 1,673 100.00

RESPONSE

R E G I O N

NCR CAR VIII XI TOTALIVII VII CARAGA

Page 35: 2004 National Household Survey

It can also be gleaned that the minimum amount spent is P 2 and the maximum is P2,000 per use.

TABLE 25 - DISTRIBUTION OF CURRENT USERS

ACCORDING TO THEIR REASONS FOR CONTINUED DRUG USE (n=1,673)

Responses to the question on the ―Reasons for Continuing Drug Use‖ were clustered

into seven (7) general categories, considered to be push factors to the continued use of drugs. Results showed that cravings for drugs/easy availability of drugs/ ―pleasurable‖ effects of drugs are the most common cause for continued drug use with 443 or (26.48%). Social/peer relationships related factors came in second with 333 or (19.90%). Two hundred forty-five (245) or 14.64% respondents mentioned family-related problems as their reason for continued use of drugs. Personal problems (170 or 10.16%) were also identified along with economic/financial problems (96 or 5.74%), medical/health problems (73 or 4.36%) and work related reasons (34 or 2.03%). Those who did not specify any answer comprised 16.68%.

REASONS FREQUENCY %

Cravings for drugs, easy availability of

drugs/"pleasurable " effects of drugs443 26.48

Social/peer relationships (peer pressure,

unwholesome environment, etc.)333 19.90

Family related problems (include separated parents,

sibling rivalry, etc.)245 14.64

Personal problems (such as low self-esteem, means

of escape from problems)170 10.16

Economic/financial problems (poverty,

unemployment, etc.)96 5.74

Medical and health problems (depression, pain relief,

obesity, etc.)73 4.36

Work related problems 34 2.03

Others :

Not Applicable 93 5.56

Not Specified 186 11.12

TOTAL 1,673 100.00

Page 36: 2004 National Household Survey

36

36

TABLE 26 – DISTRIBUTION OF CURRENT USERS BY REGION/CITY/MUNICIPALITY ACCORDING TO FREQUENCY OF USE (n=1,673)

Relative to the current users’ frequency of drug use, those who reported a weekly drug usage got the highest frequency with 628 (37.54%), following were those who use drugs during occasions, like in parties or social gatherings, with 428 (25.58%), and at third slot are the daily users with 265 (15.84%). For the current users who use drugs everyday, the NCR and Region 7 have the most number with 9.50% and 4.42%, respectively. Weekly users were reported from the NCR (23.73%), Regions 7 (5.02%) and 11 (2.93%). For those who admitted to use drugs during occasions, the NCR still topped the list with 212 (12.67%) and Regions 7 and 8 as having the same at 61 (3.65%).

DAILY % W E E K L Y % M ON TH LY %D uring

Occ asi on% N /S %

NC R

C ALOOC AN 1 0.06 1 0. 06 2 0.12 2 0. 12 3 0.18 9 0.54

M ANILA 112 6.69 311 18. 59 66 3.95 166 9. 92 7 0.42 662 39.57

P ASIG 4 0.24 11 0. 66 6 0.36 10 0. 60 1 0.06 32 1.91

P ASAY 0.00 3 0. 18 3 0.18 4 0. 24 7 0.42 17 1.02

Q U EZ ON CITY 42 2.51 71 4. 24 30 1.79 30 0. 25 11 0.66 184 11.00

T OT AL 159 9.50 397 23. 73 107 0.89 212 12. 67 29 1.73 904 54.03

C AR

B AGUIO C IT Y 1 0. 06 1 0.06 2 0.12

B ANGU ED 1 0. 06 1 0.06

LA T RIN IDAD 1 0.06 1 0.06

T OT AL 0 0.00 0 0. 00 1 0.06 2 0. 12 1 0.06 4 0.24

II

I LAGAN 2 0. 12 6 0.36 17 1. 02 9 0.54 34 2.03

T UG UEGAR AO 5 0. 30 2 0.12 3 0. 18 10 0.60

T OT AL 0 0.00 7 0. 42 8 0.48 20 1. 20 9 0.54 44 2.63

IV

LI PA CI TY 4 0. 24 3 0.18 2 0. 12 2 0.12 11 0.66

S AN JOSE 5 0.30 5 0.30

S AN PABLO 4 0.24 8 0. 48 1 0.06 3 0. 18 1 0.06 17 1.02

S TA . C RU Z 2 0.12 12 0. 72 2 0.12 2 0. 12 18 1.08

T OT AL 6 0.36 24 1. 43 6 0.36 7 0. 42 8 0.48 51 3.05

V II

C AR CAR 2 0. 12 2 0. 12 2 0.12 6 0.36

C EBU C IT Y 72 4.30 75 4. 48 17 1.02 51 3. 05 33 1.97 248 14.82

D UM AGUE TE 1 0.06 3 0. 18 2 0.12 4 0. 24 10 0.60

Z AM BOANG ITA 1 0.06 4 0. 24 10 0.60 4 0. 24 19 1.14

T OT AL 74 4.42 84 5. 02 29 1.73 61 3. 65 35 2.09 283 16.92

VI II

A LA NGALAN G 3 0. 18 6 0.36 4 0. 24 5 0.30 18 1.08

C AT BALOGAN 3 0.18 20 1. 20 15 0.90 35 2. 09 2 0.12 75 4.48

T AC LOBAN 10 0.60 22 1. 32 12 0.72 22 1. 32 1 0.06 67 4.00

T OT AL 13 0.78 45 2. 69 33 1.97 61 3. 65 8 0.48 160 9.56

XI

C OMP O STELA 1 0. 06 3 0.18 4 5 0.30 13 0.78

D AVAO CITY 11 0.66 46 2. 75 29 1.73 16 0. 96 16 0.96 118 7.05

N ABU NT UR AN 1 0. 06 1 0.06

N EW COR ELLA 1 0. 06 3 0. 18 6 0.36 10 0.60

T OT AL 11 0.66 49 2. 93 32 1.91 23 1. 37 27 1.61 142 8.49

CAR AGA

B UT UAN C IT Y 2 0.12 13 0. 78 9 0.54 20 1. 20 44 2.63

C ABAD BARAN 2 0. 12 1 0.06 9 0. 54 3 0.18 15 0.90

S ISON 2 0. 12 2 0.12

S UR IGA O CI TY 5 0. 30 4 0.24 13 0. 78 2 0.12 24 1.43

T OT AL 2 0.12 22 1. 32 14 0.84 42 2. 51 5 0.30 85 5.08

GRAN D TOT AL 265 15.84 628 37. 54 230 13.75 428 25. 58 122 7.29 1, 673 100.00

Table 21 - Distribution of Current U sers by Region/C ities/Municip alities

According To Frequency of Use n = 1,673

F R E Q U E N C Y O F U S E

TOTAL %R EG ION / CI TY /

M UN IC IPA LIT Y

Page 37: 2004 National Household Survey

In the NCR, Manila has the highest percentage of daily (6.69%), weekly (18.59%), monthly (3.95%), and occasional users (9.92%), followed by Quezon City. Region 7, particularly Cebu City, reported the most number of daily, weekly, monthly, and occasional users in the Visayas. Region 11, particularly Davao City, topped the list in terms of the frequency of drug use among the current user respondents’ in Mindanao.

TABLE 27 – DISTRIBUTION OF CURRENT USERS BY REGION ACCORDING TO THE ROUTE/S OF ADMINISTRATION (n=1,673)

Among the current users under study, those who used inhalation as a route of administration represented the highest frequency with one thousand one hundred sixty nine (1,169) or 69.87%, followed by those who take drugs by smoking with one hundred sixty six (166) or 9.92%. Those who combined inhalation and smoking consisted of one hundred forty five (145) or 8.67%. The least mode of usage for the current users was the combination of inhalation, smoking, and injection with only one (1) or .06% admitting to belong to the said category.

The NCR reported the highest percentage of current user-respondents with inhalation, among others, as the route of use at 817 or (48.83%), followed by Regions 7 with 217 or (12.97%) and 11 with 81 (4.84%). Smoking, as a mode of administration for the current users, among others, was highest in the NCR with (96 or 5.74%), Regions 11 with 45 (2.69%), and 7 with 64 or (3.82%), respectively. As to the bi-modal route by inhalation and smoking, the incidence was highest in the NCR (2.57%), Regions 7 (1.91%), and 8 (1.73%). The regions where the mode of use was by injection, among others, are: Regions 7 (0.18%), 8 (0.06%) and 11 (0.06%). There were no reported cases of injecting drug use in the NCR.

NCR % CAR % II % IV % VII % VIII % XI % CARAGA %

INHALATION 750 44.83 1 0.06 9 0.54 25 1.49 17210.28 94 5.62 70 4.18 48 2.87 1,169 69.87SMOKING 45 2.69 0.00 17 1.02 10 0.60 24 1.43 27 1.61 34 2.03 9 0.54 166 9.92

INHALATION

AND

SMOKING 43 2.57 2 0.12 8 0.48 8 0.48 32 1.91 29 1.73 8 0.48 15 0.90 145 8.67ORAL 19 1.14 0.00 1 0.06 6 0.36 9 0.54 1 0.06 3 0.18 3 0.18 42 2.51

ORAL AND

INHALATION 19 1.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 6 0.36 3 0.18 0.00 7 0.42 35 2.09ORAL,

INHALATION

AND

SMOKING 5 0.30 1 0.06 1 0.06 0.00 4 0.24 0.00 2 0.12 3 0.18 16 0.96

ORALLY AND

SMOKING 3 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 6 0.36INHALATION

AND

INJECTION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.12 1 0.06 0.00 0.00 3 0.18INHALATION,

SMOKING

AND

INJECTION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.06 0.00 1 0.06ALL OF THE

ABOVE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.06NOT

SPECIFIED 20 1.20 0.00 8 0.48 2 0.12 30 1.79 5 0.30 24 1.43 0.00 89 5.32TOTAL 904 54.03 4 0.24 44 2.63 51 3.05 28316.92 160 9.56 142 8.49 85 5.08 1,673 100.00

ROUTE

OF USER E G I O N TOTAL %

Page 38: 2004 National Household Survey

38

38

TABLE 28 – DISTRIBUTION OF CURRENT USERS BY REGION AS TO

WHETHER OR NOT DRUG USE BECAME MORE FREQUENT SINCE FIRST USE (n=1,673)

It can be clearly noted from the table that most of the current users (64.26%) said No to the question, ―If Drug Use Became more Frequent since First Use?‖ The NCR ranked 1st with 664 (39.69%) followed by Region 11 with 106 (6.34%), and Region 7 with 98 (5.86%). Only thirty percent (30.66%) confessed to having more frequent use after the first time.

TABLE 29 – DISTRIBUTION OF CURRENT USERS BY REGION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THEY INCREASE THEIR DOSAGE

SINCE FIRST DRUG USE

The table shows that a little less than three fourths (1,090 or 65.15%) of the current users answered No to the question, ―Did you increase your dosage since first drug use?‖ The NCR registered the highest number of negative responses with 701 (41.90%) followed by Regions 7 (5.32%) and 8 (4.96%). Only 504 current users (or 30.13%) admitted to have increased their dosage since their first use.

F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F %

Yes 224 13.39 0 0.00 12 0.72 18 1.08 159 9.50 55 3.29 14 0.84 31 1.85 513 30.66

No 664 39.69 4 0.24 27 1.61 29 1.73 98 5.86 96 5.74 106 6.34 51 3.05 1,075 64.26

Not Specified 16 0.96 0 0.00 5 0.30 4 0.24 26 1.55 9 0.54 22 1.32 3 0.18 85 5.08

TOTAL 904 54.03 4 0.24 44 2.63 51 3.05 283 16.92 160 9.56 142 8.49 85 5.08 1,673 100.00

CARAGA TOTALRESPONSE

REGION

NCR CAR REG2 REG4 REG7 REG8 REG11

F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F % F %

Yes 187 11.18 2 0.12 16 0.96 16 0.96 169 10.10 68 4.06 13 0.78 33 1.97 504 30.13

No 701 41.90 2 0.12 23 1.37 32 1.91 89 5.32 83 4.96 111 6.63 49 2.93 1,090 65.15

N/S 16 0.96 0 0.00 5 0.30 3 0.18 25 1.49 9 0.54 18 1.08 3 0.18 79 4.72

TOTAL 904 54.03 4 0.24 44 2.63 51 3.05 283 16.92 160 9.56 142 8.49 85 5.08 1,673 100.00

REG8 REG11 CARAGA TOTALRESPONSE

REGION

NCR CAR REG2 REG4 REG7

Page 39: 2004 National Household Survey

TABLE 30– DISTRIBUTION OF CURRENT USERS ACCORDING TO THE EFFECTS OF CONTINUED DRUG TAKING AS TO MARITAL

RELATIONSHIPS (F/n(1,673) x 100=%)

Among the current users who are married or have live-in partners, 264 or 15.78% admitted that their drug use did not affect their relationship with their spouses. However, 173 or 10.34% claimed that their spouses or live-in partners left the conjugal home while 39 or 2.33% among the current users themselves left the conjugal place.

It is worthy to note that 43 or 2.57% of the current users claimed that their marital/live-in partners also learned to take drugs and still considered living with them while 3 or 0.18% of the spouses learned to take drugs but left the conjugal home because the current user-respondents can no longer perform their marital responsibilities. One hundred eighty two (182) or 10.88% of the spouses or live-in partners did not abandon their homes in spite of the drug taking behavior of the current user-respondents.

TABLE 31 – DISTRIBUTION OF CURRENT USERS ACCORDING TO THE EFFECTS OF CONTINUED DRUG TAKING ON THEIR STUDIES/SCHOOLING

(n=1,673)

Most of the current user-respondents revealed that ―My parents stopped sending me to school,‖ with 161 (9.62%). Next was those who ―lost concentration, hence stopped studying,‖ with 149 (8.91%). On the third slot was those who ―got low grades but continued my studies,‖ with 119 (7.11%).

Spouse left me because I became irresponsible 173 10.34

I left my spouse to get away from responsibilities 39 2.33

Became irresponsible but still living together 182 10.88

My spouse learned to take drugs and stayed with me 43 2.57

My spouse learned to take drugs and left me 3 0.18

Became irresponsible and my spouse learned to take

drugs6 0.36

OTHERS:

Didn’t affect the relationship 264 15.78

I am single/no live-in partner 717 42.86

Not specified 246 14.70

Total 1,673 100.00

Frequency %RESPONSE

EFFECTS OF CONTINUED DRUG TAKING AS TO

My parents stopped sending me to

school161 9.62

Lost concentration, hence stopped

studying149 8.91

Got low grades but continued my

studies119 7.11

Expelled 23 1.37

OTHERS:

Studying and not affected by drug

use99 5.92

Not Studying 719 42.98

Not Specified 403 24.09

Total 1,673 100.00

TABLE 24 - DISTRIBUTION OF CURRENT USERS ACCORDING TO THE

RESPONSE Frequency %

SCHOOLING

Page 40: 2004 National Household Survey

40

40

CURRENT USERS ACCORDING TO THE EFFECTS OF THEIR DRUG

TAKING ON THEIR TABLE 32 – DISTRIBUTION OF EMPLOYMENT/BUSINESS (n=1,673)

Among the current users who were employed or had businesses, 345 or 20.62% said that their drug taking did not affect them while 161 or 9.62% said that they were affected. Ninety-three current users (or 5.56%) lost interest in their jobs or businesses. For those respondents who were strictly into business, 31 or 1.85% went bankrupt. Six hundred sixty-six current users or 39.81% were unemployed, or not in business at all. A significant number of the current-user respondents, 328 or 19.61% did not specify the effects of their drug use on their jobs or businesses.

TABLE 33 - DISTRIBUTION OF CURRENT USERS ACCORDING TO DRUG

RELATED CRIMES/ SOCIAL DEVIANCY COMMITTED (n=1,673)

Most current users (796 or 47.58%), when asked as to what forms of social deviancy or crimes they have committed as a result of their drug taking, admitted to have pawned personal/family properties. Those who pilfered or stole money from their household members represented 525 or (31.38%) and those who got involved in fights made up (23.91%). Worthy to mention are those who claimed to have been arrested for violating laws or

Business slowed down/affected my work

performance 161 9.62

Loss interest in business/job93 5.56

Business went bankrupt31 1.85

Lost job because I was caught using drugs49 2.93

OTHERS:

Didn't affect my work/business345 20.62

I am not working666 39.81

Not specified328 19.61

TOTAL 1,673 100.00

REASON FREQUENCY %

Crimes/Social Deviancies* Frequency %

Pawned Personal/Family Belongings 796 47.58

Pilfered/Stolen from Household Members 525 31.38

Got Involved in Fights 400 23.91

Got Arrested for Violating the Law 204 12.19

Snatched/Got Involved in Hold-Ups 146 8.73

All of the Above 7 0.42

Not Specified 325 19.43

*Multiple Response

Page 41: 2004 National Household Survey

those who have engaged in social deviant activities such as snatching or getting involved in hold-ups (146 or 8.73%) and other related crimes in order to sustain and maintain their drug use. Multiple acts of crimes and social delinquency have been reported by these current user- respondents.

Table 34 - DISTRIBUTION OF CURRENT USERS ACCORDING TO THE EFFECTS OF THEIR ABSTINENCE FROM DRUGS AFTER HABITUAL USE

(n=1,673)

Changes in appetite and sleeping patterns (39.51%), feelings of lethargy (32.04%), and

mood swings (29.77%) were the top 3 effects the current users have experienced when they abstained from drug taking after habitual use. Still others became restless (19.84%) and manifested strong cravings to use drugs again (19.31%). A small number (3.47%) experienced all of the above effects in the absence of drugs in their body systems.

TABLE 35 - DISTRIBUTION OF CURRENT USERS AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THEY SOUGHT PROFESSIONAL HELP

REGARDING THEIR DRUG USE (n=1,673)

Majority of the current users (86.67%) did not consult a doctor, psychologist or social worker for their drug problem. Only a small percentage (7.65%) sought professional help for their drug use.

EFFECTS FREQUENCY %

Change in appetite and sleeping patterns 661 39.51

Became lethargic 536 32.04

Experienced mood swings 498 29.77

Became restless 332 19.84

Had strong cravings for drugs 323 19.31

All of the above 58 3.47

Others :

No change 203 12.13

Not specified 76 4.54

*Multiple Response

Table DISTRIBUTION OF CURRENT USERS IF HE/SHE CONSULTED

PROFESSIONAL HELP

F % F % F %

NCR 37 2.21 840 50.21 27 1.61

CAR 1 0.06 3 0.18 0 0.00

II 8 0.48 29 1.73 7 0.42

IV 2 0.12 43 2.57 6 0.36

VII 26 1.55 230 13.75 27 1.61

VIII 9 0.54 143 8.55 8 0.48

XI 33 1.97 93 5.56 16 0.96

XIII 12 0.72 69 4.12 4 0.24

TOTAL 128 7.65 1,450 86.67 95 5.68

REGION

Did you consult a doctor, psychologist or social worker?

YES NO N/S

Page 42: 2004 National Household Survey

42

42

TABLE 36 – DISTRIBUTION OF CURRENT USERS ACCORDING TO INTERVENTIONS SOUGHT FOR THEIR DRUG USE (n=1,673)

When asked what interventions they have sought for their drug problem, 289 or

(17.27%) of the current users said that they went to rehabilitation centers for treatment and rehabilitation while 131 or (7.83%) consulted outpatient facilities for counseling. Surprisingly, 1,252 or 74.84% did not specify whom they sought assistance from or what help they availed of for their drug use.

TABLE 37 - DISTRIBUTION OF CURRENT USERS ACCORDING

TO THE POSSIBLE ACTIONS/INTERVENTIONS THEY WOULD TAKE FOR THEIR DRUG PROBLEM (n=1,673)

Among those who admitted to entertaining thoughts of seeking other assistance for their drug problem, the current users responded that firstly, they would most likely turn to their friends (2.33%) before their family members (1.20%), particularly their spouses or parents. Moreover, 16 or 0.96% recognize the importance of the assistance of the barangay officials.

ACTIONS/INTERVENTIONS TAKEN FREQUENCY %

Undergone treatment and rehabilitation at

Rehabilitation Centers 289 17.27

Consulted Out-patient centers for

counseling 131 7.83

Undergone Rehabilitation and consulted

out-patient counseling 1 0.06

Not Specified 1,252 74.84

POSSIBLE ACTIONS/INTERVENTIONS

TO BE TAKENFREQUENCY %

Consultation with Family

Members/Relatives20 1.20

Consultation with Friends/Neighbors 39 2.33

Seek assistance with Barangay Officials 16 0.96

Seek police assistance 2 0.12

Consultation with

Doctor/Psychologist/Social Worker8 0.48

Undergo treatment and rehabilitation at

Rehabilitation Centers1 0.06

Self-Help 1 0.06

OTHERS:

Not Specified 1,127 67.36

Not Applicable 471 28.15

*Multiple Response

Page 43: 2004 National Household Survey

TABLE 38 - DISTRIBUTION OF CURRENT USERS ACCORDING TO THE DEGREE OF CONTROL ON THEIR DRUG USE (n=1,673)

As to the question on the degree of control on their drug use, 240 or (14.35%) of the current users (1,673) said they can fully control their drug use while 106 or (6.34%) admitted that they can not control their drug taking habit. Less than one-fourth or 375 (22.41%), on the other hand, admitted that they are not sure if they can control their drug use.

Table 26 - DISTRIBUTION OF CURRENT USERS ACCORDING TO

THE DEGREE OF CONTROL ON DRUG USE n=1,673

DEGREE OF CONTROL FREQUENCY %

I can slightly control 437 26.12

I can control 437 26.12

Maybe I can control 375 22.41

I can fully control my drug use 240 14.35

I cannot control my drug use 106 6.34

Not Specified 78 4.66

Page 44: 2004 National Household Survey

44

44

PROFILE OF CURRENT USERS

• AGE : Mean age of 25 years old

• SEX : Ratio of male to female 3:1

• CIVIL STATUS : Single 51.05%

• EDUCATION : High School level 36.16%

• GAINFUL OCCUPATION : Laborers 18.5%

• AVERAGE MONTHLY FAMILY INCOME :

P 4,726.65

• DRUGS OF CHOICE : Shabu 73.82%

Inhalants 26%

• PLACE OF RESIDENCE : Urban 86.67%

Page 45: 2004 National Household Survey

Chapter IV

POPULATION ESTIMATES BASED ON 2004 NSO POPULATION PROJECTION

This Chapter presents the projections on the number of lifetime prevalent and current

users, per region, as well as their age groupings based on the 2004 Census-Based Population

Estimates.

“Population Estimates” as used in the survey, refer to the inferred number of drug users classified as lifetime and current users based on the result of the survey vis-à-vis the general population estimates of those from the 10-44 years age bracket.

Population Estimates on the Number of Lifetime Prevalent and Current Users

Based on the results of the survey, the following tables indicate the population estimates of the number of lifetime prevalent and current users interpolated from the 2004 NSO projected population of the 10-44 years old. As seen on these tables, the estimated number of lifetime prevalent and current users was projected to be 11,141,490 or (22.96% of the projected Filipino population. aged 10-44 years, for 2004 and 6,765,773 or (14%), respectively. The formula used for the following computations is:

Formula:

Pe = F x Pp

N

Where: Pe = Population Estimates F = Frequency N = Total No. of Respondents (12,000) Pp = Projected Population

Page 46: 2004 National Household Survey

46

46

TABLE 40 – POPULATION ESTIMATES OF LIFETIME PREVALENT USERS

2004 LIFE-TIME

PREVALENT USERS (F)

PROBABILITY FACTOR

(Pf)

2004 NSO PRO-JECTED POPULA-

TION (Pp)

POPULATION ESTIMATES

(Pe)

NCR

1,256 0.1046666 48,529,211 5,079,387

LUZON

321 0.0267500 48,529,211 1,298,156

VISAYAS

638 0.0531666 48,529,211 2,580,133

MINDANAO

540 0.0450000 48,529,211 2,183,814

TOTAL

2,755 0.2295832 48,529,211 11,141,490

2004 CUR-RENT

USERS (F)

PROBABILITY FACTOR

(Pf)

2004 NSO PRO-JECTED POPULA-

TION (Pp)

POPULATION ESTIMATES

(Pe)

NCR

904 0.0753333 48,529,211 3,655,866

LUZON

99 0.0082500 48,529,211 400,366

VISAYAS

443 0.0369166 48,529,211 1,791,533

MINDANAO

227 0.0189166 48,529,211 918,008

TOTAL

1,673 0.1394165 48,529,211 6,765,773

TABLE 41 – POPULATION ESTIMATES OF CURRENT USERS

Page 47: 2004 National Household Survey

As to the population estimates of current users, it can be seen on the following table, that the National Capital Region has the highest estimates with 541,606, followed by Region VII (169,551), and Region VIII (95,859).

TABLE 42 – REGIONAL ESTIMATES OF CURRENT USERS

Population Estimates By Age Group Based on the results of the survey, the population estimate of lifetime prevalent users is noted to be highest on the age bracket of 20-29 years (4,242,259) followed by those belonging to the 30-44 age group with 3,688,220 as indicated in the following table.

REGION

CURRENT USERS (F)

PROBABILITY

FACTOR (Pf)

REGIONAL PROJECTED POPULATION

(Pp)

RE-

GIONAL ESTI-

MATES (Pe)

NCR

904

0.0753333

7,189,459

541,606

CAR

4

0.0003333

895,408

2,396

II

44

0.0036666

1,735,499

26,361

IV

51

0.0042500

743,677

30,555

VII

283

0.0235833

3,422,049

169,551

VIII

160

0.0133333

2,232,869

95,859

XI

142

0.0118333

3,372,855

85,075

CARAGA

85

0.0070833

1,399,052

50,925

Page 48: 2004 National Household Survey

48

48

AGE GROUP FRE-

QUENCY (F)

PROBABIL-ITY

FACTOR (Pf)

2004 NSO PRO-

JECTED POPULA-TION (Pp)

POPULA-TION ESTI-MATES (Pe)

10 to 19 794 0.0661666 48,529,211 3,211,013

20 to 29 1049 0.0874166 48,529,211 4,242,259

30 to 44 912 0.0760000 48,529,211 3,688,220

2755 0.2295832 11,141,492

On the other hand, as shown on the following table, the population estimates of current users is highest on the age bracket of 20-29 years with 2,454,767 followed by the 10-19 age group with 2,317,270.

TABLE 43—NATIONAL ESTIMATES OF LIFETIME PREVALENT USERS BY AGE GROUPS

AGE GROUP FRE-

QUENCY (F)

PROB-ABILITY

ESTI-MATES

(Pf)

2004 NSO PRO-

JECTED POPULA-

TION (Pp)

POPULA-TION ESTI-MATES (Pe)

10 to 19 573 0.0477500 48,529,211 2,317,270

20 to 29 607 0.0505833 48,529,211 2,454,767

30 to 44 493 0.0410833 48,529,211 1,993,740

1673 0.1394166 6,765,777

TABLE 44—NATIONAL ESTIMATES OF CURRENT USERS BY AGE GROUPS

Page 49: 2004 National Household Survey

Comparison Between the Population Estimates of Lifetime Prevalent Users of the 1999 Household Survey with the 2004 Household Survey

TABLE 40 – POPULATION ESTIMATES OF LIFETIME PREVALENT USERS FOR 2004

TABLE 45 – POPULATION ESTIMATES OF LIFETIME PREVALENT USERS BASED ON THE 1999 DDB HOUSEHOLD SURVEY

N= 16,927

Tables 40 and 46 show the comparative number of lifetime prevalent users based on the 1999 and 2004 survey results. Although the sample populations, other variables, and prevailing conditions are different, this report attempts to come up with a rough estimation of the increasing/decreasing trend in the number of lifetime prevalent users for baseline purposes. It may be well to note that the 1999 survey had 16,927 respondents while the 2004 survey had only 12,000. Hence, it may be best to consider their respective proportions only. It can be noted from the two tables that with the increase in the number of population at risk, there was a similar increase in the number of users in the 2004 survey from (22.11%) in 1999 to (22.95%) in 2004. The National Capital Region experienced an increase of more than half of lifetime prevalent users from (3.8%) in 1999 to (10.5%) in 2004. However, in the Visayas, and Mindanao areas, an opposite trend was recorded. The Visayas, which had (7.27%) lifetime users in 1999 showed a decreasing trend with (5.31%). The case is true with Mindanao, which had (9.05%) lifetime prevalent users in 1999 and only (4.50%) for 2004.

1999 LIFE-TIME PREVA-

LENCE (F)

PROBABILITY FACTOR

(Pf)

1999 NSO PROJECTED POPULATION

(Pp)

POPULATION ESTIMATES (Pe)

NCR 647 0.0382229 43,599,625 1,666,504

LUZON 333 0.0196727 43,599,625 857,722

VISAYAS 1,231 0.0727240 43,599,625 3,170,739

MINDANAO 1,532 0.0905062 43,599,625 3,946,036

TOTAL 3,743

0.2211258 43,599,625 9,641,002

2004 LIFETIME PREVALENT USERS (F)

PROBABILITY FACTOR

(Pf)

2004 NSO PRO-JECTED POPU-

LATION (Pp)

POPULATION ESTIMATES (Pe)

NCR 1,256 0.1046666 48,529,211 5,079,387

LUZON 321 0.0267500 48,529,211 1,298,156

VISAYAS 638 0.0531666 48,529,211 2,580,133

MINDANAO 540 0.0450000 48,529,211 2,183,814

TOTAL 2,755 0.2295832 48,529,211 11,141,490

2004 CUR-RENT USERS

(F)

PROBABILITY FACTOR

(Pf)

2004 NSO PRO-JECTED POPU-

LATION (Pp)

POPULATION ESTIMATES (Pe)

NCR 904 0.0753333 48,529,211 3,655,866

LUZON 99 0.0082500 48,529,211 400,366

VISAYAS 443 0.0369166 48,529,211 1,791,533

MINDANAO 227 0.0189166 48,529,211 918,008

TOTAL 1,673 0.1394165 48,529,211 6,765,773

Page 50: 2004 National Household Survey

50

50

Chapter V

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This Chapter briefly summarizes the results of the survey, presents the Conclusion derived from them,

and then spells out the recommendations raised from these results.

Summary of Findings

The survey aimed to determine the number and national estimates of lifetime prevalent and current users in the country, the patterns of drug abuse, the knowledge and perceptions of the respondents on some concerns on drug use. A. Profile of the General Respondents

A total of 12,000 respondents, (3,000 each per survey region) from four (4) survey sites representing the National Capital Region, Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao were included in the survey and were interviewed in their respective households. They were randomly selected in their barangays. The age range of the respondents at the time of the survey was between 10-44 years old, with a mean age of 25.2 years. They have reached at least the high school level (31.32%) and were gainfully occupied at that time (70.86%), with the students comprising the bulk of the general respondents (28.21%). They have an average monthly family income of Php 5,577 (US $103.28). Majority of the respondents were from the urban areas (88.38%).

The respondents identified poverty (87.01%), unemployment (79.10%), and drug abuse (67.31%) as

the top three problems of the country and their respective barangays. Generally, 33.46% of the respondents considered drug abuse as a slight problem in their respective barangays. Respondents, meanwhile, from Region 2 and the CARAGA perceived drug abuse as not a problem.

Most of the respondents claimed that 7,905 or (65.88%) they have no knowledge of any drug pusher

within their barangays. Meanwhile, 62.05% were aware of the presence of drug users in their areas with the NCR as having the largest percentage of known drug users with (18.38%), followed by Region 7 (13.22%) and Region 11 (11.09%). According to the respondents from CAR and Region 2, they do not know of any drug user in their barangays.

As to the knowledge of the most commonly used drugs in their localities, Methamphetamine

Hydrochloride (53.25%), Marijuana (35.11%), and Rugby (31.22%) are on top of the list. Shabu is the number 1 drug of choice in the NCR and Regions 4, 7, 8, and CARAGA. Marijuana ranks first in CAR (1.49%) and Region 11 (8.07%). The use of Methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA or ecstasy) and Nalbuphine Hydrochloride (Nubain) was also reported nationwide. A small percentage of the respondents from the NCR, Regions 2, and 11 reported knowledge of Cocaine abuse.

Regarding their knowledge of the emerging chemical/plants of abuse in their localities, the respondents

identified Angel’s trumpet (Datura Arborea Linneaus, Talampunay, katsubong or katyubong) as number 1 with (.78%), followed by magic mushrooms (psilocybin) with (.08%) and tuba leaves with (.04%). The abuse of talampunay is highest in Region 8 (.40%) and was reported in all the survey sites. On the other hand, the abuse of magic mushrooms appears to be popular in the NCR, Regions 7 and 8. The abuse of tuba leaves was reported solely in Region 7 (.042%). Other plants reportedly being abused are ―lagundi‖ or (Vitex negundo) in Region 8 and CARAGA, comfrey (Symphytum officinale) in CAR, and the golden guarana seeds (Paullinia cupana), also known as the ―cola of Brazil‖, in Region 11. These plants are taken orally and grown in the Philippines except for the golden guarana seeds. Vulca seal, a roof cement, was reported to be abused (by inhalation) in Region 8.

Page 51: 2004 National Household Survey

As to awareness of the presence of clandestine drug laboratories in their localities, most of the respondents (97.54%) claimed that they do not have knowledge of such in their barangays. Respondents from Region 7 have the highest percentage (.37%) among those who reported knowing of the presence of clandestine laboratories in their areas. This maybe attributed to the reported discovery of the PDEA of 2 clandestine laboratories in Mandaue City, Cebu.

Regarding the places where the clandestine drug laboratories can be found in their barangays, thirty-

nine (39) respondents (37 from Cebu, 1 from Samar, and another from Tacloban) identified such in the Visayas region. There were six respondents from Davao, 3 from Laguna, and 1 from Pasig City who reported the presence of clandestine drug laboratories in their areas. Three respondents refused to specify the areas they know.

Respondents from Regions 2, 8, and the NCR have reported the presence of at least 1 clandestine

drug laboratory in their respective regions. Five respondents from Region 11 reported the presence of at least 1 clandestine drug laboratory while another claimed that he knew of 5 clandestine laboratories in the same region.

Only 1.93% of the total respondents admitted to knowing about the presence of Injecting Drug Users

(IDUs) in their respective barangays, although there were reports of such coming from all the regions covered by the survey. Respondents from Region 7 represented the highest number with (1.33%) followed by Region 8 (.21%), and the NCR with (.14%).

Forty-eight percent of the respondents (48.38%) were aware that anti-drug abuse programs are being

implemented in their respective barangays. There were more respondents from the NCR (13.10%), CAR (3.7%), Regions 11 (9.83%), and CARAGA (3.88%) who were not aware of any anti-drug campaign being undertaken in their localities while Regions 2 (3.14%), 4 (8.53%), 7 (11.63%), and 8 (2.99%) admitted otherwise.

Topping the list of the drug demand reduction programs being implemented in the barangay level is the drug advocacy campaign done through the conduct of seminars, symposia, and house-to-house visits, and the putting up of posters with anti-drug abuse slogans (12.83%) in their respective barangays. Next is the conduct of regular activities by their Barangay Anti-Drug Abuse Councils (BADACs), GMAC, etc. and the organization of youth groups like Jr. Drug Watch, Kabataan Iwas Droga (KID Listo), and other existing organizations like Kill Droga, etc. The holding of regular summer sports fests (5.51%) and other sports activities sponsored by the barangays such as the Liga ng Kabataan, Liga sa Barangay, etc. was also noted. Barangay clearing activities in coordination with their local police were also undertaken. These include the setting up of checkpoints for individuals as well as vehicles entering and leaving their barangays (542 or 4.52%), conduct of drug surveillance and house raids of suspected drug pushers, etc. (32 or .27%). The assurance of barangay and police visibility on a 24- hour shift was also observed by 217 or (1.81%).

Suggestions on the areas of preventive education and treatment and rehabilitation got the highest frequency with 36.99% of the respondents taking note of the need for the conduct of drug abuse prevention efforts, through massive anti-drug information dissemination campaigns, provision of livelihood programs for the youth and unemployed, and the conduct of regular sports activities. A significant 25.22% of the total respondents gave suggestions intended for government officials at the barangay, enforcement, executive, judicial and prosecution levels. Almost 10% of the respondents advised the individuals and their families on how to stay off drugs and how to achieve a drug-free environment. B. Profile of the Lifetime Prevalent Users

Among the total respondents, 2,755 were identified to be lifetime prevalent users, representing 22.96%, and having a mean age of 26 years. They were predominantly male (2,172) or 78.84%, single (1,303) or 47.30% and have reached the high school level (35.64%). One thousand six hundred seventy-eight (1,678) or 60.91% were gainfully employed with an average family monthly income of P5,093.16. The laborers top the list of the workers group with 588 or (21.34%). Their top three (3) drugs of choice were Methamphetamine

Page 52: 2004 National Household Survey

52

52

Hydrochloride (65.15%), Marijuana (33.65%), and inhalants (22.43%). They live mostly in the urban areas of the country (80.07%).

The NCR has the highest number of lifetime prevalent users with (45.59%) followed by Region 7

(14.85%), and Region 11 (8.37%). Meanwhile, CARAGA registered (8.93 %) lifetime prevalent users, Region 8 (8.31%), Region 4 (5.7%), Region 2 (3.81%) and CAR (2.14%)

Most of the lifetime prevalent and current users identified the social/peer factors (910 or 33.03%) as the major reasons for their initiation to drug use. The other reasons given were cravings for drugs/easy availability/‖pleasurable‖ effects of drugs ( 786 or 28.53%), family related problems (461 or 16.73%), personal problems with 174 or (6.32%), economic/financial factors (131 or 4.75%), work-related reasons (34 or 1.23%), medical/health reasons (25 or .91%) and school-related problems with 5 or (.18%). Those who did not have answers comprised 8.31%. C. Profile of the Current Users

A total of 1,673, out of the 2,755 lifetime prevalent users, were determined to be still taking drugs at the time of the interview. They have a mean age of 25 years old, mostly males (77.17%) and single (51.05%). They were able to reach the high school level of education (36.16%), gainfully occupied (54.63%) where the majority are again the laborers (18.47%). Consistently, Methamphetamine Hydrochloride (73.82%) is the top drug of choice but the inhalants (26%) have overtaken Marijuana (24.69%), as the 2nd favorite drug of abuse of the current users who come mostly from the urban areas (86.67%). Of the total number of current users, 21 or (1.26%) admitted to have tried and were still using ecstasy at the time of the survey. There were 80 or (4.78%) solvent users recorded in the urban areas while there is none in the rural areas.

The NCR maintains the number 1 slot with (54.03%) of the country’s current users. The distribution for

the other regions is: Region 7 (16.92%), Region 8 (9.56%), Region 9 (8.49%), CARAGA (5.08%), Region 4 (3.05%), Region 2 (2.63%) and CAR (0.24%)

Most of the current users (507 or 30%) spend P 100 on drugs per use. Placing second (211 or 12.61%)

are those who spend P 200 per use and last (104 or 6.22%) are those who spend P 50 per use. The highest amount spent was P2,000.00 while P2.00 was the minimum.

The top sources of drugs among the current users were the pushers (42.98%) while friends followed

with (33.35%). Ranking next were the stores, hard wares, and relatives, with 6.04%, 3.95%, and 3.47%, respectively. Respondents from Regions 7, 8, and 11 answered that pushers were their source of drugs while those from the NCR, Regions 2, and CARAGA pointed to their friends.

Cravings for drugs/easy availability/‖pleasurable‖ effects of drugs were the most common causes for continued drug use with 443 or (26.48%). Social/peer -related reasons came in second with 333 or (19.90%). Two hundred forty five (245) or 14.64% of the current users mentioned family problems as their prominent reason for continued use of drugs. School related problems were not identified as factors for continued drug use with zero response but work-related reasons were mentioned by 2.03%.

Relative to the current users’ frequency of drug use, those who reported a weekly drug usage got the

highest frequency with 628 (37.54%), following were those who use drugs during occasions, like in parties or social gatherings, with 428 (25.58%), and at third slot are the daily users with 265 (15.84%). For the current users who use drugs everyday, the NCR and Region 7 have the most number with 9.50% and 4.42%, respectively.

Among the current users, those who used inhalation as a route of administration represented the

highest frequency with one thousand one hundred sixty nine (1,169) or 69.87%, followed by those who take drugs by smoking with one hundred sixty six (166) or 9.92%. Those who combined inhalation and smoking consisted of one hundred forty five (145) or 8.67%. The least mode of usage for the current users was the combination of inhalation, smoking, and injection with only one (1) or .06% admitting to belong to the said category.

Page 53: 2004 National Household Survey

Only thirty percent (30.66%) of the current users confessed to having more frequent use after the first

time while almost a similar number (30.13%) admitted to have increased their dosage since their first use. Among the current users who are married or have live-in partners, 264 or 15.78% admitted that their

drug use did not affect their relationship with their spouses. However, 173 or 10.34% claimed that their spouses or live-in partners left the conjugal home while 39 or 2.33% among the current users themselves left the conjugal place. It is worthy to note that 43 or 2.57% of the current users claimed that their marital/live-in partners also learned to take drugs and still considered living with them while 3 or 0.18% of the spouses learned to take drugs but left the conjugal home because the current user-respondents can no longer perform their marital responsibilities.

Most of the current user-respondents 161 (9.62%) revealed that their parents stopped from sending

them to school. Next were those who lost concentration so they had to stop studying with 149 (8.91%). On the third slot were those who got low grades but still continued with their studies with 119 (7.11%).

Most current users (796 or 47.58%) admitted to having pawned some personal/family properties. Those

who pilfered or stole money from their household members represented 525 or (31.38%) and those who got involved in fights made up (23.91%). About (146 or 8.73%) claimed to have been arrested for violating laws or those who have engaged in social deviant activities such as snatching or getting involved in hold-ups and other related crimes in order to sustain and maintain their drug use.

Changes in appetite and sleeping patterns (39.51%), feelings of lethargy (32.04%), and mood swings (29.77%) were the top 3 effects the current users have experienced when they abstained from drug taking after habitual use. Still others became restless (19.84%) and manifested strong cravings to use drugs again (19.31%). A small number (3.47%) experienced all of the above effects in the absence of drugs in their body systems.

Majority of the current users (86.67%) did not consult a doctor, psychologist or social worker for their drug problem. Only a small percentage (7.65%) sought professional help for their drug use.

When asked what interventions they have sought for their drug problem, 289 or (17.27%) of the current users said that they went to rehabilitation centers for treatment and rehabilitation while 131 or (7.83%) consulted outpatient facilities for counseling. Surprisingly, 1,252 or 74.83% did not specify whom they sought or what help they availed of for their drug use.

Among those who admitted to entertaining thoughts of seeking other assistance for their drug problem,

the current users responded that firstly, they would most likely turn to their friends (2.33%) before their family members (1.2%), particularly their spouses or parents. Moreover, 16 or 0.96% recognize the importance of the assistance of the barangay officials.

Two hundred and forty or (14.35%) of the current users (1,673) said they can fully control their drug use

while 106 or (6.34%) admitted that they can not control their drug taking habit. Less than one-fourth or 375 (22.41%), on the other hand, admitted that they are not sure if they can control their drug use. D. Projections

Based on the results of the survey and as interpolated from the 2004 NSO projected population of the 10-44 years old, 14% of the Filipinos aged 10-44 years old++ is on drugs (Current users - those who were taking drugs during the last six (6) months prior to, and at the time of the conduct of the interview).

Among the 11,141,490 belonging to the 10-44 age group in 2004 who have tried drugs at least once in

their lifetime, (4,375,717) has since stopped drug use and only (6,765,773) remained to be on drugs at the time of the interview (current users).

Page 54: 2004 National Household Survey

54

54

With regard to the regional estimates of lifetime prevalent and current users, the National Capital Region ranks No. 1 with the most number of estimated lifetime prevalent users (752,496), followed by Region VII (116,635), and Region XI (82,634). The population estimate of lifetime prevalent users is noted to be highest on the age bracket of 20-29 years (4,242,259) followed by those belonging to the 30-44 age group with 3,688,220. The population estimate of current users is highest on the age bracket of 20-29 years with 2,454,767 followed by the 10-19 age group with 2,317,270. Conclusions Based on the foregoing findings, the following conclusions were drawn:

1. Drug abuse is considered a problem in the country and is closely linked with poverty, unemployment, and increasing population but is more pronounced in the urban areas.

2. Methamphetamine Hydrochloride remains to be the top drug of choice in the country. However,

Marijuana and inhalants vie for the second place for current users. Inhalant abuse is becoming more popular among the urban youth.

3. Drug users continue to explore on alternate chemicals/plants of abuse.

4. Injecting drug users are common in Region 7.

5. The unemployed and the unskilled laborers are high risk to drug use.

6. Cravings for drugs/easy availability/‖pleasurable‖ effects of drugs are the top triggers for continuation

of drug use. Pushers and friends are the main sources of dangerous drugs.

7. As a drug user goes deeper into the drug problem, his monthly family income declines.

8. Most current users take drugs weekly with inhalation as the main route of drug administration.

9. Drug taking has negative effects on the marriage, studies and employment/business of the drug users and leads them to commit crimes or socially deviant behavior.

10. The chances that a person who has tried drugs to continue the habit is 60.7%.

11. Abstinence from drugs after habitual use results to physical and psychological changes.

12. Most drug users refuse to seek professional help. Only a small percentage of drug users go to rehabilitation centers or outpatient centers for treatment and counseling.

13.Drug users are more likely to turn to their friends instead of their family members for their drug

problem.

14. There is an increase in both the number of current users in the country with NCR as the number one in the distribution followed by Regions 7 and 11.

Page 55: 2004 National Household Survey

Recommendations:

In the light of the afore-mentioned findings and conclusions, the following recommendations are hereby raised:

On Policy Formulation and Program Implementation

1. Propose formulation of policies that would strengthen the drug abuse prevention and control program by linking it to the government’s anti-poverty, population, unemployment, and housing programs.

2. Strengthen the implementation of the drug supply and drug demand reduction programs of the

government, with emphasis on the urban areas, specifically in the NCR, Regions 7, 8, and 11.

On Supply Reduction

3. For the PDEA and other drug law enforcement agencies, to validate and appropriately act upon the intelligence information gathered from this survey regarding the presence of drug users, pushers, and clandestine drug laboratories in the barangays mentioned.

4. Sustain the intensive and relentless interdiction offense of the PDEA on Shabu, Marijuana, and other drugs of abuse as well as the clandestine drug laboratories.

5. Strictly implement the control mechanisms for the use, handling, and sale of inhalants and injectable

anesthetics. If warranted, review and/or amend of the existing policies to make them more receptive to the present conditions.

6. For the concerned Government Organizations (GOs), the NGOs as well as the civil society, to closely

monitor the cultivation and misuse of possible emerging chemical/plants of abuse and report the same to the proper authorities for appropriate action.

On Demand Reduction 7. Implement massive advocacy campaigns geared toward encouraging drug users to seek the appropriate

intervention. 8. Advocate an appreciable, aggressive, full-blast, and mass-based information campaign so that the general

public would have the appropriate and correct knowledge on drugs and a better understanding of the law. 9. Heighten the preventive drug education programs targeting the family, the school, the formal and informal

sectors of the workplace, the out-of-school youth, and the unemployed in order to guarantee the development of life-coping skills for the vulnerable individuals for them to be able to withstand the threat and lure of drug use in the face of stress.

10. For the DDB, the PDEA and other allied government and private organizations, to continue with their

efforts aimed at eliminating the drug problem as it brings disastrous and irreversible damage not only to the individual user and his family but also to the entire society, in general.

Page 56: 2004 National Household Survey

56

56


Recommended