The graph illustrates the percentage of heavy SSBs drinkers among the respondents.

Moreover, it shows that most of the

respondents are heavy-drinkers of Sugar-sweetened Beverage, as evidenced by the 51%; on the other hand, 49% of the
respondents are moderate SSB drinkers. To resonate, the high consumption of sugar sweetened beverages among respondents,
which you can refer to Kangen Water Philippines (2014), in which their study showed that Philippines has an increase of 150%
consumption between 1993 to 2003 in terms of SSB-intake with an average of one serving per day. Furthermore, it was even
reported that the country consumed 151 8-ounce servings of coke per capita annually, which is way above the global average of 77
servings.

The graph shows the percentage of Pre-TRAIN law SSB-consumption. Moreover, it illustrates the frequency of SSBs
consumption before the excise tax were added to its price, it presents that most of the students consume SSBs twice a week with a
percentage of 32% which is higher than consuming once a week which is only 31%, followed by thrice a week with a percentage of
24% and lastly, 4-7 times a week got only 12%. This means that before the implementation of excise tax, people are used to buy
SSBs moderately.
The table presents the TRAIN Law Indicator of Spending Comparison number 1. The data above shows the difference of data collected in the Likert scale of
the second part of the questionnaire. In question 2.1 there are 53 participants that strongly agree, 173 participants that agree, 73 participants that
disagree, and 22 participants that strongly disagree. On the other hand, in question 2.7 there are 41 participants that strongly agree, 223 participants that
agree, 32 participants that disagree, and 25 participants that strongly disagree. The graph shows that over 70.40% of the respondents purchase sugar
sweetened beverages before the implementation of TRAIN Law. Furthermore, when the law was in effect the graph shows that over 82.24% of the
respondents still purchase SSBs despite the increase of price. However, there is also a presentation that there were also respondents that do not purchase
these products after the price increase as evident in the 17.76% participants that disagreed and strongly disagreed. Although there is a difference between
the two data majority of the respondents agreed that they still purchase these products implicating that although there is a minority most consumers in the
market purchase SSBs. Thus the effect of TRAIN Law as regards to the spending comparison has no significant difference. Therefore, when TRAIN Law was in
effect and increased prices in sugar sweetened beverages, it showed that people are still purchasing these goods as referenced to the 41 participants that
strongly agree and the 223 participants that agree that they still purchase these goods.

ANOVA

The table presents the TRAIN Law Indicator of Spending Comparison number 2. The data above shows the difference between the price of Sugar Sweetened
Beverages before the implementation of TRAIN Law and after its implementation as regards to the budget of consumers. As observed, in 2.2 there are 69
respondents that strongly agree, 213 respondents that agree, 30 respondents that disagree, and 9 respondents that strongly disagree. Consequently, in 2.8
there are 36 respondents that strongly agree, 202 respondents that agree, 65 respondents that disagree, and 18 respondents that strongly disagree. The
graph of 2.2 illustrates that 87.85% of the respondents strongly agree and agree that SSBs are within their budget pre-TRAIN Law. Moreover, the graph also
shows that 12.15% of the respondents disagree and strongly disagree that SSBs are within their budget pre-TRAIN Law. Comparing the data from the graph
of 2.2 the data in the graph of 2.8 shows that 74.14% of the respondents strongly agree and agree that SSBs are within their budget post-TRAIN Law.
Furthermore, the graph also shows that 25.86% of the respondents disagreed and strongly disagreed that SSBs are within their budget post-TRAIN Law.
Thus, as referenced to the graph above there is a significant difference between the pre and post TRAIN Law in regards to the budget of consumers. This is
seen in the 13.71% decrease of strongly agree and agree response and the 13.71% increase in the disagree and strongly disagree response of the post and
pre TRAIN Law.
The table presents the TRAIN Law Indicator for Frequency number 1. The data presented above shows the difference between the frequency to purchase
Sugar Sweetened Beverages before and after the implementation of TRAIN Law. As shown in 2.3 there are 38 respondents that strongly agree, 113
respondents that agree, 129 respondents that disagree, and 41 respondents that strongly disagree the the usually purchase SSBs pre-TRAIN Law.
Conversely, in 2.9 there are 35 respondents that strongly agree, 163 respondents that agree, 93 respondents that disagree, and 30 respondents that
strongly disagree

The table presents the TRAIN Law Indicator of Spending Comparison number 2. The data above shows the difference between the price of Sugar Sweetened
Beverages before the implementation of TRAIN Law and after its implementation as regards to the budget of consumers. As observed, in question 2.2 there
are 69 respondents that strongly agree, 213 respondents that agree, 30 respondents that disagree, and 9 respondents that strongly disagree. Consequently,
in question 2.8 there are 36 respondents that strongly agree, 202 respondents that agree, 65 respondents that disagree, and 18 respondents that strongly
disagree. The graph of 2.2 illustrates that 87.85% of the respondents strongly agree and agree that SSBs are within their budget pre-TRAIN Law. Moreover,
the graph also shows that 12.15% of the respondents disagree and strongly disagree that SSBs are within their budget pre-TRAIN Law. Comparing the data
from the graph of 2.2 the data in the graph of 2.8 shows that 74.14% of the respondents strongly agree and agree that SSBs are within their budget post-
TRAIN Law. Furthermore, the graph also shows that 25.86% of the respondents disagreed and strongly disagreed that SSBs are within their budget post-
TRAIN Law. Thus, as referenced to the graph above there is a significant difference between the pre and post TRAIN Law in regards to the budget of
consumers. This is seen in the 13.71% decrease of strongly agree and agree response and the 13.71% increase in the disagree and strongly disagree
response of the post and pre TRAIN Law.

The Table
the

The Table