As a result of government restrictions and the rain that began in the last few days, the number of firecracker-related injuries during the New Year celebration for 2019 dropped 68 percent to only 139 cases from last year’s 428, Health Secretary Francisco Duque III said Tuesday.
READ: 43 injured 3 days into New Year, says DOH
“This is the biggest reduction in fireworks-related injuries. Remember there were also times in the past that it was also raining, but the injuries were high,” he said.
At a news conference at the East Avenue Medical Center in Quezon City, Duque said President Rodrigo Duterte’s executive order limiting the use of firecrackers to community fireworks displays was a big factor in the decline.
The EO prohibits residential and personal use of fireworks and restricts their use to community fireworks zones.
“Nature, this time, took the side of DOH. It has been raining in the past several days and unrelentingly so this also contributed on the substantive reduction of fireworks-related injuries,” Duque added.
No stray bullet injuries or deaths were recorded this year.
Of the 139 firecracker-related injuries, two were due to ingestion. Five cases resulted in amputation, and 36 cases caused eye injuries.
The regions with the most number of firecracker-related injuries were the National Capital Region (53 cases), Western Visayas (26 cases), Central Visayas (13 cases), Central Luzon (10 cases) and Calabarzon (10 cases).
Duque said the firecrackers which caused the most injuries include were (30 cases), boga (16 cases), piccolo (15 cases), lusis (eight cases) as well as five star (seven cases) and triangle (seven cases).
Duque said the number of injuries might rise yet due to late reports from the regions.
READ: Firecracker injuries mounting
The report said 64 percent of the victims were active users of firecrackers, while 36 percent were bystanders.
Duque said he supports a total ban on firecrackers but said the government would first set up livelihood programs for people who would be hurt by such a ban.
“We cannot be reckless. We have to be clear about the alternative livelihood programs for people who will be displaced because of the ban. That is the more compelling reason that we need to look into,” he said. With PNA
