The large proportion (38.6 %) of households perceived reduced source as a reason for their low level of dependence on wild foods.
Overall, lesser proportion of the indigenous (11.2 %) than the non-indigenous (34.1 %) ethno-culture groups reported one or more of the five reasons for their low level of dependence on wild foods.
The fact that the majority of households (56.4 %) reported reduced sources of wild foods (38.6 %) and wild foods have currently vanished (17.8 %) as reasons for their low level of dependence on wild foods implies that households in the study area wanted to rely on wild foods for making their living but such a desire was affected by diminishing and vanishing sources of wild foods.
Therefore, the odds of being moderately addicted to Khat compared to a low level of dependence increased by a factor of 1.67 for those who live in rural areas compared to living in urban areas, after controlling for additional variables in the model.
13.2% of the patients were rated as having a very low level of nicotine dependence, 17.2% as having low dependence, 20.5% medium, 39.1% high and 9.9% as having a very high nicotine dependence.
This "ceiling effect" confers a high safety profile clinically, a low level of physical dependence, and only mild withdrawal symptoms on cessation after prolonged administration.
Among those with low level of nicotine dependence, there was no significant difference in lifetime quit attempts between the two groups.
These include perceived barriers to or self-efficacy in quitting smoking [ 8, 9], the use of nicotine patches [ 10], a low level of nicotine dependence [ 8], a low level of daily cigarette consumption [ 11], enforcing smoke-free laws and/or smoking restriction policies [ 12, 13], and implementing workplace smoking-cessation programs [ 14].
Looking at the simple effect of TTFC, we find in Table 3 (Model II) that after controlling for confounders, among those with a low level of nicotine dependence, nurses were less likely to have made a quit attempt in the previous 12 months compared to other females during that same time (OR = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.49, 0.98).
Even low levels of welfare dependence can be mobilized to justify welfare chauvinism if politicians present the recipients as a cultural threat, while quite high levels of welfare dependence may not trigger welfare chauvinism if politicians do not frame this as an issue of cultural threat (Koning, 2013).
