1|Page

The Obesity Epidemic : A Growing Public Health Crises

Submitted By:
Priyanshu

PRN: 23010224104

Division-B

BBA LLB

Symbiosis Law School, NOIDA

Symbiosis International (deemed University), Pune

Under the guidance of:

Dr. Vijay Pandey
(Course in- Charge: Business Statistics )
Symbiosis law School, NOIDA
2|Page

Acknowledgment

First, I would like to thank Dr. Vijay Pandey for giving me such an interesting research topic.
I also want to express my gratitude to Symbiosis Law School, Noida's library staff and
academic support staff for providing me with a variety of research resources and sources that
helped me create a project that was as original as possible. I also like to thank Symbiosis Law
School, Noida, for giving me this opportunity to make a project which will be helpful for me
in my future as a professional.
3|Page

INTRODUCTION

Overweight, a multifaceted disease related to the deposition of excess fat mass, is considered
to be one of the major healthcare issues of the recent decades. This has shifted from being
mainly cosmetic in its impact to a major global health problem that touches everybody, every
society, and economy. Obesity has rapidly become more and more common in the general
population and involves individuals of all ages, men and women, and all socio-economic
classes.

Thus, the origins of obesity can be considered complex and interrelated. There have been
changes in people’s diet over time concerning the consumption of processed foods,
carbonated beverages, and portion size, leading to augmented energy intake. To the same,
sedentary lifestyle and reduced exercise participation opportunities due to modernisation,
have also accelerated the trend. Additionally, features of the world encompassing people
which include accessibility of healthy foods, made environments that hinder physical
activities, and disparities in economic status are vital in determining obesity levels.

Obesity entails numerous diverse health risks of which the most apparent are those directly
associated with the condition. Obesity puts people in a vulnerable position of being at higher
risks of developing several non-communicable diseases such as type 2 diabetes,
cardiovascular diseases, stroke, and some forms of cancer. Each of these conditions reduces
quality of life, and also incurs a large burden on health care systems. In addition, obesity may
cause poor health, including stress that peaks on aspects like self-image and emotional well
being.

Combating the obesity problem requires a multi-faceted approach in which many segments of
society are active. Breaking down knowledge about healthy nutrition and raising awareness
about the importance of regular physical activity are critical to the job. Governments
interventions like taxes on harmful foods and sponsorships on healthier foods like vegetables
help in building a healthy diet culture. Moreover, people’s awareness of healthy diets and
accessible health promotion plans is vital in decision-making processes.

The nature of obesity requires that is handled by different researchers, policymakers and
communities collaborating internationally. Through research on the roots of this global health
issue, pinpointing having efficient prevention measures, and promoting a lasting solution to
this challenge, world generations can be protected from the effects of this epidemic and have
a better future to look forward to.
4|Page

Why This Topic

Obesity has emerged as one of the most severe ailments calling for an intervention from the
governmental and non-governmental institutions. This disease that involves the augmentation
of more than the necessary amount of body fat exceeds the mere cosmetic problem. At the
international level it is in a very large scale affecting persons, civilizations as well as the
financers market.

Indeed, obesity is taken as the primary risk factor that contributes to the occurrence of various
noncommunicable diseases. These are; cardiovascular disease, diabetes type 2, strokes &
specific cancers. These conditions without fail affect the quality of life and are very much a
burden to the health care systems and the wallet.

Apart from having implications on the health of a person, obesity is associated with a great
deal of social consequences. This leads to low production among employees, reliance and
prejudice thus one is confined to the ways he or she can function in the society. Apart from
this, the costs have escalated in the areas including health care, loss in productivity of the
workforce, and disability.

Obesity is however worst among [Link] were assessed on the criteria of age and
gender. Overweight or obesity also predisposes a child to the destiny of other severe
complications in the future. This problem should be resolved to do away with the sicknesses
that a given individual is likely to develop in later years as well as to nurture the health of
generations to come.

It was also noted that obesity is not or evenly distributed in populations as it was widely
distributed among some populations and scarcely present in others. A number of differences
are possible in; SES, race, ethnic origin and geographic location. Thus, it becomes clear that
there is mutual dependence between social determinants of health and obesity and this
requires corresponding interventions.

Overweight is a multifaceted problem which is requiring a treatment all over the world. As
with any changes, the impacts on the health of a nation’s citizens, on societies and various
economies cannot be in doubt. Thus, as this work has shown, obesity can be a phenomenon
with multiple vectors, to which prevention measures and further prognosis can be created so
that people can improve and have a better future.
5|Page

ANALYSIS

1. Frequency:

 Definition: Frequency is the number of times a particular value or category occurs in

a data set.
 Example: If 31 people have a BMI below 18.5, the frequency of the "Below 18.5
(Underweight)" category is 31.

2. Relative Frequency (RF):

 Definition: Relative frequency is the proportion of the total number of data points
that fall within a particular category. It is calculated by dividing the frequency of a
category by the total number of observations.

 Formula: Relative Frequency=Frequency of the category /

Total number of observations

3. Percentage:

 Definition: The percentage represents the relative frequency as a percentage of the

total. It shows the proportion of observations in each category relative to the total,
expressed as a percentage.

 Formula: Percentage=Relative Frequency×100



the percentage is 0.3163×100=31.63%

 Example: If the relative frequency of underweight individuals is 0.3163,

4. Cumulative Frequency:

 Definition: Cumulative frequency is the sum of the frequencies for all categories up
to a certain point in the data set. It provides a running total of frequencies as you
move through the categories.

31+30=6131 + 30
 Example: If 31 people are underweight and 30 are of normal weight, the cumulative

= 6131+30=61.
frequency after the "Normal weight" category would be
6|Page

Mean

 Definition: The mean, often called the average, is the sum of all values in a dataset

Formula: Mean=∑xiN\text{Mean} = \frac{\sum x_i}{N}Mean=N∑xi

divided by the number of values.

o Where ∑xi\sum x_i∑xi is the sum of all data points and NNN is the


number of data points.

 Usage: The mean provides a measure of the central value of the dataset. It is
commonly used in various business contexts, such as calculating average revenue,
costs, or salaries.

Median

 Definition: The median is the middle value in a dataset when the values are arranged
in ascending or descending order. If there is an even number of observations, the
median is the average of the two middle numbers.
 How to Find It:

o If the number of data points NNN is odd, the median is the value at position
o Arrange the data in order.

N+12\frac{N+1}{2}2N+1 .
o If NNN is even, the median is the average of the values at positions N2\frac{N}
{2}2N and N2+1\frac{N}{2} + 12N +1.
 Usage: The median is useful when dealing with skewed distributions or outliers, as it
is less affected by extreme values compared to the mean. It helps understand the
middle point of the data.

Mode

 Definition: The mode is the value or values that occur most frequently in a dataset. A
dataset may have one mode, more than one mode (bimodal or multimodal), or no
mode at all if no value repeats.
 How to Find It: Identify the value(s) that appear most frequently in the dataset.
 Usage: The mode is used to determine the most common or popular value in a
dataset. In business, this can be useful for understanding the most common
preferences or behaviors among customers.
7|Page

Following is the analysis of survey -:

Question - How many hours do you exercise per week?

Frequency:

 0-1 hours: 25 respondents

 2-3 hours: 25 respondents
 4-6 hours: 31 respondents
 More than 6 hours: 18 respondents
 Total Respondents: 99

2. Relative Frequency (RF):

 Definition: Relative frequency is the proportion of the total number of respondents

Calculation: RF=Frequency of categoryTotal respondents\tRF} =

who fall into each category.

{Frequency of category}}{\{Total respondents}} RF=Total respondentsFrequency



of category

o 0-1 hours: 2599=0.2525\25}{99} = 0.25259925 =0.2525 (25.25%)

 Values:

o 2-3 hours: 2599=0.2525\{25}{99} = 0.25259925 =0.2525 (25.25%)

o 4-6 hours: 3199=0.3131\{31}{99} = 0.31319931 =0.3131 (31.31%)
o More than 6 hours: 1899=0.1818\18}{99} = 0.18189918 =0.1818
(18.18%)

3. Percentage:

 Definition: This represents the relative frequency as a percentage of the total respondents.
 Values:
8|Page

o 0-1 hours: 25.25%

o 2-3 hours: 25.25%
o 4-6 hours: 31.31%
o More than 6 hours: 18.18%

4. Cumulative Frequency:

 Definition: Cumulative frequency is the running total of frequencies as you move

through the categories.
 Values:
o 0-1 hours: 25 (25 respondents)
o 2-3 hours: 50 (25 + 25 respondents)
o 4-6 hours: 81 (50 + 31 respondents)
o More than 6 hours: 99 (81 + 18 respondents.

Key Insights:

 Most Common Frequency: The majority of respondents, 39.18%, consume fast food
3-4 times per week.
 Low Consumption Group: Only 20.62% of respondents avoid fast food entirely,
reporting 0 times per week.
 Moderate Consumption Group: A significant portion, 21.65%, consumes fast food
1-2 times per week.
 High Consumption Group: 18.56% of respondents consume fast food 5 or more
times per week.

Implications:

 High Consumption Levels: The data shows that a large portion of the respondents
(39.18%) consume fast food frequently (3-4 times a week), which may have
implications for their health and nutrition.
 Dietary Patterns: With 60.82% of respondents consuming fast food at least 1-2 times
a week, fast food is a regular part of the diet for the majority.
9|Page

QUESTION – How often do you consume fast food in a week?

10 | P a g e

Frequency Distribution:

 0 times: 20 respondents (20.62%)

 1-2 times: 21 respondents (21.65%)
 3-4 times: 38 respondents (39.18%)
 5 or more times: 18 respondents (18.56%)

2. Relative Frequency (RF):

in that category: RF=Frequency of categoryTotal respondents\

 The relative frequency for each category represents the proportion of respondents

text{RF} = \frac{\text{Frequency of category}}{\text{Total

respondents}}RF=Total respondentsFrequency of category
 The RF values are:
o 0 times: 0.2062 (20.62%)
o 1-2 times: 0.2165 (21.65%)
o 3-4 times: 0.3918 (39.18%)
o 5 or more times: 0.1856 (18.56%)

3. Percentage:

 This column represents the percentage of respondents in each category:

o 0 times: 20.62%
o 1-2 times: 21.65%
o 3-4 times: 39.18%
o 5 or more times: 18.56%

4. Cumulative Frequency:

 This shows the running total of respondents as you move from one category to the
next:
o 0 times: 20 (20 respondents)
o 1-2 times: 41 (20 + 21 respondents)
o 3-4 times: 79 (41 + 38 respondents)
o 5 or more times: 97 (79 + 18 respondents)

5. Key Insights:

 Most Common Frequency: The majority of respondents, 39.18%, consume fast

food 3-4 times per week.
 Low Consumption Group: Only 20.62% of respondents avoid fast food entirely,
reporting 0 times per week.
 Moderate Consumption Group: A significant portion, 21.65%, consumes fast
food 1-2 times per week.
 High Consumption Group: 18.56% of respondents consume fast food 5 or more
11 | P a g e

times per week.

6. Implications:

 High Consumption Levels: The data shows that a large portion of the respondents
(39.18%) consume fast food frequently (3-4 times a week), which may have
implications for their health and nutrition.
 Dietary Patterns: With 60.82% of respondents consuming fast food at least 1-2
times a week, fast food is a regular part of the diet for the majority.

QUESTION – What is your BMI?

1. Frequency:

 Below 18.5 (Underweight): 31 respondents

 18.5-24.9 (Normal weight): 30 respondents
 25-29.9 (Overweight): 25 respondents
 30 or above (Obese): 12 respondents
 Total Respondents: 98

2. Relative Frequency (RF):

 Definition: Relative frequency represents the proportion of respondents in each

BMI category relative to the total number of respondents.
12 | P a g e

o Below 18.5 (Underweight): 3198=0.3163\{31}{98} = 0.31639831

 Values:

o 18.5-24.9 (Normal weight): 3098=0.3061\{30}{98} = 0.30619830

=0.3163 (31.63%)

o 25-29.9 (Overweight): 2598=0.2551\{25}{98} = 0.25519825

=0.3061 (30.61%)

o 30 or above (Obese): 1298=0.1224\{12}{98} = 0.12249812

=0.2551 (25.51%)

=0.1224 (12.24%)

3. Percentage:

 Definition: This is the relative frequency expressed as a percentage, showing the

percentage of respondents in each BMI category.
 Values:
o Below 18.5 (Underweight): 31.63%
o 18.5-24.9 (Normal weight): 30.61%
o 25-29.9 (Overweight): 25.51%
o 30 or above (Obese): 12.24%

4. Cumulative Frequency:

 Definition: Cumulative frequency is the running total of the frequencies as you

move through the BMI categories.
 Values:
o Below 18.5 (Underweight): 31
o 18.5-24.9 (Normal weight): 61 (31 + 30)
o 25-29.9 (Overweight): 86 (61 + 25)
o 30 or above (Obese): 98 (86 + 12)

5. Key Insights:

 High Underweight Prevalence: The largest proportion of respondents (31.63%)

fall into the Underweight category, indicating that a significant portion of the
population has a BMI below 18.5.
 Normal Weight and Overweight: A substantial number of respondents have a
BMI in the Normal weight (30.61%) and Overweight (25.51%) categories.
Together, these categories account for over half of the respondents (56.12%).
 Low Obesity Rate: Only 12.24% of the respondents are in the Obese category
(BMI of 30 or above), indicating a relatively low prevalence of obesity in this
group.

6. Implications:

 Potential Health Concerns: The high percentage of underweight individuals may

13 | P a g e

suggest issues related to nutrition or health that need to be addressed.

 Balanced Weight Distribution: The distribution of respondents across the normal
weight and overweight categories is fairly balanced, indicating a relatively healthy
weight distribution for most people.
 Focus on Prevention: With a smaller percentage of respondents in the obese
category, there may be an opportunity to focus on prevention strategies to avoid an
increase in obesity rates in the future.

QUESTION – How often do you consume sugar beverages?

Data Breakdown:

 0 times: 24 respondents (25%)

 1-3 times: 24 respondents (25%)
 4-6 times: 29 respondents (30.21%)
 7 or more times: 19 respondents (19.79%)

Cumulative Frequency Analysis:

 0 times: 24 respondents (24%)

 1-3 times: 48 respondents (48%)
 4-6 times: 77 respondents (77%)
 7 or more times: 96 respondents (100%)

Observations:
14 | P a g e

1. Frequency Distribution:
o The highest proportion of respondents consume sugar beverages 4-6 times a
week (30.21%).
o An equal proportion of respondents consume sugar beverages 0 times and 1-
3 times (25% each).
2. Cumulative Frequency:
o By the category "4-6 times," 77% of respondents fall within this range or
fewer.
o By the category "7 or more times," 100% of respondents are included,
which means that every respondent's frequency is accounted for.

Insights:

 Majority Consumption: A majority of respondents (77%) consume sugar

beverages 4 times or fewer per week, suggesting that while a significant portion of
the population consumes these beverages, most do so relatively infrequently.
 High Consumption Group: A smaller portion (19.79%) consumes sugar beverages
7 or more times per week, indicating that this high consumption frequency is less
common.
 Equally Dispersed: The proportion of respondents consuming 0 times and 1-3
times are equal, suggesting there’s a notable number of people who either abstain or
have very minimal consumption.

QUESTION – How many hours of sleep do you get per night?

15 | P a g e

Data Breakdown:

 Less than 5 hours: 22 respondents (22.68%)

 5-6 hours: 25 respondents (25.77%)
 7-8 hours: 34 respondents (35.05%)
 More than 8 hours: 16 respondents (16.49%)

Cumulative Frequency Analysis:

 Less than 5 hours: 22 respondents (22%)

 5-6 hours: 47 respondents (47%)
 7-8 hours: 81 respondents (81%)
 More than 8 hours: 97 respondents (100%)

Observations:

3. Frequency Distribution:
o The majority of respondents (35.05%) get 7-8 hours of sleep per day, which
is within the generally recommended range.
o The least number of respondents (16.49%) get more than 8 hours of sleep,
indicating this is less common.
4. Cumulative Frequency:
o By the category "7-8 hours," 81% of respondents fall within this range or
fewer.
o By the category "More than 8 hours," 100% of respondents are accounted
for, indicating that the dataset covers all reported sleep durations.

Insights:

 Ideal Sleep Range: A majority of respondents (81%) get between 7-8 hours of
sleep, aligning with most sleep recommendations for adults.
 Short Sleep Duration: About 22.68% of respondents get less than 5 hours of sleep,
which is below the recommended amount and might indicate potential issues with
sleep quality or duration.
 Extended Sleep Duration: Only 16.49% of respondents get more than 8 hours of
sleep, suggesting that excessive sleep is less common among the group.

QUESTION – How many meals do you typically eat per day?

16 | P a g e

Data Breakdown:

 1 meal: 20 respondents (20.62%)

 2 meals: 38 respondents (39.18%)
 3 meals: 22 respondents (22.68%)
 More than 3 meals: 17 respondents (17.53%)

Cumulative Frequency Analysis:

 1 meal: 20 respondents (20%)

 2 meals: 58 respondents (58%)
 3 meals: 80 respondents (80%)
 More than 3 meals: 97 respondents (100%)

Observations:

5. Frequency Distribution:
o The majority of respondents (39.18%) eat 2 meals per day, which is the
most common pattern observed.
o The smallest proportion (17.53%) eat more than 3 meals per day, suggesting
this is the least common pattern.
6. Cumulative Frequency:
o By the category "3 meals," 80% of respondents fall within this range or
fewer.
o By the category "More than 3 meals," 100% of respondents are accounted
for, indicating that all reported meal frequencies are covered.

Insights:

 Most Common Meal Pattern: Eating 2 meals per day is the most common pattern
among respondents, with nearly 40% following this routine.
 Less Frequent Meals: A significant portion (20.62%) eats only 1 meal per day,
17 | P a g e

which could indicate a varied eating pattern or potentially less frequent eating
habits.
 More Frequent Meals: The smallest group (17.53%) eats more than 3 meals per
day, which may reflect varied eating schedules or dietary preferences.

QUESTION – How many times have you attempted to loose weight ?

Data Breakdown:

 0 times: 28 respondents (28.87%)

 1-2 times: 24 respondents (24.74%)
 3-4 times: 26 respondents (26.80%)
 More than 4 times: 19 respondents (19.59%)

Cumulative Frequency Analysis:

 0 times: 28 respondents (28%)

 1-2 times: 52 respondents (52%)
 3-4 times: 78 respondents (78%)
 More than 4 times: 97 respondents (97%)

Observations:

7. Frequency Distribution:
o The largest proportion of respondents (28.87%) have never attempted to
lose weight.
o The group with 3-4 attempts is fairly substantial (26.80%), indicating a
18 | P a g e

significant portion of individuals have made multiple attempts.

8. Cumulative Frequency:
o By the category "3-4 times," 78% of respondents have attempted to lose
weight this number of times or fewer.
o By the category "More than 4 times," 97% of respondents fall within this
range, covering almost all cases.

Insights:

 No Attempts: A notable portion of respondents (28.87%) have never attempted to

lose weight, which could indicate they are either satisfied with their weight or do
not see the need for weight loss.
 Multiple Attempts: A significant percentage (46.39%) of respondents have
attempted to lose weight between 3 to more than 4 times, suggesting that weight
loss attempts are common and potentially indicate challenges in achieving or
maintaining weight loss.
 Frequency of Attempts: The data shows a pattern where a considerable number of
individuals make multiple attempts to lose weight, reflecting the complexity and
difficulty of weight management.

QUESTION – How often do you consult to your healthcare

professionals?

Data Breakdown:

 Never: 31 respondents (31.96%)

 Once a year: 34 respondents (35.05%)
 2-3 times a year: 19 respondents (19.59%)
19 | P a g e

 More than 3 times a year: 13 respondents (13.40%)

Cumulative Frequency Analysis:

 Never: 31 respondents (31%)

 Once a year: 65 respondents (65%)
 2-3 times a year: 84 respondents (84%)
 More than 3 times a year: 97 respondents (97%)

Observations:

Frequency Distribution:
o The largest proportion of respondents (35.05%) consult healthcare
professionals once a year.
o The smallest proportion (13.40%) consult healthcare professionals more
than 3 times a year, indicating this is less common.

Cumulative Frequency:
o By the category "2-3 times a year," 84% of respondents have consulted
healthcare professionals this number of times or fewer.
o By the category "More than 3 times a year," 97% of respondents are
included, meaning almost all respondents consult healthcare professionals at
least occasionally.

Insights:

 Annual Consultations: A significant portion of respondents (35.05%) consult

healthcare professionals once a year, suggesting a moderate level of engagement
with healthcare services.
 Low Consultation Frequency: A notable percentage (31.96%) never consults
healthcare professionals, which may reflect a lack of perceived need, accessibility
issues, or other barriers.
 Frequent Consultations: A smaller percentage (13.40%) consults healthcare
professionals more than 3 times a year, indicating that frequent visits are less
common.
20 | P a g e

CONCLUSION:

After analyzing the information, it can be concluded that the problem of obesity has
become one of the most alarming in the context of the public health of the 21st century,
which indicates an extensive and diverse process with significant consequences for the
worldwide population. This growing epidemic is defined by the escalating incidence of
overweight in the society mainly through poor diet and lack of adequate exercise, together
with environmental factors. Obesity levels have been increasing and hence there is an
implication of these diseases on the people, such as type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular
diseases, and specific forms of cancer. These health problems not only affect the quality of
people’s lives but also become a substantial challenge to the healthcare system, and
increase medical expenses and consumption of resources.

That has increased the push for the need to finding ways on how to manage the escalating
rates of obesity. However, the obesity problem is still evolving as evidenced by the increase
in rates of OB and this clearly shows that the efforts that are currently being employed
might be lacking or are not well executed. One of the major areas of interventionist in
coming up with a solution to this crisis is the ability to recognize obesity as a polygenic
disorder. Schizophrenia cannot be explained by single factors, but is related to a
combination of at least genetic factors and behavior tems, or factors in the environment.
For example, the contemporary world provides the stimulus for inactive living through
increased computer use and decrease of actual activity, as well as presents a higher
accessibility and appeal for consuming high energy, low nutrition foods.

Combating obesity will also be beset with numerous challenges because this problem is
rooted in the socioeconomic context of the countries experiencing it. Obesity and lower
income are correlated because lower income populations cannot afford better food and
obtainment and do not have safe access to recreational facilities. Such discrepancies imply
21 | P a g e

that there is a need to come up with specific measures that focus on these populations in an
attempt to seek the main determinants of obesity within these groups. The healthy public
policies should serve to ensure that the gap between the higher and the lower levels of the
socioeconomic order is closed to ensure that people get healthy foods at very cheap prices
and ensure that systems that promote healthy living are put in place. Furthermore,
educational approaches are essential in social transformation processes by increasing
people’s awareness of healthy life styles, balanced diets, and the need to exercise regularly.
Weight control and therefore the prevention of obesity do not therefore lie only in
alteration of behaviour. Some of the recommended strategies should be – systematic
change processes intended to alter some of the policies and other structures in the society
with the aim of promoting healthy choices. For example, implementing the legal measures
that indicate the affordable foods as unhealthy especially for children, and improving the
quality of informing people about Foods can help to navigate. Environment changes related
to the developments such as increasing the accessibility of park or recreation centers is also
needed to facilitate physical activity. Also, if these two elements of health and social
policies include the approaches to prevent and manage obesity, it can help to create a better
approach to the problem in general.

Obesity cannot be fought alone and therefore, coordination and participation of the
governments, organizations and other communities are essential. This means that strategies
towards management of the various aspects of the obesity vice in the management of
public health programs require multi-sectoral effort. First of all, the strategies should imply
the involvement of several sectors and should include the following; Consequently, it can
be stated that the large scale could contribute a lot to the policy making, community
mobilization and provision of healthy services for the decrease of the rates of obesity and
improvement of overall population health among the different stakeholders.

It is possible to state that obesity is one of the emergent and complicated problems, which
should be solved with the help of a long-term strategy including different sectors. It is
equally important, however, to identify numerous changes on the individual level and
realize that all the changes should be supported by the corresponding shifts in the policy,
the physical environment, and the soci-economic system. Therefore, obesity does need a
multifaceted approach which does include the preventive measures, the education, and the
equality of opportunities/ resources in the society. And therefore, the disease of obesity in
Colorado proves the only possible way to achieve the constant level of progress – the
mobilization of society’s stakeholders for cooperation. Obesity is one of the forcing factors,
however, it is also an excellent opportunity to enhance the quality of people’s lives in
populations worldwide and to build better communities for generations to come.
22 | P a g e