Each year, the American Cancer Society estimates the numbers of new cancer cases and deaths that will occur in the United States in the current year and compiles the most recent data on cancer incidence, mortality, and survival. Incidence data were collected by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program; the National Program of Cancer Registries; and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Mortality data were collected by the National Center for Health Statistics. In 2017, 1,688,780 new cancer cases and 600,920 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States. For all sites combined, the cancer incidence rate is 20% higher in men than in women, while the cancer death rate is 40% higher. However, sex disparities vary by cancer type. For example, thyroid cancer incidence rates are 3-fold higher in women than in men (21 vs 7 per 100,000 population), despite equivalent death rates (0.5 per 100,000 population), largely reflecting sex differences in the "epidemic of diagnosis." Over the past decade of available data, the overall cancer incidence rate (2004-2013) was stable in women and declined by approximately 2% annually in men, while the cancer death rate (2005-2014) declined by about 1.5% annually in both men and women. From 1991 to 2014, the overall cancer death rate dropped 25%, translating to approximately 2,143,200 fewer cancer deaths than would have been expected if death rates had remained at their peak. Although the cancer death rate was 15% higher in blacks than in whites in 2014, increasing access to care as a result of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act may expedite the narrowing racial gap; from 2010 to 2015, the proportion of blacks who were uninsured halved, from 21% to 11%, as it did for Hispanics (31% to 16%). Gains in coverage for traditionally underserved Americans will facilitate the broader application of existing cancer control knowledge across every segment of the population. CA Cancer J Clin 2017;67:7-30. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

https://acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.3322/caac.21387

Cancer statistics, 2017

Each year the American Cancer Society estimates the numbers of new cancer cases and deaths that will occur in the United States in the current year and compiles the most recent data on cancer incidence, mortality, and survival. Incidence data were collected by the National Cancer Institute (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results [SEER] Program), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (National Program of Cancer Registries), and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Mortality data were collected by the National Center for Health Statistics. A total of 1,658,370 new cancer cases and 589,430 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States in 2015. During the most recent 5 years for which there are data (2007-2011), delay-adjusted cancer incidence rates (13 oldest SEER registries) declined by 1.8% per year in men and were stable in women, while cancer death rates nationwide decreased by 1.8% per year in men and by 1.4% per year in women. The overall cancer death rate decreased from 215.1 (per 100,000 population) in 1991 to 168.7 in 2011, a total relative decline of 22%. However, the magnitude of the decline varied by state, and was generally lowest in the South (∼15%) and highest in the Northeast (≥20%). For example, there were declines of 25% to 30% in Maryland, New Jersey, Massachusetts, New York, and Delaware, which collectively averted 29,000 cancer deaths in 2011 as a result of this progress. Further gains can be accelerated by applying existing cancer control knowledge across all segments of the population.

/pdf/cancer-statistics-2015-42anew2xb1.pdf

Cancer statistics, 2015.

As GDP is a measure of market capacity and not economic well-being, this report has been commissioned to more accurately understand the social progress indicators of any given state. Gross domestic product (GDP) is the most widely used measure of economic activity. There are international standards for its calculation, and much thought has gone into its statistical and conceptual bases. But GDP mainly measures market production, though it has often been treated as if it were a measure of economic well-being. Conflating the two can lead to misleading indications about how well-off people are and entail the wrong policy decisions. One reason why money measures of economic performance and living standards have come to play such an important role in our societies is that the monetary valuation of goods and services makes it easy to add up quantities of a very different nature. When we know the prices of apple juice and DVD players, we can add up their values and make statements about production and consumption in a single figure. But market prices are more than an accounting device. Economic theory tells us that when markets are functioning properly, the ratio of one market price to another is reflective of the relative appreciation of the two products by those who purchase them. Moreover, GDP captures all final goods in the economy, whether they are consumed by households, firms or government. Valuing them with their prices would thus seem to be a good way of capturing, in a single number, how well-off society is at a particular moment. Furthermore, keeping prices unchanged while observing how quantities of goods and services that enter GDP move over time would seem like a reasonable way of making a statement about how society’s living standards are evolving in real terms. As it turns out, things are more complicated. First, prices may not exist for some goods and services (if for instance government provides free health insurance or if households are engaged in child care), raising the question of how these services should be valued. Second, even where there are market prices, they may deviate from society’s underlying valuation. In particular, when the consumption or production of particular products affects society as a whole, the price that individuals pay for those products will differ from their value to society at large. Environmental damage caused by production or consumption activities that is not reflected in market prices is a well-known example.

https://andrewoswald.com/docs/stiglitz20report_commission20final20200920sept.pdf

Report by the commission on the measurement of economic performance and social progress

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common malignancies in the United States. Every 3 years, the American Cancer Society provides an update of CRC incidence, survival, and mortality rates and trends. Incidence data through 2013 were provided by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program, the National Program of Cancer Registries, and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Mortality data through 2014 were provided by the National Center for Health Statistics. CRC incidence rates are highest in Alaska Natives and blacks and lowest in Asian/Pacific Islanders, and they are 30% to 40% higher in men than in women. Recent temporal patterns are generally similar by race and sex, but differ by age. Between 2000 and 2013, incidence rates in adults aged ≥50 years declined by 32%, with the drop largest for distal tumors in people aged ≥65 years (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.50; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.48-0.52) and smallest for rectal tumors in ages 50 to 64 years (male IRR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.85-0.96; female IRR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.93-1.08). Overall CRC incidence in individuals ages ≥50 years declined from 2009 to 2013 in every state except Arkansas, with the decrease exceeding 5% annually in 7 states; however, rectal tumor incidence in those ages 50 to 64 years was stable in most states. Among adults aged <50 years, CRC incidence rates increased by 22% from 2000 to 2013, driven solely by tumors in the distal colon (IRR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.13-1.35) and rectum (IRR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.13-1.31). Similar to incidence patterns, CRC death rates decreased by 34% among individuals aged ≥50 years during 2000 through 2014, but increased by 13% in those aged <50 years. Progress against CRC can be accelerated by increasing initiation of screening at age 50 years (average risk) or earlier (eg, family history of CRC/advanced adenomas) and eliminating disparities in high-quality treatment. In addition, research is needed to elucidate causes for increasing CRC in young adults. CA Cancer J Clin 2017. © 2017 American Cancer Society. CA Cancer J Clin 2017;67:177-193. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Colorectal cancer statistics, 2017.

Global status of commercialized biotech/GM crops: 2006.

This US Census Bureau report highlights the increasing poverty and racial inequality in America. In 2004, 45.8 million people did not have health insurance. The poverty rate increased from 12.5 percent in 2003 to 12.7 percent in 2004; 1.1 million more people - a total of 37 million - lived in poverty in 2004. This rise in poverty came despite economic growth and marks the first time on record that household incomes had failed to increase for five straight years. Black households had the lowest median income; 32.7 percent of the Hispanic population was without health insurance.

/pdf/income-poverty-and-health-insurance-coverage-in-the-united-ij6kic9vbf.pdf

Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2004

/pdf/income-and-poverty-in-the-united-states-2013-3iwoccin19.pdf

Income and Poverty in the United States: 2013

/pdf/income-poverty-and-health-insurance-coverage-in-the-united-4dwgo5b5dm.pdf

Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2012. Current Population Reports P60-245.

This report presents data on income, poverty, and health insurance coverage in the United States based on information collected in the 2006 and earlier Annual Social and Economic Supplements (ASEC) to the Current Population Survey (CPS) conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau. Real median household income increased between 2004 and 2005. Both the number of people in poverty and the poverty rate were not statistically different between 2004 and 2005. The number of people with health insurance coverage increased, while the percentage of people with health insurance coverage decreased between 2004 and 2005. Both the number and the percentage of people without health insurance coverage increased between 2004 and 2005. These results were not uniform across demographic groups. For example, the poverty rate for non-Hispanic Whites decreased, while the overall rate was statistically unchanged. This report has three main sections— income, poverty, and health insurance coverage.

/pdf/income-poverty-and-health-insurance-coverage-in-the-united-1aaofa2jq4.pdf

Bernadette D. Proctor

Papers

Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2004

Income and Poverty in the United States: 2013

Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2012. Current Population Reports P60-245.

Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2005