Global Incidence and mortality of oesophageal cancer and their correlation with socioeconomic indicators temporal patterns and trends in 41 countries

Oesophageal cancers (adenocarcinomas [AC] and squamous cell carcinomas [SCC]) are characterized by high incidence/mortality in many countries. We aimed to delineate its global incidence and mortality, and studied whether socioeconomic development and its incidence rate were correlated. The age-standardized rates (ASRs) of incidence and mortality of this medical condition in 2012 for 184 nations from the GLOBOCAN database; national databases capturing incidence rates, and the WHO mortality database were examined. Their correlations with two indicators of socioeconomic development were evaluated. Joinpoint regression analysis was used to generate trends. The ratio between the ASR of AC and SCC was strongly correlated with HDI (r = 0.535 [men]; r = 0.661 [women]) and GDP (r = 0.594 [men]; r = 0.550 [women], both p < 0.001). Countries that reported the largest reduction in incidence in male included Poland (Average Annual Percent Change [AAPC] = −7.1, 95%C.I. = −12,−1.9) and Singapore (AAPC = −5.8, 95%C.I. = −9.5,−1.9), whereas for women the greatest decline was seen in Singapore (AAPC = −12.3, 95%C.I. = −17.3,−6.9) and China (AAPC = −5.6, 95%C.I. = −7.6,−3.4). The Philippines (AAPC = 4.3, 95%C.I. = 2,6.6) and Bulgaria (AAPC = 2.8, 95%C.I. = 0.5,5.1) had a significant mortality increase in men; whilst Columbia (AAPC = −6.1, 95%C.I. = −7.5,−4.6) and Slovenia (AAPC = −4.6, 95%C.I. = −7.9,−1.3) reported mortality decline in women. These findings inform individuals at increased risk for primary prevention

Post-capitalist property

When writing about property and property rights in his imagined post-capitalist society of the future, Marx seemed to envisage ‘individual property’ co-existing with ‘socialized property’ in the means of production. As the social and political consequences of faltering growth and increasing inequality, debt and insecurity gradually manifest themselves, and with automation and artificial intelligence lurking in the wings, the future of capitalism, at least in its current form, looks increasingly uncertain. With this, the question of what property and property rights might look like in the future, in a potentially post-capitalist society, is becoming ever more pertinent. Is the choice simply between private property and markets, and public (state-owned) property and planning? Or can individual and social property in the (same) means of production co-exist, as Marx suggested? This paper explores ways in which they might, through an examination of the Chinese household responsibility system (HRS) and the ‘fuzzy’ and seemingly confusing regime of land ownership that it instituted. It examines the HRS against the backdrop of Marx’s ideas about property and subsequent (post-Marx) theorizing about the legal nature of property in which property has come widely to be conceptualized not as a single, unitary ‘ownership’ right to a thing (or, indeed, as the thing itself) but as a ‘bundle of rights’. The bundle-of-rights idea of property, it suggests, enables us to see not only that ‘individual’ and ‘socialized’ property’ in the (same) means of production might indeed co-exist, but that the range of institutional possibility is far greater than that between capitalism and socialism/communism as traditionally conceived