“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

On one level the deaths are a protest against the time in which they occur. Those involved have private reasons, however. The reasons, of course, vary from one individual to another, yet all involved “want their death to serve a purpose” beyond private concerns. Partially, then, such deaths are meant to make the survivors question the conditions (dash) — for unconsciously the species well knows there are reasons for such mass deaths that go beyond accepted beliefs.

(Pause at 10:42.) Give us a moment… In your society scientific medical beliefs operate, and a kind of preventative medicine, mentioned earlier, in which procedures [of inoculation] are taken, bringing about in healthy individuals a minute disease condition that then gives immunity against a more massive visitation. In the case of any given disease this procedure might work quite well for those who believe in it. It is, however, the belief, and not the procedure, that works (louder).²

Such medical technology is highly specific, however. You cannot be inoculated with the desire to live, or with the zest, delight, or contentment of the healthy animal. If you have decided to die, protected from one disease in such a manner, you will promptly come down with another, or have an accident. The immunization, while specifically effective, may only reinforce prior beliefs about the body’s ineffectiveness. It may appear that left alone the body would surely develop whatever disease might be “fashionable” at the time, so that the specific victory might result in the ultimate defeat as far as your beliefs are concerned.

New paragraph: Despite all “realistic” pragmatic tales to the contrary, the natural state of life itself is one of joy, acquiescence with itself — a state in which action is effective, and the power to act is a natural right. You would see this quite clearly with plants, animals, and all other life if you were not so blinded by beliefs to the contrary. You would feel it in the activity of your bodies, in which the vital individual affirmation of your cells brings about the mass, immensely complicated achievement of your physical being. That activity naturally promotes health and vitality.

For all of the disadvantages of vaccination and inoculation programs, then, Seth obviously doesn’t recommend that we abandon them at present, since most of us believe in their efficiency. It may be some time before private beliefs are strong enough to sustain us, without the use of those medical “crutches.” Still, we can try to minimize such dependency (as Jane and I do now), and to avoid taking shots simply because they’re “in vogue.”

Still, Jane and I do have our cats inoculated against feline distemper and respiratory viruses; pets acquired at humane societies (as ours often are) have already shared an infected environment. We suppose that if we had young children we’d see to their receiving the immunizations they “should” have, or are required to have by a school board, for example. It’s very difficult in our society to rely upon beliefs alone where other people are involved, particularly in the face of medical and scientific propaganda. (Let me add, though, that there are available today numerous vaccines against childhood diseases, but that many parents ignore many of them. Some of those vaccines — for whooping cough, mumps, measles, German measles or rubella, for instance — are still quite controversial. They’re often only partially effective, and can cause a variety of side effects: reactions ranging from the temporary to the permanent or fatal. Jane and I strongly recommend that parents thoroughly investigate and understand the pros and cons involved with each inoculation their children will receive.)