“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

A controversy related to that over mammograms, but one that hasn’t been nearly as well publicized, concerns “prophylactic subcutaneous mastectomy” — the process by which some women elect to have their breasts removed before they actually develop cancer in one or both of them. These women have been told that statistically they’re “high risk” prospects for cancer. Involved here are recent diagnostic procedures: the study of the “patient’s” family history, the study of the “density” and structure of her breast tissues as determined by mammogram patterns, and the detection of possibly premalignant cellular changes. In this preventative operation, the surgeon leaves the nipple and the skin of the breasts, and restores their bulk with implants of plastic or silicone.

The breast cancer suggestions associated with self-examinations have caused more cancers than any treatments have cured (most emphatically). They involve intense meditation of the body, and adverse imagery that itself affects the bodily cells.² Public health announcements about high blood pressure themselves raise the blood pressure of millions of television viewers (even more emphatically).

Seth didn’t mention it in the session tonight, but Jane and I find it extremely interesting that just last week much national publicity was given to the ongoing two-year-old controversy among cancer specialists over whether women — especially those under 50 years of age — should be given routine mammograms (X-ray examinations) in efforts to detect breast cancer in its early stages.

Involved in the arguments are the leading cancer investigative organizations in the country. For example: Scientific advisers to the government’s National Cancer Institute, which is conducting elaborate studies of many thousands of women of varying ages, have called for a halt to the routine screening of younger women. These scientists are on record as stating that such X-raying may cause more breast cancer than it cures. Many millions of dollars, and much time and effort, have been and are being given to such research programs. It will be difficult to alter those studies because of entrenched belief systems. Even the economic factors become important: Beside the great sums involved in the “official” programs, for instance, many private radiologists have also found mammography screening to be quite profitable.

[...] The most educated Western doctors will look with utter dismay and horror at the thought of a chicken being sacrificed in a primitive witch doctor’s hut, and yet will consider it quite scientific and inevitable that a woman sacrifice two breasts to cancer. [...]

You are told what to look for; you are as cursed — far more — as any native in a tiny village, only you lose breasts, appendixes, and other portions of your anatomy. [...]

Another woman [friend] found a small sore spot on her breast. [...]

[...] While there, Lottie noticed that Jane has put on weight in her breasts and other portions of her anatomy. [...]

[...] She’s lost both breasts from cancer, and has a host of other physical and emotional problems. [...]

[...] This note was in a closet… An inside pocket (pause), a pocket up high like a breast pocket, rather than down low. [...]

[...] A handkerchief shows above his breast pocket. [...]

(Also, I saw a big black spider on woman’s dress, over one breast. [...]

[...] A pale yellow handkerchief in a triangle in Dr. Instream’s pocket, breast pocket.

Suddenly, I notice that Jane is slightly heavier, and her blouse which is partially unbuttoned, reveals two rather ample breasts. [...]

A handkerchief shows above his breast pocket. [...]

(Peggy quite clearly recalls a man with such a handkerchief in his breast pocket. [...]