Rise in breast cancer and Serge Benhayon’s 1999 prediction
Rise in breast cancer and Serge Benhayon’s 1999 prediction
In spite of the fact that medical research itself states that 95% of all cancers are epigenetic, which means that our lifestyle choices from what and how we eat, where and how we live, with whom and how we interact, our sleep patterns and quality, how we exercise, even how we age – all of these can eventually cause chemical modifications in our body that would affect our overall health and wellbeing, the fact of which sadly still falls on deaf ears and we avoid asking a collective question:
Why as women, are we so unenthusiastic to at least explore the part we each play in the presence of diseases such as breast cancer? What is it that we are doing (and not doing) that basically does not in any way equate to cancer prevention?
Many of our well intended physicians and some of our perhaps not so well intended media tend to lead us to believe that the key to breast cancer prevention is early detection, regular screening and examining of ourselves. Whilst of course, these play an important part, they are by no means high scorers on the chart of true prevention; the type of prophylactic, true medicine – the medicine of life we need to explore that requires us to be willing to take, at the very least, some 100 steps backwards before we step in front of the mammogram machine. It is in those steps that we can reveal the cracks and deepen our understanding of what’s truly going on, which in turn will change the course of prediction that says breast cancer is, and continues to be, on the rise.
Serge Benhayon, world renowned health practitioner, author, presenter and philosopher, consistently takes his surveillance of the energetic impact of lifestyle choices. Back in 1999, he said:
"Lack of Self Nurturing is now a significant global problem and in particular for women, as it is the actual energetic cause of breast cancer and its ill rise in our societies everywhere."Serge Benhayon Esoteric Teachings & Revelations Volume I, ed 1, p 518
Let’s ask ourselves another, perhaps a mouthful to read but, question ad rem nonetheless:
Why do we not respond to the possibility that this prediction dating back two decades could in fact be true, and why do we not exert as much investigative diligence to examine what it is that Serge Benhayon is accessing to be able to make such accurate prediction with confidence, which for those who remain open would be enough to recognise him as one of the world’s greatest seers, and yet for those who have made sceptics’ circles and supremacist silos their choice of dwelling, he would be pronounced a charlatan, a barking lunatic even, as we do in say for instance when investing in the next drug treatment, which even more honest physicians confirm more often than not has devastating effects not only on those rapidly increasing malignant cells but on healthy ones too; and why not apply as much doggedness to merely ask if not entertain curiosity and a sheer desire to understand how and why this divination may be a turning point reflection for all of us, as we do when annually everyone is covered in pink ribbons, encouraged to run the next body beating marathon followed by coffee, cakes and champagne, in spite for example of the fact that the World Health Organisation (WHO) have found: “Alcohol use is a risk factor for many cancer types including cancer of the oral cavity, pharynx, larynx, oesophagus, liver, colorectal and breast.” Not to mention adverse effects of sugar and caffeine?
Meanwhile, the female body, the human machine that ‘friends of science’ would rather own than honour and openly study and they would rather tell it what it is that it’s feeling because according to evidence-based backers, it is not any body’s business to claim, and so they would sooner shut down their auditory ossicles than hear from the physical form whose particles however hard one might try cannot be owned for money or life, are constantly sending silent sounds of discord and dichotomy with the space it originates from, soundless to supremacy that reigns havoc amongst humans, yet loudly heard by a woman and her entire being, like that time when she knew she shouldn’t have slept with that guy but she ended up in soiled sheets just so she could convince herself that someone (a man!) wanted her. And that time she left behind the innate grace she’d carried around since she was a little girl in exchange for partying hard with drugs, alcohol and a whole lotta rock’n’roll of body abuse. And during all the years of abandoning the woman in her in exchange for “I am a mum” or “I am a dutiful daughter” or “I am a devoted sister/aunty/colleague/friend” badge, putting herself not only at the bottom of the priority list but even worse than that keeping herself off the list.
We insist in continuing to keep ourselves in the illusion of the claim that we are winning the ‘war’ on breast cancer because we have better drugs and treatments which result in longer survival rates whilst a great many women are being diagnosed with breast cancer. Whatever smarty-pants answers we may come up with, they are not even worthy of mention.
However, what is deserving of asking is why in spite of all the effective and excessive screening, the numbers are showing and the fact remains that breast cancer is still the most common form of cancer death amongst women?
And whilst women and society at large are focussing on whether a treatment is doing what it’s meant to and the train of thought in her head is chugging between ‘is she getting better or is she another step closer to death’, the much needed ‘strategy’ to change things from the root (from within) remains remote enough to keep cancer as the arch enemy within and the sniper eye on the malignant growth, the end product of the sum total of all her previous choices to not nurture instead of deeply questioning and focussing on changing the status quo.
Behind every woman diagnosed with cancer there is a domino stack of human beings being affected by that single diagnosis that sets off a chain reaction and inflicts ripple effect pain and devastation.
We speak of chemo, radio as torturous treatments a woman has to endure and yes, sure enough it cannot be easy to go through the treatments that are not without often severe side effects, but why don’t we use the same language, indeed the same word for enduring what we do before any signs of breast cancer appear. Why endure abusive relationships be that with her partner, siblings, parents . . . why put up with put-downs, why allow self-doubt, why live with comparison, jealousy and lack of self-worth, why so much time, effort and energy on pleasing others all at the expense and absence of nurturing her own body?
As Oxford, Cambridge, Collins and perhaps numerous other dictionaries would tell us, nurturing means to take care of, feed, and protect someone or something, especially young children or plants, and help him, her, or it to develop.
It is interesting to note that women are seen as natural nurturers, what with the widely accepted endowment with the responsibilities of motherhood and caretaker as her primary role, and that such an energetically inward pointing verb is described and used for an act that appears to be exclusively associated with and applied to someone / something that is outside of herself.
Is it any wonder that . . .
- because nurturing is almost solely used with women in conjunction with babies, women see it as their sole responsibility to nurture their young and everyone else (but themselves) because a dictionary has told her so and that the only place she’d probably ever hear that she must take care of herself first, and then of her offspring, is on an aeroplane (!) and
- there is a serious role model deficit around her to reflect how true nurturing is done, what it looks, feels even tastes like so she could learn that when a woman deeply nurtures herself she can do so much more to support others to do the same, including young children.
"The breasts cannot emanate the ‘light ofSerge Benhayon Esoteric Teachings & Revelations Volume I, ed 1, p 518
nurturing’ if the woman is not self-nurturing.
As a result of our women having to resort to
a more male stimulated energy to get through
what is demanded of them, and having to assume
a more male driven energy to simply win back
some form of equality in society, they have lost
their inner-instincts to self-nurture –
thus the lack of true self-nurturing
that now prevails in our world.
If energetic truth is understood,
it is not only the women who get directly affected
by this ill way of being, but we all do
as a result of the lack of this light being there,
impulsing and inspiring us to be more self-loving."
If we wish to change any prediction perceived negative, any down-spiralling trend, we must remember that classic definition of an idiocy: doing the same thing but expecting different results. Predictions we don’t want to come true are only reversible when we address the root cause. Pruning it simply doesn’t cut it (pun not intended).