My own 86 year old uncle had a similar experience, when the doctors found a spot that turned out to be lung cancer. His oncologist saidthat they caught the cancer early and that targeted radiation pellets should wipe out the small tumor in short order. Instead the tumor continued to grow and then began to spread to other parts of his body. His oncologist recommended he begin some strong chemo and possbily more radiation therapay, which he was hesitant to do.
Since I told him about oleander and it's wonderful success rates against most lung cancers, he had his brother-in-law (another uncle of mine) go to MD Anderson (where much of the research on oleander has been performed) to check it out and was given a glowing report. As a result, he began taking oleander and following much of the advice in my suggested anti-cancer protocol:
His tumor growth soon began to slow, then it stopped growing and then it began to shrink and the cancer in the rest of his body disappeared. Ultimately all that was left was a very small benign mass, essentially scar tissue, and he remains cancer free three years later and enjoys a daily round of golf and is quite healthy.
The advice to look at cancertutor.com is very good too. You will find that that cancertutor has the oleander treatment rated among their top cancer remedies.
All the best,
I'm a prostate cancer survivor for 16 years after refusing to my urologist's urging that I have it removed. It was Stage 1. Had it watched closely for many years, particularly in the early years, and have learn a bit about cancer though I'm not an oncologist.
Add to the above, during a hospital stay last December for knee replacement they did a CT scan and found a nodule on my lung. I ignored it because have been told that I have granulomas on my lungs, which are normal in many people from a variety of sources. Was told mine was TB from childhood.
On another strange visit to same hospital three weeks ago they got a little testy 'cause I hadn't followed up on the CT scan and they did an X ray and found it still there. Then they called my primary care doctor who got me in for another CT scan which indicated that the nodule had grown. I'm going through all of this because I was distinctly told that a chest X ray shows very little, a CT scan shows more and even that isn't perfect. But a CT scan is very definitive. An X ray is not.
So, on to the pulmonary doctor who ordered a PET scan. A PET scan is identical to a CT scan except they give you a radioactive fluid IV prior to the scan. If you have cancerous cells they will pick up the radioactive dudes and it will show up on the PET scan. My nodule picked up the radioactive guys, but the PET scan was also a complete body scan and there were/are no other areas that picked it up which means it is most likely Stage 1 and the size indicates that as well.
In consultation I was told the results of the PET scan, both the bad and the good, was then given a choice of what to do. (This PET scan part and consultation has all happened within the past week.) Was told that an attempt at a biopsy to verify cancer could have two results - one they could miss the actual cancer and two if it is cancer, a biopsy can cause it to spread. That on the table I was given my choice of biopsy or nodule removal. I chose removal because, whatever it is is growing so even if benign, I want it out, and if it is cancer I don't want them spreading it with a biopsy. So, I'm off to a thoracic surgeon in a couple of days for consultation and scheduling for removal.
I'm spelling this all out for you for a couple of reasons. I don't understand why they did a biopsy from an X ray because I was very clearly told that an X ray does not give a very good view of cancer. Why didn't they go the CT or PET route? So now that he's been diagnosed I would suspect that the next thing is to find what stage it is in. A PET scan will give them greater than 90% certainty as to where cancer is, anywhere in the body and will tell them if it has spread. I'm assuming that your dad is working with a qualified pulmonary doctor. Right? Before ANY surgery they have to do a PET scan to determine the extent of the cancer. Just my opinion, not a professional one.
I'm 77. Started smoking heavily at 17 though had been smoking some since about 13. Quit my 2 1/2 pack a day habit almost exactly 40 years ago. Thought that by now I was certainly out of the woods on the cancer routine but have been told my smoking is the cause.
Cancer is not parasitical. I was originally a Hulda Clark enthusiast until I read her books and did my own research regarding cancer. Am sorry Hulda, there are no parasites in cancer. If there were I would be flooded with them as I have untreated cancer from 16 years ago.
What I have done is that I've brewed up a big batch of Essiac tea and one of pau d'arco as well. Rene Caisse administered Essiac as a supplement to the then X ray therapy that was used in cancer treatment. Have also seen a wonderful testimonial here on Cure Zone about a person curing theirs with pau d'arco. I've had several Essiac and pau d'arco books as well as the herbs on my shelf waiting to help others, and low and behold I get to help myself.
Certainly I'm concerned, but I've been told that they are highly certain that my cancer is Stage 1 and that surgery for removal of the nodule will completely end my lung cancer and I'll be completely back to normal in 3 to 4 weeks. That what I'm looking at, but I'm still drinking my tea. If the cancer is Stage 1 there is no chemotherapy involved at all. If it happens to be Stage 2 (has gone beyond the nodule within the lungs) then chemo is 50/50. I'm suspecting I'm Stage 1.
It is important for your dad to learn what Stage his cancer is in which means how extensive it is, and that will determine the treatment. They can get a good idea of that through a PET scan.