That's great to hear!

This subject is near and dear to my heart, because 7 years ago, I had cancer. Mine was follicular lymphoma. So, a different cancer, but I can understand what he is going through.

In my case, I had other complications, and I was definitely on my way to death. I tried alternative ideas because I did not think chemo was a good way to go. I tried the MMS, Apricot seeds, and some other things. None of it did anything for me.

Ultimately, I went with chemo. It saved my life. So, I am not 100% against modern medicine. There are some life-saving and good things they do -- especially in the area of traumatic injuries. But it's only about 10% of what they do that is any good. 90% of what doctors believe is just plain false, and usually completely opposite of the truth (see the current Covid nonsense for evidence).

I have been cleared of cancer and feel fantastic for the past 6+ years (5 years was considered max). During that time, I have studied the subject, and learned a lot more about human health than I knew back then. I won't claim to be an expert, but I've read a lot and have arrived at some conclusions that I think make sense.

Here is a post I made about my theory of health. Even that is subject to change, but it gives you an overall idea of why I will say what I will say here:

https://greatawakening.win/p/13zg0LGJw9/

If I was in his position, here is how I would look at things and what actions I would take.

• Doctors are wrong about what they think cancer is and what causes it.
• For that reason, they will rarely give a correct answer (some chemo drugs work for some types of cancer, but those drugs were pretty much lucky things they came up with, not because they understand cancer). I'll take it, but let's be real about it, too.
• Thomas Seyfried has done more to figure out how to end cancer than anyone else out there. His basic conclusion is that cancer is caused by a degredation of the mitochondria in cells (therefore, inability to produce energy).
• This, IMO, causes the cells to become lethargic, you might say, and they then do not "kill thyself" like all cells are programmed to do (apopotosis -- see My Theory of Human Health). Also IMO, this situation originates from either poor health habits or toxins in the body (in my case, a combination of both, mostly toxins).
• This is when they appear to "mutate," which is what doctors think they see (and they have no idea why).
• These cells are holding on to survival, when they should be leaving the scene so the body can clean them out. But they don't, and they continue making more of themselves, which at some point becomes "cancer."
• The key to fixing this situation is to starve those cells of the nutrients they need.
• Most cancer cells must have glucose to survive. Lacking glucose, they die off (and the cancer goes away).
• Some cancer cells can build their own "system" and can survive also on glutamine.
• These are the two nutrients that allow cancer to continue and grow: glucose and glutamine. Since 99% of doctors know nothing at all about this, they have no way of ending cancer without their "standard of care" which is chemo, radiation, and surgery.
• But there is another strategy that can work.
• The best thing about this strategy is that it is easy, cheap, and does not matter that it is "Stage 4," since it applies to the entire body.
• The strategy is changing nutrition and eating habits.

It is necessary to cut out ALL carbohydrates completely. This is because ALL carbs turn to glucose and/or fructose. The glucose is the killer. That is what gives cancer cells energy. Otto Warburg figured this out almost 100 years ago, and modern doctors think it is nonsense because that is what they have been told by the establishment (again: see Covid).

The tricky thing is that some cancer cells can also survive on glutamine. Getting glucose out of the diet is easy. But glutamine is not. Glutamine is an amino acid and it is in pretty much every food we eat.

So, eliminate glucose 100%, and cut way back on glutamine (in some cases, glutamine blocker drugs might be used, but that would need to be done with someone who knows what they are doing).

I suspect it is possible to do it without the drugs, though. Certainly, the situation should improve dramatically.

The plan I would follow --

• Eat only ONE meal per day. During that meal, there is no limit on HOW MUCH to eat (eat until full, but don't bust a gut). For the other 23+ hours per day, eat NOTHING, and drink NOTHING (including water). This is to give the body time to heal and repair -- and kill off the cancer cells.
• Eliminating carbohydrate eliminates dietary glucose, which is most important. By also reducing the frequency of eating, glutamine will be reduced, and what is provided to the body will have a chance to be utilized by healthy parts of the body. Some sort of fasting is the only way I can think of to reduce glutamine without using glutamine blocker drugs.
• That ONE meal per day should be ONLY meat and eggs. The meat should just be meat (no "breading" which is all carbs). No dairy (milk has carbs, although fermented milk should be ok). No fruit, veggies, grains, or junk food (all high in carbs).
• Learn to eat the eggs RAW (at least some of them). I eat raw eggs every day. It's an aquired taste. They will never taste like chocolate cake, but they are extremely healthful. Get the best quality possible -- "free range" is the type to get. Not "cage free" (means nothing), not "pastured" (means nothing), not "vegetarian feed" (chickens are not vegetarians). The best eggs come from the best chickens, and those are the ones who free range on grass, eat insects, get fresh air and sunshine, and can roam around.
• If a person is fat or average/above average bodyfat, then do a complete fast for 3 days at a time every so often. A 3-day fast can reset the immune system. It also reduces both glucose and glutamine to zero, during that period.
• The rest of the time, eat ONE meal per day only.
• If a person is very skinny (some people with cancer are), then do not do the longer fasts. Just eat the one meal per day, but add some cream to the diet (not milk, which has carbs -- cream does not).

I would follow this strategy for as long as it takes to beat the cancer.

(Obvously, no alcohol, no smoking, etc.)

Thomas Seyfried interviews:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgmLNNjrTnE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wY-JZ6TTNh8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ylTpUxbdBI

More on Seyfried's work:

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/05/joseph-mercola/why-glucose-and-glutamine-restrictions-are-essential-in-the-treatment-of-cancer/

If hubby has been a smoker, that is likely what caused the mitochondria degredation. Here is a paper on this with regard to COPD, but likely applies to lung cancer, too:

https://respiratory-research.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1465-9921-14-97

Cancer as a metabolic disease:

https://nutritionandmetabolism.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1743-7075-7-7

University of Southern California study showing that fasting for 3 days can reset the immune system (making it stronger):

https://gero.usc.edu/2018/11/26/fasting-for-72-hours-can-reset-your-entire-immune-system/

Here is another article on stem cells. Modern medicine wants to implant these into people, but that is probably not necessary. A longer fast (5-7 days) can generate new stem cell growth, which can be used by the body for anything (a stem cell is a "generic cell" that can be turned into any type of cell, such as new lung cells). This is probably not necessary, but something to consider trying after a few months of the main protocol:

https://copdnewstoday.com/2017/10/03/stem-cells-could-offer-hope-for-copd-and-others-with-lung-damage-early-study-says/

One of the toughest things to do in your husband's situation is to take a step back, and just think clearly about what action might be good to take in order to get out of this bad situation.

I pray that he is able to think clearly, and make good decisions, and to stick with those decisions to see it through to success.

Best wishes.