As a professional environmental biologist who has had health as an avocation for over 40 years and been critically reading about cancer and cancer treatments, both standard and alternative, for over 20 years, I highly praise Suzanne Somers for having the courage to compile the interviews in "Knockout" with physicians who have had successes in treating cancer patients using alternative methods.
Over the past 30 years, I have known many people who were diagnosed with cancer: Practically none lived for more than a relatively short time-- months or short years of continual or intermittent chemical treatments that made most of the last part of their lives physically miserable ( at a cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars.) Had I personally known ANYONE who survived long-term after standard treatment of breast, lung, or pancreatic cancer, or brain tumors, I might have put more credibility in it, but I haven't. The only "survivors" I have known had lymphomas which standard treatments can successfully treat (a fact mentioned in "Knockout".)
Cancer is not something that attacks us from outside the body like a virus or bacteria, but rather something that the body creates in response to an external insult (radiation, toxin, e.g.) or internal imbalance (nutritional deficiency, hormonal imbalances, e.g.). It only makes sense that if the body can create cancer, it also has the capability of controlling or removing it given the right kind of support from a physician: That is what the doctors interviewed in "Knockout" have been doing: supporting the body and its immune system to control or fight the cancer. Do I think that all the treatments presented in the book are of equal value in treating cancer based upon what I've read over the years? No. But most are based on good science, practical experience and success, and are highly consistent with the scientific studies and reports that I have read. It is to Suzanne's credit that she did not "pre-judge" the various treatment alternatives but leaves that task up to the readers.
I have only one criticism of the information provided in "Knockout" and that is some of the comments made about pesticides and "organic" produce. Two or three of those interviewed made blanket and inaccurate statements and assumptions about pesticides (it's obviously outside their area of expertise.) Few people know that the EPA for many years has required extensive toxicity testing of pesticides by independent, EPA-approved laboratories using standard protocols--including testing of reproductive effects over multiple generations--before they will approve a product label; that the pesticide label use requirements provide a 100-fold protection factor for human safety; that chemical companies today generally won't even pursue approval of new pesticides that are highly toxic or dangerous; or that manufacturers of the hormonally disruptive and persistent organochlorine pesticides such as DDT, were prohibited from selling them in the US some 30+ years ago. Few people know that some "organic" growers use "natural" pesticides, some of which are considerably MORE TOXIC AS APPLIED and more environmentally persistent than a good number of the commercial, standard pesticides, and which generally have not undergone the extensive EPA-required testing of standard, commercial pesticides.
Rather than buy nothing but organic produce -- which many people cannot afford -- I recommend buying fruits and vegetables grown in the USA where only EPA-approved pesticides can be used and where states are required to test and certify all commercial pesticide applicators to ensure pesticides are applied in accordance with the product label. (Violations result in loss of applicators' licenses). No such strict controls exist in some foreign countries that regularly ship produce to the US. I am also highly dubious of "organic" claims for imported produce. (I avoid buying products from other countries when I can get the same products grown in the USA, organic or not.)
That said, however, anyone diagnosed with cancer who does not examine and seriously consider at least some of the alternatives presented in "Knockout" to the standard "cut, poison, and burn" treatments (all of which can seriously compromise the very immune system needed by the body to fight the cancer), runs the risk of laying down like a lamb to slaughter in the face of standard cancer treatment. Being well informed and playing an active role in selection of cancer treatment may make the difference between life and death.
"Knockout" is a major accomplishment and a valuable contribution to all those who face a diagnosis of cancer, and one that I hope readers will take seriously. Suzanne should be highly praised for facing the highly lucrative and entrenched cancer industry head on!