If I end up with cancer that grows so fast that a mammogram every few years is the only way to catch it in time, then I frankly wouldn’t have great odds anyway.

But to more directly answer your question, I’m actually pretty unlikely to be willing to go through chemo and radiation treatments regardless if it’s a real threat to my life or not. If it can be excised via surgery, maybe, or if some of the new treatments (like the mRNA vax or the preventative vax) would handle it with minimal side effects, I would do that, but otherwise, nope. But surgery is pretty invasive so yes, I do think over-treatment for me specifically would be more harmful than just waiting to see if it gets worse, and then still doing the surgery.

I had parents in the medical field, and most of my deceased family has been taken down by cancers, so I know what I’m getting myself into, treated or not. My mom didn’t even bother with treatment (hospice only), because she spent enough time in oncology and hospice to know the outcomes. I took care of her throughout, and we had a lot of conversations about treatment and the reasoning behind not going that route, but ultimately people who work with cancer patients tend not to seek treatment themselves for a reason. And I tend to agree with their logic, given the current treatment options.

I’ve had gene screening for all known cancer genes and came up clean (tho I still get updates on my unknown mutations every few years). I was and still am fully prepared for a double mastectomy or whatever other surgical interventions if it ever becomes prudent. I do regular bloodwork, regular professional exams, plus I do fairly frequent self-screens (full body), so I’m not doing nothing, I’m just not doing mammograms.

To each their own, and by no means do I think nobody should be screened or go through treatment, it’s just not something I’m personally interested in doing.