You are right that my attitude toward it might change.

I think a lot would depend on the type of chemo and the type of cancer, plus what age and overall health I am at the time.

I had a son-in-law that went in for cancer treatment and did not survive the treatment. His reaction was so severe they had to induce a coma and he never came out of it. Was the most miserable time in my daughters life. Her ready to let him go with no chance for a normal life or recovery and another of his family members not ready so urged my daughter not to pull the plug yet he was not willing to even sit with Jerry because he could not take it. A bad deal.

In this particular situation he would have been better off to have just taken pain reducing drugs till the end and forgo the treatment. The treatment killed him quicker than the disease would have.

Another neighbor cancer outcome that was even worse in my opinion, he actually survived but never got out of bed and had no quality of life for about a year while his family suffered.

On the other hand I have a sister-in-law that did survive it and seems to have benefited from chemo.

No easy answers and everyone's situation and desires are different, not to mention the age of a person when the treatment is contemplated. But sometimes I think the medical industry does more than it should to keep people alive. Or in some cases, in my opinion, it is not so much keeping them alive as it is keeping them in a state of existence longer. More a state of un-dead than actually living.

Everyone is going to have their own personal opinion on what they want to go through to continue living and that is perfectly fine. I just put some information out there that is not mainstream so people have access to it should they be interested.  They might not otherwise know about it.

John